IslandMix - Soca, Reggae, Zouk and Caribbean Entertainment

Background and Ethnic context

Unlike some other parts of Africa, there is a fairly clear distinction between the first peoples of Southern Africa and Africans who migrated into the region in recent times. The cultural presence of the San hunter-gatherers has been attested to in rock art and archaeology for over 20 000 years. Human occupation of the region stretches back over 150 000 years.

The aboriginal San, and their related herding neighbours, the Khoekhoe (also Khoikhoi), are according to geneticist the people who carry the genetic material which indicates that their ancestors are the ancestors of all living human beings. The San are distinguished rich knowledge of biodiversity and by their extraordinarily complex languages that include a range of click sounds.

San peoples have been colonised first by the arrival of Bantu-speaking Black agro-pastoralists from East and Central Africa, then more aggressively by European settlers. The impact of European settlement in South Africa included an almost complete destruction of San civilisations in that country. Today there are some 100 000 San living in the region. Only about 15 people have graduated from tertiary education, the majority live in situations of poverty and marginalisation.

Certain Khoe peoples adopted sheep pastoralism more than 2000 years ago. They spread throughout the subcontinent and were able to negotiate their relationship with the European settlers somewhat more successfully than the San. In South Africa, many Khoekhoe assimilated into Afrikaans speaking, so called “Coloured” farming society, though the Nama people of the Richtersveld and Orange River managed to keep their language and culture alive. In Namibia, Nama people number over 100 000 and have a degree of representation in government. The largest Afrikaans-speaking Khoekhoe group is the Griqua of South Africa.

2005 - South Africa

South Africa is fully engaged with transforming itself into a socially and economically viable democracy. It is deconstructing its legacy of racist governance and attempting to create new opportunities for all its citizens. The President and other senior officials have made important positive statements about indigenous peoples. However, it is not evident that the line function department identified with dealing with indigenous issues has the will or capacity to generate the type of holistic policy framework that can seriously address the needs of indigenous peoples. (For more information see the 1999 ILO report on South Africa and the IPACC / UN sponsored workshop by indigenous leaders held in Port Nolloth in 2004.)

In July 2005, the South African government hosted the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples, Professor Rodolfo Stavenhagen. The visit was a major event for Africa and for the indigenous peoples of South Africa. It is the first formal recognition by an African state of the UN’s mechanisms for protecting the rights of indigenous peoples.

IPACC assisted the government, the UN and the civil society to ensure that the Special Rapporteur would visit grassroots communities where they live and hold broad consultations with representative organisations. The SR’s full report will be released in 2006. His main conclusions were that South Africa is a democracy where the full range of human and civil rights may be expressed and enjoyed by all, including indigenous peoples. Several important policy initiatives have been taken with regards indigenous peoples, however the implementation has been inadequate and people remain in vulnerable situations.

An important observation was that there is little co-ordination on indigenous issues between the different levels of government: national, provincial and local, and there is even less co-ordination between United Nations agencies in the region.

The South African government started negotiating with Khoe and San groups in 1998 about constitutional accommodation. In November 2004, the South African cabinet adopted a ‘policy tools’ memorandum that sets out mechanisms for creating policy on the rights of indigenous peoples. To date, little progress has been made on substantive policy and administration. Some activists are concerned that the Government sees indigenous rights as a form of ethnic nationalism which will be dealt with through endless dialogue on no real changes.

A serious gap in the Interdepartmental Working Group on Khoe and San Issues is the absence of the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). DEAT handles the international and domestic aspects of key UN agreements on indigenous peoples, including Agenda 21, the three Rio Conventions (Biodivesity, Climate Change and Desertification), and the creation and management agreements on World Heritage Sites, two of which are due to be on indigenous peoples lands. DEAT to date has not had any formal contact with South African indigenous peoples.

Botswana

The crisis of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR) remained in the courts and in the international media spotlight. San peoples removed from the CKGR and placed in resettlement villages have contested the legality of the expulsion. The issue became a major media sensation internationally which pushed the Government into a defensive position whereupon it allegedly destroyed documents that were under negotiation with the Game Reserve to include San people in tourism and development initiatives.

Apart from the acrimonious court processes, the San organisations are engaged in discrete behind-the-scenes negotiations with Government to find a solution to the stand off. The court case remains complex and unresolved. Whatever the courts decide, the long term solution is a change in thinking by Government and a greater role of San and other ethnic minorities in governance and decision-making.

The international media alleged that the motivation for the expulsion of the San was prospective diamond mining. Botswana San organisations have had meetings with De Beers diamond mining officials and are convinced that this was not a factor. Mining happens in CKGR but would be prohibitively expensive in the area that was previously occupied by the San. There are no plans to attempt it in the area. The expulsion of the San was more likely the result of Government keenness to sedenterise local people and to separate wildlife from people, and wildlife from animal husbandry.

San who were resettled outside CKGR were provided with resettlement subsidies, a school, a clinic and a tarred road. The resettlement was one of Botswana’s most expensive projects to provide new homes and infrastructure for a rural community. However, the Government did not factor in problems of fuel, employment, poor water and the generally unsuitable impact of displacement of people from their viable and traditional territories to an artificial town. Physical and mental health of those displaced has been adversely affected. In 2005, one man has won the right in court to return to his land inside the Game Reserve.

The crisis in the CKGR is a small part of a much more serious land and development crisis for indigenous peoples in Botswana. Tens of thousands of San people are losing their homes and territories as the Government allocates land to dominant ethnic groups to be ‘productive’. Sustainable traditional economic activities of hunting and collecting wild foods are seen as primitive by the Government and hunting has become so regulated that families cannot get licenses and feed themselves. Nationally, land allocations which privilege agro-pastoralists over hunting and fishing peoples has put many other San in vulnerable situations of land loss and displacement.

The Botswana story is complex. In Gabarone, the view is that the government is treating all citizens equally and providing housing, water and schools to remote rural areas. The problem is related to the structure of government where local chiefs, invariably from dominant Bantu groups, represent the whole constituency, effectively leaving the San and minorities without a voice in local government.

The area where there is mutual interest and increasing dialogue is on nature conservation. The San are holders of rich indigenous knowledge about biodiversity, animal behaviour, and the climate. The Government is interested in developing nature conservation and tourism as part of its national development plan. San elders report that the massive displacement of San from their territories means that knowledge of plants, soil, animals and fish is rapidly declining.

San organisations in co-operation with the University of Botswana and the University of Tromsø sponsored the Mother Tongue Education for Southern African Minorities conference. The report is available from WIMSA, entitled For the Benefit of All. Botswana has resisted acknowledging the ethnic and linguistic diversity of its citizens. Of the over dozen local languages spoken in the Republic, only one, Setswana, may be taught in schools and used in media. According to a 1994 Education policy statement, it is theoretically possible for other languages to be introduced to schools. San peoples are standardising their languages and introducing them into schools but without the support of the Department of Education.

HIV / AIDS is a major concern for San communities in Botswana. Whereas cultural and language policies may be anachronistic, the health programme is progressive. The Government of Botswana is moving to make anti-retroviral treatment widely available. The concern of San groups is that these treatments will not be accessible or affordable for them in the remote areas.

Despite the political and economic challenges in Botswana, it has a vibrant indigenous civil society. Rooted in contact with Mission stations, there are now San NGOs and Community Based Organisations (CBOs). The network is united under the umbrella structure of the Kuru Family of Organisations. This includes craft marketing projects, art projects, literacy, bible translation, mother tongue instruction, tourism and other economic development activities, primarly in Ghanzi and Ngamiland Districts. Komku, based in Ghanzi makes outreach into the Kgalagadi District. Letloa, based in Shakawe, is an expert skills organisation that services the network and particularly CBOs in the region.

A major initiative in 2005 was the setting up of a GIS map training centre in Shakawe, Ngamiland. Nathaniel Nuulimba and Thlokomaleng Ngako, work with local San people to map their territories, and knowledge of wild foods. They will provide GIS mapping support to a number of San projects around the country. The project is supported by the Trust for Okavango Cultural and Development Initiatives (TOCADI) along with foreign partners Open Channels and Strata360.
Namibia
The Working Group of Indigenous Minorities in Southern Africa (WIMSA) is both a development agency and a network of San leaders throughout Southern Africa. WIMSA supports San organisations in various aspects of advocacy, including land rights, economic livelihoods, education, language and culture, and intellectual property rights.

WIMSA has developed a new and informative website: http://www.wimsanet.org/

WIMSA co-operated with the Evangelische Entwicklungs Diens (EED) a Protestant service organisation in Germany to produce a guide to indigenous peoples intellectual property rights. WIMSA worked with the South African San Council and South African San Institute to secure intellectual property rights over the exploitation of hoodia gordonii, a medicinal desert plant from the Kalahari which can be used for weight loss.

WIMSA’s efforts in educational advocacy led to the creation of the South African San Education Forum (SASEF). SASEF in co-operation with the Universities of Botswana and Tromsø hosted the second major conference on education for San learners. The event brought together San from across the region to present case studies on the successes and blockages to mother-tongue education in schools.

Another major player in Namibia is the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF). WWF is supporting capacity building and eco-tourism opportunities linked to traditional and commercial sustainable use of natural resources with San communities in several parts of Namibia. WWF supports the NyaeNyae and N=a Jaqna Conservancies in Tsumkwe East and West respectively. This is linked to further development efforts in Kaudom National Park. WWF is also involved in the Caprivi Strip supporting amongst others Khwe speaking peoples trying to set up conservancies.

The Khwe have the ongoing problem that the central government does not recognise them as an ethnic group with representation in government due to the absence of a recognised traditional leader. Both WWF and WIMSA have worked with the Khwe to help promote non-traditional leadership representation which will secure the Khwe a seat at the subregional planning processes, notably on the theme of conservancies and sustainable natural resource use.

IRDNC

Politically, Namibia is moving ahead faster than its neighbours. Though San are still in a vulnerable and under-represented situation compared to their Bantu-speaking neighbours and the White minority, there are signs of changing attitudes in Windhoek. Notably, the current Deputy President has expressed an interest in the efforts by San communities to create sustainable livelihoods based on environmental management and tourism.

WIMSA has been working with Christian NGOs in southern Angola to make contact !Xun and Khwe communities there. Most of these San groups were either killed or driven into exile during the protracted civil war in Angola. With the advent of peace in Angola, there is new hope that these vulnerable groups may have a future. Norwegian Church Aid sponsored support and a fact-finding mission. WIMSA has released a video and booklet on the situation of San in southern Angola.

San activists are working on various strategies to protect their cultures and livelihoods through nature conservancy. There are two San run conservancies in the Tsumkwe are with plans for others in the Caprivi Strip. San activists are asking for the Namibian government to give more support to community conservancies, include more financial training and recognition of traditional knowledge and skills, such as advanced tracking skills.

Ju|’hoansi activists reported that many San have been displaced from farms in the north. A group of San were being kept at a private relocation camp near Okahandja. San activists were concerned that the owners of the land were using the desperate situation of the displaced San to raise money for their own benefit. Human rights organisations are investigating.