 |
| H.E. Joaquim Alberto Chissano |
LECTURE DELIVERED
BY HIS EXCELLENCY JOAQUIM ALBERTO CHISSANO, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF
MOZAMBIQUE
AND
CHAIRMAN OF THE
FORUM FOR FORMER AFRICAN HEADS OF STATE
AND GOVERNMENT
AT THE 3rd
EDITION OF THE AFRICA LEADERSHIP LECTURES
April 2015
University for
Development Studies (UDS)
Tamale – Ghana
Dr. A. B. Salifu
Chairman
of the University for Development Studies (UDS)
Prof.
Haruna Yakubu
Vice-Chancellor
of the University for Development Studies (UDS)
Deans of Various Departments and Colleges
of the University
Distinguished Guests
Students of the University
Ladies and
Gentlemen
It is indeed an honour and privilege to me to have
been chosen to deliver the Third Edition of the Africa Leadership lectures at
such a distinguished university of Africa. I’m happy to offer my humble
contribution to this exercise aimed at stimulating discussion and action on
African leadership and governance, in the hope that this exercise will support
and enhance development in Africa.
In this lecture I wish to share with this august
gathering my “Reflections on Leadership,
Good Governance and Development in Africa”. These reflections are
essentially based on my experience at the helm of my country, Mozambique, as
well as on the interaction with fellow African Leaders during my tenure as
Leader of Mozambique.
Senior Officials of the University;
Distinguished Students of the University;
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Africa is often regarded and described in a rather
negative way, as a continent suffering from poor leadership. Afegbua and
Adejuwon (2012) provide an overview of that negative reading, by portraying
Africa “as a continent facing a leadership and governance crises”. They argue
that “Africa’s failures have come about largely as a result of frequent
leadership change, lack of ideology, policy reversal and weak institutional
pattern.. The leadership selection process in Africa is seen as often taking
the imposition pattern and that African leaders frequently come to their
position with limited experience. Hence, the decline in moral and discipline,
caused by bad policies, eroded professional standards and ethics, and weakened
systems of governance.”
However, I beg to differ with this view and should like to point out that there
is out there a different Africa moving forward. As a matter of fact, Africa’s
political landscape is changing for the better. We have moved from one-party
democracy to multi-party democracy; from life presidency to tenure presidency;
from unconstitutional changes of government to democratic changes of
government.
The
economic landscape has also changed drastically. Africa is considered to have
some of the fastest growing economies in the world. With changing political and
economic landscapes, new legal requirements to promote democracy and good
governance are being adopted and sustained. We as Africans should claim the
credit and be proud of these tremendous achievements.
Indeed
the African continent has come a long way in embracing democracy and democratic
values as a way of building good governance and ensuring respect for the rule
of law. Colonialism was a classic case of bad governance. The post-independence
leadership had to entrench its legitimacy on delivering to the people. Good
governance was, therefore, an imperative for post-colonial Africa’s political
landscape. To ensure good governance, African leaders had to recognize the need
to institutionalise or reinforce a system of checks and balances.
Multiparty
democracy provided the opportunity for different political groups to compete
and accede to political power. Through democratic values and principles it was
possible to promote the notion that there was life after presidency and that
life-presidency violated the basic rights of people to choose their own
leaders, through elections.
Since
then, elections have become common as Africa goes through electoral processes
on the continent every year. We can say that democracy has taken root on the
continent and good governance is evolving within the context of democratic
values and principles. All these remarkable developments happening in Africa
attest to the effective leadership being pursued by African leaders, around the
continent.
Distinguished
Guests;
Ladies
and Gentlemen;
Mozambique
has been going through a wave of political, constitutional, social and economic
reforms aimed at strengthening governance systems and institutions. These bold
reforms have demanded strong leadership for them to yield much needed positive
results.
When I
became President of Mozambique, in November, 1986, following the dramatic death
of President Samora Machel in an apartheid regime masterminded plane crash, my
country, as most others in Africa, was a single-party state that was facing a
devastating war, led by the then called MNR (National Resistance of Mozambique,
later renamed Renamo) against the Government. It was clear from my first day in
office that my immediate and fundamental task as the leader of the country was
to find a permanent solution to that destructive conflict affecting the
Mozambican people. Over time that
followed, my awareness was reinforced through the frequent contacts I had with
the people in different provinces of the country and many other groups in our
society, namely, religious groups, civil society organizations, the media,
among others. In all these contacts, the common denominator was the need to put
an end to the prevailing war, and that the President had to take the lead for
the materialization of this goal.
However,
among those social groups there were differences on how to reach that goal: the
most prevailing mood across the country was that it was necessary to fight and
finish off the “armed bandits”, as Renamo fighters were then labelled. Other
groups, in particular religious groups, among others, were of the view that a
negotiated solution should be pursued, as this would be a first step towards a
national reconciliation, leading to a permanent peace.
The vast
majority of the population, particularly in rural areas, held the strong view
that the Government and I in particular should not meet and negotiate with
those who took up arms to inflict untold levels of suffering to their fellow
countrymen, killing without discrimination old people, youth, children, women
and men, and, at the same time, destroying the economic and social
infrastructure of the country, including schools, health facilities, roads,
railways, bridges, power stations and transmission lines, farms, industries and
housing.
The degree
of Renamo’s cruelty and atrocities in Mozambique, was documented, among many
other publications, in a 1988 report produced by Robert Gersony, an American
consultant commissioned by the US State Department. His main conclusion was
that, in terms of brutality to the populations, Renamo was worse than the Khmer
Rouge, known for the atrocities they committed in Cambodia, under the Pol Pot
regime.
For these
reasons, initially, I was not finding any popular support to pursue a
negotiated settlement with Renamo. To change this state of mind, I had to work
hard, talking face to face with the people, in all the 128 districts of the
country, including in the localities and villages.
On the
other hand, for the majority of my colleagues in the FRELIMO party leadership,
being this rebel group a creation of the minority regime of the Southern
Rhodesia, led by Ian Smith, and later adopted, financed and logistically
supported by the apartheid regime of South Africa, Renamo was only an
instrument of foreign aggression, without any political legitimacy and
constructive agenda for the country.
In their
opinion if negotiations were to take place they should be with “the owner of
the dog and not with dog”. Although these were valid and strong arguments, they
were however overlooking the fact that the previous attempt to end the war
through an agreement between the Governments of Mozambique and apartheid South
Africa, the 1984 Nkomati Accord, failed to produce the intended results and
that failure was an indication that negotiating with the apartheid regime alone
was not sufficient.
I was
convinced that it was possible to find a permanent solution to the war, but I
first needed to address the reluctance within the party and the society at
large. To that effect, I started a patient dialogue with the different strata
of our society and within the FRELIMO Party structures as well. Gradually, the
mood stated to change in a positive sense, until I felt that I had reached
enough consensuses within the ranks of my party and with the population in
general to pursue a direct dialogue with RENAMO.
The next
challenge in the preparation of successful negotiations was to change the
existing constitution, moving the country from a single-party state to a
multiparty democracy. This was an important step, as one of the reasons for the
failure of the previous direct negotiations which took place in Pretoria
between the Government of Mozambique and the RENAMO Rebels, during the
Presidency of Samora Machel, following the signing of the Nkomati Accord, was
precisely the lack of political space in the constitution for the independent
existence and action of other political parties. In other words, it was
necessary to create conditions for the exercise of multiparty democracy.
To
kick-start the process, a new draft constitution was submitted to public debate
and enrichment through people’s ideas and inputs across the country and in the
diaspora. The public debate took around two years and was held in all districts
and most localities of the country. Among the key innovations proposed in this
draft were the opening of the country to multiparty democracy, the adoption of
market-oriented economy and the expansion of freedom of expression.
The
outcome of the debate was that the overwhelming majority of the people in the
country were opposed to multiparty democracy, as it was viewed as a highly
divisive risk to the country, with the potential to nurture tribalism and other
forms of division, fuelled by ambitious and unscrupulous politicians.
Within FRELIMO,
this risk was particularly felt given the history of divisionism the
organization had to face during the liberation struggle, coupled with the sour
experiences of other countries.
Furthermore,
for some comrades, the change from socialism to capitalism, as they put it, was
not acceptable, on ideological grounds. For them, the proposed changes amounted
to a betrayal to the masses. Indeed, some of these comrades had joined the
liberation struggle precisely with the conviction that socialism would be the
official doctrine to be pursued by the liberation and be adopted by the
independent Mozambique. In fact this actually happened in the FRELIMO Third
Congress, in 1977. Therefore they felt it very difficult to accommodate the
proposed changes, both emotionally and ideologically.
I did not take these arguments and
reservations lightly, as I knew well the valuable contribution the concerned
colleagues gave to the liberation struggle, as well as their strong dedication
to the newly independent country. But, on the other hand, I could not let the status quo prevail, as the demand for
peace was pressing in the country, as I said earlier.
All evidence I had strongly suggested, on
one hand, that a military solution to the conflict was not feasible, and, on
the other hand, that without political space for independent existence and
activity, Renamo would not accept any peace agreement.
Against
this background, I had therefore to steer the Mozambican people and Frelimo
Party itself, through a patient, systematic and methodical dialogue, which
created the necessary political conditions for the adoption of the new
constitution, in 1990. I had to explain that, although the majority of our
population did not favour multiparty democracy, it was advisable to open space
and opportunity for those minorities who eventually wanted the multiparty
system to be able to create their own political parties, including Renamo, to
be allowed to do so, as a contribution to peace. I added that if the majority
of the people were supporting FRELIMO then, there should be nothing to fear as
they would continue to do so.
On
another hand, I was following the world trends that pointed out to the need of
reforms particularly in Africa towards multiparty democracy. Some African
leaders tried to convince me not to accept any pressure to change from the one
single Party State we had. Some of such advisers were very well respected
leaders by the western great powers.
I would
like to mention as one example the wise maen that was the late President Felix
Houphouhet Boigny of Côte d’Ivoire. He told me
that I should be careful with the advice of the Europeans, as they were false
friends who did not care about the bad things that could happen to our
countries if we were to follow their advices or pressures. And he illustrated
what he was saying with is prediction of what would happen in his country if it
were to adopt a Multiparty State system. He said: “My country will be divided on
tribal lines. There will be war my brother, Joaquim. You should avoid that to
happen in your country.”
 |
| H.E. Joaquim Chissano pays courtesy call on Ghana's Prez John Dramani Mahama |
Fortunately, I had already
taken my decision to move towards multiparty democracy. When a number of
African Heads States participated in a
meeting, at La Baule with the late President Mitterrand of France, where this
European ruler tried to call for a change into multiparty democracy I had
already taken the decision.
I told President Mitterrand
that had already decide to introduce multiparty democracy in spite the fact
that my country was one of the poorest in Africa, with the lowest rate of
literacy (above 80%) with a weak state apparatus, with a meager judicial base
with no magistrates, a weak police service and above all it was a country
chattered by a war of destabilization. I told him that I was taking a risk.
I suggested him to launch a “Mitterrand Plan” to help in the
reconstruction of Mozambique and the building of the multiparty democracy,
which in my view was not to be achieved uniquely by the adoption of a low. It
had to be built progressively and for a long term and all of these required a
lot of money. Multiparty system is an expensive system. But one has to
recognize its positive aspects.
Internally in Mozambique, I had argued that our country was not a closed
Island where outside ideas would not penetrate, especially in the era of the
new technologies of communications. I defended that it was better that we lead
our own changes instead of being forced to change by any form of pressures or
be forced to copy from formulas created overseas for the Continent. That is why
we were the first to change among the countries with a single party system
particularly in Southern, Central and Eastern Africa.
At the same time we established a limit of term of office tenure for a
Head of State. In what concerns the dangers of division of the country on
tribal and religious basis, In Mozambique we had reflected under my guidance about the possibility of
the emergence of tribal, regional or religious based parties and we had thought
about the legal ways to avoid it to happen. For instance a Political Party to
be registered had to prove that it had some support from all Provinces of the
country and that it was open to citizens from any religion.
Concerning
the debate about the economic orientation or model to follow, it was necessary
to explain that although neither socialism nor capitalism were perfect economic
systems, the adoption of the market-oriented economy by Mozambique was a
pressing necessity, because we had started to invite investments from the
capitalist countries and since the beginnings of the 1980’s we had come to the
conclusion that the aid from the socialist countries was inadequate for the
needs of our development. We had started to make changes in our economic and
trade relations.
In 1985, while I was the Minister of the
Foreign Affairs of my country I visited the Soviet Union as an envoy of
President Samora Machel and I was amazed but the interest shown by the leaders
of that country on the changes that Mozambique was introducing in its economic
management.
They had perceived the value of our changes
probably beyond the value we gave to it. It was repeated when I went there
again in 1986. Later, when I was already the President of the Republic of
Mozambique the then Ambassador of the Soviet Union expressed his sympathy with
changes we were undertaking saying that in his opinion Mozambique had
started “its Perestroika” much before
the Soviet Union.
Here again for the adjustment of our
economic conduct to the changing times we should not wait to adopt the pertinent
political and economic bold decisions if we didn’t want to adopt them under
pressure from the donors and international organizations. The interest of
change was ours.
Distinguished
Guests;
Ladies
and Gentlemen;
What I’m
sharing with you is just a summary of a long and tortuous political, economic,
social, cultural and emotional process of reform, with moments of doubt and
frustration, which culminated with the signing of the Rome Peace Accord between
the Government of Mozambique and Renamo, in 4 October 1992. Indeed, the level
of objectives to be achieved was very high, as was also very high the level of
obstacles and challenges to overcome.
The
implementation of the Accord was another major challenge, as it was necessary
to mobilize the people to avoid revenge and other hostile acts that could give
excuse to Renamo to abandon the process and go back to war. It was also
necessary to mobilize other forces in society, in particular religious groups,
to preach messages of peace, pardon and national reconciliation.
The
messages should also be targeted to Renamo membership. Indeed, the
implementation of the Accord was a challenging process to Renamo, as it had to
change from a military rebel group to a political party, learn and practice
politics and democracy, try to build internal cohesion among members exposed to
different realities during the war, manage their expectations, build relations
with other political forces, adapt to life in urban areas, to be exposed to the
scrutiny of the media and other forces in society, etc.
Soon it
became clear that the signing the Rome Agreement was just one step, an
important step indeed, in a long-term process leading to better living
standards of all Mozambicans. The same attitude of remaining focused on the pursued
objective, but at same time managing obstacles and other challenges along the
way, had to be kept in the simultaneous process of consolidating peace,
resettling refugees and displaced people, rebuild economic and social
infrastructure to provide basic services to the populations, reforming
institutions in conformity with the new constitution and creating the legal,
judicial and institutional framework for the long-term development of the
country.
Senior Officials of the University;
Distinguished Students of the University;
Ladies and Gentlemen;
The fundamental objectives set for that period were
achieved, namely, to end the war, consolidate peace, resettle refugees and
displaced populations, national rehabilitation of infrastructure and the laying
of the foundations for the long-term development of the country.
In this process, we have paid particular attention
to institutional development, through a combination of human capital
development and enabling legal framework. Our understanding is that the quality
of the relations between the government and the citizens, including the respect
of their rights, largely depends on quality of the public institutions in
place. In turn, the quality of these institutions depend on the professional
quality of their cadres and the legal norms that guide their organization and
functioning, in addition to other resources made available. I’m convinced that
good governance we talk so much about today, shall be more ensured by capable
institutions, public and private, including the media, rather than by personal
intervention of the leaders.
Coming back to our post-war agenda, I have to say
that we were successful in this enterprise because we adopted the right working
methods, consisting of collective discussions of the country’s challenges,
setting of priorities and building consensus on how to solve them. In the
debates, there was space for intellectuals and technical experts, but also for
the common citizens. The debates were followed by decisions. Quite often the decisions
were not easy to take, but they always needed to be timely.
During my childhood and youth, among my friends and
colleagues I always used to naturally help or assist those in need, as I was
concerned with their success and above all with the success of whatever we were
doing. I also liked to do things myself, instead of asking others to do it for
me, unless it was absolutely necessary.
With time, this spontaneous attitude became more
consolidated and fundamental aspect of my relation with others. I started to
realize that people would quite often choose me to be their leader. Only later
I understood the reason behind that preference. They found in me somebody
dedicated to the common cause who very often advanced some alternative
solutions even if it was about combining their ideas and recognize their
correctness. They felt that I supported them in the fulfillment of their
respective roles.
Those who have born qualities of leadership still
may emerge as the best leaders among the trained ones in leadership. And
besides theoretical training they should pass through a practical experience of
serving as subordinates in public and private sectors. They should be good
servants before becoming good and excellent leaders.
I believe that natural potential for leadership can
be developed by training and education, as I said earlier. That is why that we,
at the Joaquim Chissano Foundation, are in the process of creating with some
partners an Institute on Leadership and Governance, to train, educate,
disseminate knowledge and develop leadership skills in interested citizens,
enabling them to improve the performance of their public and private
institutions.
Distinguished Guets;
Ladies and Gentlemen;
In my opinion leaders emerge in a process of
collective pursuit of common aspirations. And the best leaders are those who
never aspire to become leaders, those who did not chose to be leaders but they
become leaders by the recognition by their peers of a number of qualities that
inspire the whole group or at least the majority of the group involved in an
activity aimed at achieving a defined objective.
Normally such persons are distinguished by their
dedication in the pursuit of the success of the tasks of their collective, the
success of their enterprise without caring with singling out their personal
contribution to the pursuit of the cause. On the contrary they are keen to see
their colleagues succeed in their assignments. The success of the collective
work leading to the attainment of the common goal is the only satisfaction such
distinguished persons look for.
They do not expect praises to their work, they do
not expect to be thanked or paid for what they do, anyway not more than the
remuneration established for them whenever remunerations are paid in the organization or group where they exercise
their activity.
Normally their views are listened to by the other
members of the group for they do come very often with suggestions to improve
the overall work of the team. That’s why they start to be followed by the
others in whatever they do or suggest, they are very often consulted and
finally chosen to lead
Without being prescriptive, I believe that the
supreme quality of leadership is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real
success is possible. I share the view that the roots of effective leadership
lie in simple things, one of which is listening. Listening to someone
demonstrates respect; it shows that you value their ideas and are willing to
hear them with due attention and consideration.
I also believe that all organizations need the
capacity for leadership to appear anywhere it is needed, whenever it is needed.
Isolationism deludes leaders and leadership style. When I was Head of State and
Government I always took decisions by consensus after listening to all members
of my Cabinet
Leadership is essentially about keeping all
stakeholders united and committed in solving the multiple and increasingly
complex problems our countries are faced with. This includes the identification
of the political leader with the people. In the case of Africa the contact
between them must be very frequently personal. The use of modern communication
technology should come as complementary. The people at all levels must
participate in the search of solutions for their problems.
Collin Powel, the Afro American General who was
once Secretary of State, said that “Leadership is solving problems. The day
soldiers stop bringing you their problems, is the day you have stopped leading
them. They have either lost confidence that you can help them or concluded that
you do not care and therefore you do not deserve to be a leader. Either case is
a failure of leadership.” I could not agree more with him!
We are all aware that as a leader one is not there
to make a living, through unscrupulous means and tactics. Self-enrichment using
the position of authority is a lethal poison in leadership. You are there in
order to enable your organization and ultimately your country to live more
amply, with greater vision, with a finer spirit of hope and achievement.
Senior Officials of the University;
Distinguished Students of the University;
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Concerning development, the main challenge our
countries are faced with is to adopt a long-term strategy, as development does
not happen overnight. In that strategy we need to ensure that the interests of
different groups in society are harmonized, which means that every citizen
should be ensured of space to pursue his or her legitimate economic interest or
business. Thus, the role of public institutions is key as I said above, as they
should make sure that existing laws and regulations are applied equally to all
citizens, irrespective of their position in society.
When fairness is not applied, citizens develop
sentiments of indignation, exclusion, marginalization and revolt, which can
lead to conflicts. Governments need to understand that, today, citizens are
more aware and knowledgeable of their rights and will fight for them, whenever
they are violated. In order to prevent the violation of the rights of the
citizens, in particular their economic rights, the appropriate public
institutions shall ensure that all government officials, whatever their level
of responsibility should be accountable for their acts. In other words, the
struggle against corruption shall be enhanced in our countries, and thus
stopping impunity.
In the development agenda, ordinary citizens want
to see tangible results. They want to see roads, hospitals and schools being
built. They want food, food in their tables and food security. After having
gone through the horrors of war, they want to cherish peace and stability.
Their major concerns are basic human needs and they will respect the leader who
can deliver such services.
Many leaders remain locked in their offices while
leadership is about going to the people, discussing with them and addressing
their concerns and demands. Leadership is about delivering on promises made. If
you make a promise, you must deliver – and that is what accountability is all
about. A leader should not promise what he/she cannot deliver.
The challenge of leadership is to anticipate
demands and aspirations of the people and design appropriate strategies to
address them. To this end, leadership must have the requisite capacity to
anticipate, or in other words, to read the minds of the people and address
their expectations.
As I said earlier, there are no magic or infallible
formulas that will take you to the success. There is a high element of risk and
uncertainty involved, but the best way to manage those risks is to be in
constant contact with the people, is to be accessible to them. When this
happens, people will always have opportunities to share with you their views
and sentiments about the prevailing situation, even making suggestions and
proposals to correct errors and mistakes.
With these working methods, the leader ensures the
participation of the people, the common citizens, in addressing the
developmental challenges of the country, thus making room for them to
complement the work of the intellectuals and technical experts. These working
methods provide a new dimension of accountability, which is people-centered,
but, again, in complement with what experts produce.
In this regard, leadership requires organizational
structures and systems focusing on addressing the demands and aspirations of
the people. In the current wave of social media, leaders cannot promise and not
deliver, for this will almost certainly invite something like what is now
commonly referred to as the Arab spring.
Discontent and popular uprising are part of
leadership’s failure to deliver. Sometimes leaders see things but they do not
believe what they are seeing. Leadership for development is anticipating and
addressing potential trouble spots and not waiting until it is too late. Early
warning demands early action.
Senior Officials of the University;
Distinguished Students of the University;
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Let me
conclude by submitting that our countries need to adopt mechanisms for
assessing effective leadership, such as the Mo Ibrahim Index. We may not
necessarily have to adopt the Mo Ibrahim index. However, we need to have some
indicators for measuring success or failure, towards the development of an
effective leadership; one that is transparent and accountable.
I thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment