Liberators in Dire Need of Political, Moral Cleansing

IOL News

4 days ago

(From left) Swapo president Nutembo Nandi-Ndaitwah, ANC president Cyril Ramaphosa and former Frelimo president Joaquim Chissano at a working dinner held at Mahlamba Ndlopfu, Pretoria on July 26, 2025. The ANC hosted a Liberation Movements Summit in Ekurhuleni, Gauteng on July 25-27, 2025.
Image: GCIS
Zamikhaya Maseti
The ruling African National Congress convened a landmark Liberation Movements Summit from 25 to 27 July 2025, gathering six Southern African liberation parties including MPLA (Angola), SWAPO (Namibia), FRELIMO (Mozambique), ZANU PF (Zimbabwe), and CCM (Tanzania) to deliberate on the theme: 'Defending the Liberation Gains, Advancing Integrated SocioEconomic Development, Strengthening Solidarity for a Better Africa.'
Conspicuously absent, however, was Zambia's United National Independence Party (UNIP), the liberation movement led by the late President Kenneth Kaunda. This party offered refuge to the exiled leadership of the African National Congress and embraced thousands of young South Africans who crossed borders to join the national liberation struggle against apartheid.
The ANC, as a liberation movement, had its headquarters in Lusaka under the protection of UNIP, and the Zambian people sustained its operational lifeline. The organisers of the summit have not explained this omission, and it stands as a glaring historical oversight in any attempt to reconstruct the liberation narrative of Southern Africa.
Any honest retelling of Southern Africa's liberation history is incomplete without recognising Zambia's indispensable role, under the leadership of the United National Independence Party (UNIP) and President Kenneth Kaunda. While not always armed with material abundance, Zambia carried the weight of regional liberation with unmatched moral clarity and unwavering solidarity. Lusaka was not just a geographical refuge for exiles; it was the beating heart of a pan-African revolutionary conscience, hosting the ANC's headquarters, training camps, political schools, and underground logistics.
The Zambian people paid a heavy price, including economic sabotage, border raids by the apartheid regime, and relentless pressure from the West. Yet Kaunda's government never wavered. It chose principle over profit, and African unity over diplomatic convenience. That such a pivotal liberation movement was absent from this summit should not be taken lightly; it reflects a growing trend of selective memory that must be confronted if we are to truly reclaim and revitalise the liberation legacy.
The summit made several significant resolutions. It reaffirmed support for the liberation of Western Sahara, condemned all forms of foreign domination and neocolonial interference, and called for deeper ideological and practical cooperation between liberation movements. The parties committed to revitalising South–South solidarity, advancing youth mobilisation and political education, and accelerating regional economic integration through shared development frameworks.
In addition, the summit called for party-to-party diplomacy beyond state platforms, recognising the strategic value of liberation movements coordinating across borders to influence global governance, trade, and peace agendas. These resolutions, if translated into action, could mark a turning point, shifting these movements from commemorators of the past to architects of the African future.
This was not a nostalgic gathering of revolutionaries trading memories over aged slogans. It was a solemn reaffirmation of purpose, a strategic recalibration of the post-colonial project amidst a volatile global order. What emerged was clear: the legacy of liberation is not a finished chapter; it is an unfinished struggle, and those who led us into freedom must now lead us into transformation.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Ad Loading
The liberation movements in the Southern African region have not been able to dogwatch one another, to speak frankly, honestly, and without diplomatic pretence. At no point did SWAPO, FRELIMO, CCM, or MPLA rise with principled courage to say, for instance, to President Robert Mugabe, how you are governing Zimbabwe is unjust and unsustainable.
The ANC, however, attempted what it called quiet diplomacy in Zimbabwe, urging the Zimbabwean leadership and people to resolve their problems internally and to avoid relying on externally imposed solutions. Unfortunately, that quiet diplomacy did not yield the desired results. The suppression of opposition parties and the stifling of democratic space persisted. This absence of honest, fraternal correction among liberation movements has weakened the moral centre of the liberation tradition itself.
One hopes that this revived Party-to-Party diplomacy will correct that historical failure. It must not be reduced to celebratory declarations and performative solidarity. It must have political dog watching as a central tenet, a principled, fraternal mechanism through which liberation movements hold one another to the revolutionary values they once embodied: honesty, people-centred governance, democratic integrity, and moral courage. Not loyalty to incumbency, but loyalty to the people.
The liberation movements must be brave enough to confront the objective reality of the evaporation of the liberation heritage. The fact of the matter is that across the African continent, the very parties that ushered in political freedom, that dismantled colonial rule, and held the dreams of the masses, are no longer the governing parties.
In Ghana, the Convention People's Party (CPP) of Kwame Nkrumah, the first to proclaim African independence, has faded into political obscurity. In Zambia, UNIP, once the bastion of Southern African solidarity under Kenneth Kaunda, has been swept aside. In Kenya, KANU (Kenya African National Union), the liberation party of Jomo Kenyatta, has long ceded power.
Here at home, the ANC of Nelson Mandela, once the symbol of global moral authority, has been partially dislodged from power. It now governs in coalition with its ideological and historical adversaries, a profound moment that should signal not a tactical adjustment, but a generational reckoning.
The liberation movement, as we know it, stands at a precipice. The question these Parties must collectively ask is not cosmetic or electoral, it is existential: Why has this occurred? Why have the liberation movements, once cherished as the custodians of the people's hopes, been relegated to electoral decline, coalition compromise, and in some cases, outright irrelevance?
And more importantly, what should be their collective response to this objective reality of downward swings, fractured mandates, and the political displacement of liberation itself? This is no longer a theoretical concern. It is an urgent summons for introspection, ideological recalibration, and coordinated strategic renewal across the continent.