Patrice Lumumba is symbol of freedom for all Africa
Speaking to RT, she explained that Lumumba's ideals resonate far beyond the country's borders, uniting a continent in its quest for dignity, sovereignty, and true independence.
Juliana Lumumba, the former DR Congo minister of culture, described her father as a 'truly iconic figure' of African dignity, a man who 'symbolizes... liberation, the Africa that he wanted to see independent, standing on its own feet, united.'
'He was not alone. Lumumba is part of a whole galaxy of our founding fathers of independence,' she added.
She went on to say that her father's struggle for justice and independence gained global recognition, especially in the former Soviet Union. She pointed to the naming of the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia after her father as 'geopolitical continuity' from a country that viewed Lumumba as 'the embodiment of freedom against colonialism and neocolonialism.'
Today, she said, Russia has carried this torch forward. The university still bears his name, and continues to produce thousands of African professionals, including many Congolese.
Juliana expressed deep gratitude to the Russian people and government for their steadfast recognition of her father's legacy, noting that Russia was among the first to honor Lumumba on his 100th birthday, through a tribute by the country's ambassador to the DR Congo. 'This solidarity, balanced, strong, real, must continue to move even further forward,' she said.
Patrice Lumumba was born in 1925 and died in 1961. He was an independence leader and first democratically elected prime minister of the DR Congo following its liberation from Belgian colonial rule in 1960.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
11 hours ago
- Russia Today
France's retreat from Africa began here
As Algeria celebrates 63 years of independence from France on July 5, this year's anniversary feels more like a reckoning than a triumph. Far from reconciliation, relations between Algiers and Paris have sunk to one of their lowest points in decades – fuelled by France's refusal to fully confront its colonial crimes, and Algeria's renewed demands for justice. Amid calls for formal apologies and reparations, the shadow of empire still looms. So why revisit this history now? Because even six decades after the French flag was lowered over Algiers, the wounds of colonialism remain open, and the battle over memory rages on. To understand the depth of today's diplomatic rupture, we must go back to where the story began – France's invasion of Algeria starting on June 15, 1830, when French naval forces sailed from Toulon and seized Algiers in less than three weeks. The expedition's commander, General de Bourmont, boasted: 'Twenty days were enough to destroy a state whose existence had burdened Europe for three centuries.' He was referring to Ottoman Algeria, a semi-autonomous province with its own identity and institutions. France's quick victory fed a dangerous illusion: that conquest would be simple. What followed was anything but. The swift victory gave French leaders an illusion that Algeria's fall signaled smoother days ahead. Few anticipated serious resistance – an attitude that partly explains how quickly the territory was absorbed into the colonial empire. No one imagined that a national liberation movement, the FLN (Front de Libération Nationale), would one day reclaim Algeria, and force France to retreat. Algeria was a peaceful, semi-autonomous Ottoman province with a distinct identity shaped by local political systems, Islamic scholarship, Mediterranean trade, and tribal alliances. For France, however, it was more than a colony – it was a conquest driven by ambition and a bid to restore prestige after Napoleon's decline. What began as a punitive expedition soon became a 132-year project of domination, costing hundreds of thousands of Algerian lives – Algeria still claims at least 1.5 million people killed. The invasion was sparked by one of history's most trivial diplomatic incidents. In 1827, the Dey of Algiers – effectively head of state – met French consul Pierre Deval to discuss Algeria' s unpaid debts. Frustrated by Deval's attitude, the Dey struck him with a fly whisk. Deval reported the insult to Paris, triggering a chain of events that led to the invasion. France seized on the minor incident as a convenient pretext for war. Behind it lay a post-Napoleonic regime eager to distract from domestic unrest and reassert power abroad. Algeria, geographically close and politically weak, was an ideal target – symbolically vital as the gateway to North Africa. The invasion marked the beginning of one of the longest and harshest occupations in France's colonial history. While France had other holdings in West Africa and its territoires d'outre-mer, Algeria was far more significant – strategically, economically, and symbolically. Its proximity to Europe and greater wealth made it more than just a colony. France saw Algeria as part of its own territory, officially incorporating it and settling nearly a million Europeans – pieds-noirs – who posed as civilians but functioned as a reserve force upholding colonial rule. Most pieds-noirs settlerswere attracted by a set of policies offering incentives: cheap land taken from Algerians, tax breaks and subsidized farming backed by modern infrastructure and military protection. European settlers received full French citizenship, while native Algerians were denied equal rights unless they renounced Islam – a condition most rejected. These policies entrenched privilege and exclusion revealing policy of unequal. On December 9, 1848, the French National Assembly declared all of Algeria an integral part of France, dividing it into three départements – Algiers, Oran, and Constantine – mirroring the administrative structure of metropolitan France. In fact, Algeria became French territory over a decade before Nice was annexed from Italy. The phrase 'The Mediterranean runs through France just as the Seine runs through Paris' became a popular propaganda slogan, used well into the 1960s to justify France's continued hold on Algeria. Within two decades, French Algeria became a top global wine producer, aided by global demand, a favorable climate and a phylloxera outbreak in southern France. By the 1930s, Algeria produced over one billion litres annually, mostly exported to France, where producers blended it with local wine to improve color, taste, and strength. Ironically, a mostly Muslim country where alcohol is forbidden became a major wine producer under colonial rule. Local farmers, lost land to vineyards, were excluded from profits and denied the chance to cultivate crops aligned with Islamic values – making the industry a symbol of exploitation and cultural disregard. For decades, Algerian resistance to French rule was fragmented and brutally suppressed. On May 8, 1945, tens of thousands marched in Sétif, Guelma, and Kherrata to demand independence – on the day Europe celebrated the end of World War II. Peaceful protests were met with horrific violence. French troops, police, and settler militias killed an estimated 15,000 to 45,000 Algerians. Villages were bombed, civilians executed, and communities razed. International condemnation was minimal, overshadowed by postwar triumphalism. For many Algerians, the message was clear: France would never grant independence willingly. The trauma shattered hopes for reform and fueled a new nationalist generation, paving the way for the FLN less than a decade later. The FLN chose Algiers, the capital, to ignite full-scale resistance with dramatic violence. Three women – Djamila Bouhired, Zohra Drif, and Samia Lakhdari – disguised in European dress, slipped through French checkpoints into the European Quarter. Their targets: a busy Milk Bar and a crowded cafeteria. The bombings shocked the capital, marking a bloody new phase in urban resistance and showing the FLN's growing reach within colonial strongholds. Following the attacks, French authorities cracked down hard. Zohra Drif and Samia Lakhdari were captured, but it was Djamila Bouhired's arrest and trial that drew global attention. Tried by a military court and facing death, her case revealed colonial brutality, especially torture. Bouhired's defiance made her a symbol of the FLN and the independence struggle, galvanizing international sympathy and cementing her legacy as an Algerian War icon. The guerrilla campaign, called the Battle of Algiers (1956-1957), was a defining chapter in Algeria's independence war, highlighting the FLN's urban guerrilla tactics and the harsh French counterinsurgency. The events shocked France and the world, later immortalized in Gillo Pontecorvo's 1966 film, 'The Battle of Algiers', which portrayed the conflict in a raw, documentary style. Djamila Bouhired, a key figure, became a global resistance symbol. Her legacy extended beyond Algeria – she led an international women's delegation to Gaza in 2014, blocked by Egyptian authorities. Her story inspired a generation of African activists fighting colonialism and apartheid. The film influenced liberation movements across Africa, serving as a blueprint for urban guerrilla warfare, secret networks, and mass mobilization. In the 1970s, African National Congress (ANC) leaders in exile studied the film, and members of Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), the ANC's armed wing, reportedly used it in their training. Its raw portrayal of resistance also shaped fighters in Angola, Guinea-Bissau, and Zimbabwe – making Algeria's struggle, and its cinematic depiction, a shared reference in Africa's fight against colonialism and apartheid. Algeria's colonial past continues to strain relations with France, marked by unresolved grievances and deep distrust. France has repeatedly refused a full apology for its 132-year occupation, while Algeria insists it's essential for genuine reconciliation. In 2021, French President Emmanuel Macron offered a limited apology for the 1961 Paris massacre, when the police killed at least 100 protesters, some of whom were thrown into the River Seine, but stopped short of acknowledging broader colonial crimes. For many Algerians, such gestures fall short, keeping demands for full recognition and reparations central to the post-colonial debate. In every French presidential election, colonial memory – especially Algeria's – shapes debates and voter behavior. A recurring issue is the fate of the Harkis, Algerians who fought with France against their country. After independence, many fled to France, where they and their descendants – now millions strong – form a significant electoral bloc. While not openly hostile to Algiers, many harbor deep resentment over perceived neglect by both France and Algeria. Algeria continues to demand a full apology and reparations for colonial crimes. In March 2025, the Algerian parliament revived stalled legislation from 2006 to criminalize French colonialism, calling for a formal apology, recognition of crimes against humanity, and compensation for France's 132-year occupation. On May 8, Interior Minister Brahim Merad said France would 'inevitably have to recognize its colonial crimes.' However, France has repeatedly avoided the issue – most recently worsening ties by recognizing Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, opposing Algeria's support for Sahrawi independence. Algeria withdrew its ambassador from Paris, bringing relations to a low point. Despite strong domestic backing, the draft law remains under review amid fragile diplomacy and unresolved history. The violent French expulsion from Algeria in 1962 left a lasting impact across West Africa, still felt today. A new generation of Sahelian leaders – shaped by poverty and postcolonial frustration – views France not just as a former colonizer but as a failing patron. Between 2021 and 2023, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger expelled French troops, citing worsening security and sovereignty violations. Niger cut ties with Paris in 2023, following Mali and Burkina Faso. Even longtime allies like Chad and Senegal have voiced discontent. France's occupation of Algeria formally ended in 1962, but its legacy still shapes identities, policies, and geopolitics across North and West Africa. The scars of colonization remain living tensions – contested memories and unresolved demands for justice. From Algiers to the Sahel, the struggle against French dominance continues, as new generations reclaim their histories and reshape sovereignty in a post-imperial era. As French influence in Africa wanes, a new generation of leaders draws strength from the continent's history of resistance, inspired by struggles like Algeria's independence fight. The legacy of colonialism, marked by exploitation and violence, must be fully acknowledged and addressed. Only by settling these historical grievances, however delayed, can former colonies and their colonial powers build a foundation of genuine partnership, mutual respect, and a more hopeful future.
Russia Today
11 hours ago
- Russia Today
South Africa seeking new trade partners in response to US tariffs
South Africa is quickly expanding its global trade partners as a solution to the United States government's 30% tariff on its exports, Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen has said. Steenhuisen made the statement as the US tariff increase on South Africa is expected to come into effect on August 1. 'The real solution lies not just in playing defence, but in going on the offensive. This is why we are doubling down on market access expansion,' said Steenhuisen, who is the leader of the DA in the Government of National Unity. The tariff deadline will come as the country waits for the outcome of the proposed US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025, which seeks to impose sanctions against some ANC leaders accused of, among others, supporting China, Russia, and Iran, and mismanaging state resources. Delivering a keynote address at the RSA Group Stakeholder Dinner in Muldersdrift outside Johannesburg on Thursday, Steenhuisen said his department was reaching out to other countries looking for markets to sell the country's agricultural products. He called on the country not to waste time by being overly reliant, but to be productive. He said the country was already strengthening its trade alliances with the likes of Chile, Peru, and New Zealand 'to jointly lobby for fair and stable trade treatment of fresh produce' through the Southern Hemisphere Association of Fresh Fruit Exporters. 'Over the past six months alone, we have finalised new phytosanitary protocols for the export of avocados to China; table grapes to Vietnam and the Philippines; and maize to India,' he said. Steenhuisen said there were trade negotiations with Indonesia, Thailand, and Bangladesh. 'Our goal is simple — to ensure that no South African fruit producer is ever left dependent on the goodwill of a single trading partner.' He said the country was also strengthening its plant health systems, expanding traceability capabilities, and digitising its export certification platforms to align with the European Union's Green Deal and Asia's growing demand for sustainability-linked imports as part of 'investments that are not just defensive; they are the launchpad for new growth'. He said the country's agriculture has always been one of ingenuity, grit, and partnership. 'We have overcome political transitions, trade embargoes, droughts, pandemics, and port crises. We will overcome these current headwinds (tariff increase) too,' he said. Steenhuisen said that to avert the effects of new tariffs more quickly and effectively, the country must be united and pull together. 'My department is open for business, open for reform, and open for ideas,' he said. Steenhuisen said the tariffs will damage the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which is set to expire in September and is already under threat of not being renewed due to strained relations between South Africa and the US. 'Let me be clear: South African agriculture did not deserve this treatment. We do not dump, we do not distort, and we do not play geopolitical games with food,' he said. He said the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC) was leading the country's formal engagement with the United States. 'And we continue to work hand in hand with Minister Tau and his team to ensure that the full impact on the agricultural sector is well understood,' he said. Soon after taking over the US presidency for the second time, Donald Trump came down heavy on South Africa by signing an Executive Order alleging that the country was mistreating its Afrikaner community by enabling genocide and passing oppressive policies. He also accused the country of being aggressive towards his country and its allies, 'including accusing Israel, not Hamas, of genocide in the International Court of Justice, and reinvigorating its relations with Iran to develop commercial, military, and nuclear arrangements'. 'The United States cannot support the government of South Africa's commission of rights violations in its country or its undermining of United States foreign policy, which poses national security threats to our Nation, our allies, our African partners, and our interests,' read the order. In reaction, Ramaphosa led a delegation, which comprised Steenhuisen and influential businessman Johann Rupert, to correct misinformation about Afrikaners' treatment and straighten the relationship with Trump's administration. However, the first phase of passing the US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025, which, according to its author, US Congressman Ronny Jackson, seeks to punish ANC leaders, raised eyebrows. The act, which is now awaiting tabling at the full House of Representatives, accused the ANC's government leaders of undermining human rights by having a military and political relationship with the Russian government, which is at war with Ukraine. It accused the country of having allowed a US-sanctioned Russian cargo ship, the Lady R, to dock and transfer arms at a South African naval base in December 2022. 'The ANC published an article in their newspaper, ANC Today, in October 2024, promoting Russian propaganda about the war in Ukraine,' read the proposed act, which also accused ANC leaders of mismanaging Eskom and Transnet, and enabling the cholera outbreaks. University of South Africa's Thabo Mbeki African School of Public and International Affairs' international affairs expert, Dr Bongiwe Ngcobo, said the US actions were designed to force South Africa to abandon the International Court of Justice case against Israel on the Gaza conflict. She said South Africa's BRICS membership was also a concern for the US. 'If BRICS strengthen and grow, then it means they will have a challenger, and it means they will have less control over smaller countries like South Africa and other countries from the Global South,' she published by IOL
Russia Today
20 hours ago
- Russia Today
Israel just drew a new map – without saying it out loud
In a significant yet non-binding move, the Israeli legislature has overwhelmingly approved a declaration urging the immediate extension of Israeli sovereignty over Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and the Jordan Valley. The motion, which passed by a vote of 71 to 13, was backed by right-wing and center-right factions including Likud, Shas, Religious Zionism, Otzma Yehudit, and Yisrael Beiteinu. The text declares that the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas — referred to in Israeli political discourse as the 'Simchat Torah Massacre' — proves that the creation of a Palestinian state poses a mortal danger to Israel's existence. 'The Knesset declares that the State of Israel has the natural, historical, and legal right to all parts of the Land of Israel,' the resolution reads. 'The Knesset calls on the Government of Israel to act without delay to apply sovereignty… over all areas of Jewish settlement in Judea, Samaria, and the Jordan Valley.' Though labeled symbolic, Palestinian experts view the vote as laying the bureaucratic foundation for a permanent Israeli presence and governance in the West Bank, the heartland of a future Palestinian state as envisioned by international consensus. Saad Nimr, professor of political science at Birzeit University in the West Bank, told RT the implications of the Knesset's move are far-reaching. 'This is not symbolic at all,' Nimr said. 'It means these settlements are now treated as Israeli cities. They're no longer 'occupied' under military law. This is the legal and bureaucratic infrastructure of annexation.' He continued: 'The Israeli ministries — not the military — will now oversee health, welfare, planning, and infrastructure in these areas. It's not about theory. It's about bulldozers, budgets, and expansion.' Dimitri Diliani, a member of the Fatah Revolutionary Council, echoed that sentiment. 'To describe the vote as symbolic is dangerously naive,' Diliani warned. 'In Israeli politics, symbolism is often a precursor to de facto annexation. While the Knesset motion lacks binding legislative authority, it institutionalizes consensus in both government and opposition to expand the State of Israel's settler-colonial project with new domestic political legitimacy.' Diliani added that members of the Knesset are already pushing legislation to replace the internationally recognized term 'West Bank' with the biblical 'Judea and Samaria' — further entrenching a nationalist narrative in Israeli law. Many analysts see the vote not only as ideological, but also as a tactical political maneuver to preserve Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's fragile governing coalition. 'It's quite clear this was a political exchange,' said Nimr. '[The leader of the National Religious Party–Religious Zionism Bezalel] Smotrich and [the leader of the Otzma Yehudit ('Jewish Power') party] Ben Gvir threatened to leave the government if negotiations in Doha led to a Gaza ceasefire. This vote is Netanyahu's way of keeping them on board.' By offering the far right a symbolic prize on annexation, Netanyahu appears to be stalling a government collapse – even as truce talks with Hamas continue under Qatari mediation. Diliani described the move as 'opportunistic,' adding: 'It's designed to pre-empt mounting international legal scrutiny, particularly after the International Court of Justice advisory opinion in July 2023, which declared Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory illegal.' The reaction from the international community was swift but toothless. Jordan condemned the vote as 'a blatant violation of international law.' The European Union and the Arab League issued similarly worded rebukes, reaffirming their commitment to a two-state solution. But both Palestinian analysts were unshaken by the lack of meaningful repercussions. 'The historical record teaches us that international consensus does not always translate into action,' said Diliani. 'Israel's alignment with key Western powers, particularly the United States, has only grown stronger – even amid documented live-streamed Israeli genocide in Gaza and tremendous war crimes in Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank.' He cited continued US military support, which amounts to $3.8 billion annually in aid and has reached nearly $20 billion in additional military assistance since the war on Gaza began in October 2023. 'Israel continues to enjoy extensive trade privileges with the EU,' Diliani added. 'Over three-quarters of a million illegal colonial Israeli settlers reside in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Yet the response from the international community remains negligible. Absent deterrent sanctions or accountability mechanisms, Israel interprets this as tacit permission to proceed.' Nimr was equally scathing. 'Israel went into this decision with an overwhelming majority in the Knesset. That means they don't care about the international community's opinion. The EU witnessed with their own eyes the genocide in Gaza, the use of hunger as a weapon, and still didn't take any real action.' 'If there is no punishment,' Nimr said, 'it's interpreted as agreement. So now, they feel they have a green light.' The analysts tie this impunity to Israel's entrenched position within the Western geopolitical orbit. In 2024, bilateral trade between the EU and Israel reached $46 billion, with Germany, France, and the Netherlands among the top exporters of dual-use technologies. Meanwhile, the United States increased both defense cooperation and intelligence-sharing with Israel under the Biden administration, even as it publicly maintained opposition to annexation. 'This double standard is embedded in the architecture of global power,' said Diliani. 'The situation with Crimea in 2014 triggered sweeping sanctions against Russia. In contrast, the State of Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza and de facto annexation of the West Bank is rewarded with increased arms transfers and diplomatic cover.' 'Israel functions as a strategic Western colonial stronghold in the Middle East. It ensures violations of international law are overlooked. Unlike Russia, which is constructed as a threat to Western order, Israel is portrayed as an extension of that order – even when it dismantles international norms.' Diliani added that allegations of antisemitism are strategically deployed to shield Israeli actions from critique. 'The Zionist instrumentalization of antisemitism allegations to silence critics of its genocidal war crimes has further immunized the Israeli state from accountability.' Nimr agreed. 'The double standard is the slogan – the unspoken slogan – of international diplomacy. Countries deal with Israel differently than they deal with Russia or China, because Israel is part of the same imperialist and capitalist system they belong to.' He called for a global reassessment of the post-WWII international legal framework. 'All these laws, including the United Nations and the Security Council, should be under review. The system is broken. The US veto can block any decision against a country like Israel – its favorite ally in the region.' Both experts believe that the consequences of the Knesset vote extend far beyond diplomatic rhetoric. For Nimr, it should mark a turning point for the Palestinian leadership. 'This decision affects all Palestinians,' Nimr said. 'The two-state solution is not only behind us – it's officially dead. The law blows up the Oslo Agreement.' Signed in the 1990s, the Oslo framework laid the foundation for limited Palestinian self-rule under Israeli oversight – a compromise meant to pave the way toward a two-state solution that now appears conclusively buried. Nimr called on the Palestinian Authority to take immediate, concrete steps, beginning with ending security coordination with Israel – a practice long criticized by Palestinian civil society as collaboration. 'If Oslo is dead, then why should we keep our part of it? The Palestinian Authority must immediately stop all security cooperation. That would send a strong message.' Beyond this, Nimr urged national unity. 'We need a united front – Fatah, Hamas, all factions – to strategize against this existential threat. For decades, we had two paths: negotiations under Oslo, or resistance. Now, the Oslo path has been closed by Israel itself.' Diliani, too, believes Palestinians must take matters into their own hands. 'We are no longer dealing with theoretical annexation,' he said. 'This is the normalization of apartheid and settler-colonial domination – with legal mechanisms to enforce it. Palestinians must now focus on building grassroots resistance, mobilizing international civil society, and dismantling the myth of Israeli democracy.'
