The way the Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN) presents
itself as the ‘legitimate voice’ of the prodemocracy movement has been rejected
by political and labour groups in the kingdom, according to an analysis just
published.
And, the split between the SSN and its parent, the
People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), could eventually lead to a
decline in the potential impact of work for democracy in the kingdom, ruled by
King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.
The analysis came from the African Conflict Prevention
Programme (ACPP) in Pretoria, South Africa, which is part of the Institute for
Security Studies.
It came in a briefing after last week’s decision by
PUDEMO to indefinitely suspend SSN and to throw it out of its office for
‘systemically launching vicious attacks on PUDEMO’.
ACPP says, ‘Those familiar with the SSN Google Forum
would be acquainted with their aggressive descriptions of the monarchy elite
and their permanent labelling of the ruling regime as nepotistic,
discriminatory and oppressive.’
ACPP says, ‘the self-presentation of the SSN as the
legitimate voice of the movement has been rejected by PUDEMO, other political
entities and labour formations in the country.
It says the move by PUDEMO should not be seen as a ‘split’
in the democracy movement because the SSN is not at the centre of
decision-making in the movement. Its role has, ACCP says, been to monopolise
‘the external public communications space on the country’s domestic politics’.
ACPP says, ‘The irony with the SSN’s suspension is that
PUDEMO and the SSN, who both operate illegally since political party activities
are criminalized, have generally had more similarities than differences in
their political change approaches, which are characterized by the use of strong
language, radicalism and revolutionary rhetoric.’
ACPP says, ‘[T]he PUDEMO/SNN rift signifies serious
underlying weaknesses within the Swaziland Democratic Movement (SDM), which
over the years has failed to address the tough questions on the true character
of the movement; the extent to which there are assumed material incentives in
SDM participation; and the degree of “free riding” within the group.’
ACPP says, ‘The mass democratic movement has a history of
fragmentation based on both ideology and intra relations within the group.
These fragmentations also challenge the self-presented notion of a collective
identity within the SDM, inferring that collective identity is more a
perception than a reality.’
ACPP says as a consequence the various democracy groups
are unable to agree on campaign strategies and tactics for reform. It predicts
that this will lead eventually to a decline in the potential impact of the
movement.
To read the full briefing report click here.
See also
SWAZI DEMOCRACY MOVEMENT SPLITS
No comments:
Post a Comment