Conference to Build the ASI - Report from Congo-Brazzaville

Presented by Berthin Nzelomona

I am very happy to be here tonight. I would like to thank the participants who are present. Today I need a translator to be understood, but I promise that the next time I will speak in English.

I want to begin by saying, "Uhuru!" As had been said, this applies to the Congo-Brazzaville as well. This presentation is from reflections made in Paris about Africa. This presentation will have two parts: a brief historical introduction about the Congo, and then a discussion about Africa.

The name, Congo, comes from the ancient kingdom, called Kongo, before colonization by the Portuguese. The former Kongo kingdom was made up of parts of what is currently known as Congo-Brazzaville, Congo-Kinshasa, Angola and Gabon.

The war between the European slavers and the Kongo state lasted two centuries until the battle of 1661 when the Kongo kingdom was defeated militarily and the king of Kongo was captured. Thus, today, we have four republics, four states. Congo-Brazzaville was called the capitol of colonial French Equatorial Africa. During the Second World War, which took place from 1940 to 1944, before the liberation of Paris, Brazzaville was the capital of Free France.

Now, for the second part of my presentation. When we speak about Africa we talk about African states. But in reality are these states like the states in the rest of the world, which assume their proper role? Because of tribalism, civil war, exploitation, the role of women, national organization — none of these states are viable.

In Morocco, despite existing problems, the construction of the State is helped by the monarchy and religion, which are quite old. In South Africa, the nation-building process is going on, the State is being internalized in the heads of the people, and a State internalized in the heads of the people is thus accepted by the people. These processes are reversible.

In 1960, a person was for independence and a revolutionary or one was not a revolutionary. All the projects of the revolution tending towards socialist states have failed because, in fact, the African citizens, the population, were not actors. The people were not part of that revolution.

Thus they were denied authentic, participatory, direct democracy. That is, 60 percent of the population, those who are workers and peasants, have never been able to participate in political life. They have to become the masters of the situation. The intellectuals, making up 20 to 30 percent, have to work together with the workers and peasants. This is something that has never been done before.

I respect these people. Socialists like Lumumba and Nkrumah were great visionaries, but I also feel they have failed. Socialism has not failed, it is a great idea that needs to be reinvented or adapted to our reality.

On the other side, people like Obasanjo and others puppets are failures because they separate the people from direct democracy and therefore it is a continuity of imperialism.

Thus, the primary idea of an authentic, participatory democracy is simply to respect all the social classes, the ethnicity, the region, the religions, the men and the women as participants in part of the whole of the social life. Each one in his role must be accepted. We must share the power, share the wealth and there must be equitable political participation.

I will make a simple example: The Congolese state. Its currency is the French franc, but the franc has disappeared in Europe. Congo's language is French. It is the tool for thinking and working. The security of the country is in the hands of foreigners. The oil is exploited by France and the wealth of the country is taken out to France. So Congo is in the pocket of the French government. Only participatory democracy would bring this situation to an end.

For the revolutionaries, this idea of direct democracy becomes a material force when it is gripped by the people. Immediately, they take power to govern themselves. They learn the theory. They learn how to govern themselves.

Question: What is happening in Congo-Brazzaville right now knowing that the president was not really elected?

Response: It's as if John Major wanted to kick Tony Blair out of office and he succeeds and the British people don't say anything. It's crazy. That's what happened in Congo. The people just watched. Later they did not accept the constitution. They did not internalize the state. Thus Congo has had three stages: The first stage was multi-party state. After 28 years there was a single party system. Then we went back to the multi-party system. After a national conference, a president was democratically elected. Mr. Lissouba, the man who was elected, is now in exile here in Britain. He was chased out by Dennis Sassou Nguessou, the current president, in a coup d'etat.

Coming back to democratic elections: In European democracy, the minority is controlled by the majority. In Congo, there is no working class nor bourgeois class party as seen in Europe, in the sense that when they win they win everything or when they lose they lose everything. There is no alternative. The opposition has no hope of ever coming to power like in the European bourgeois democracies.

The parties that we have in Congo are not ideological parties. They are ethnic parties. Thus the democratic election is a forced democratic election because the system is not at all adapted to the reality on the ground. The ethnic groups of the former president and the ethnic groups of the current president are at war with each other. Whoever wins does so with his generals and part of the administration. The one who loses must go into exile with his generals and the members of his administration.

Where is the State? That is the question. Where is the State? The problem of the State is also valid for many countries: Congo-Kinshasa, Gabon, Central African Republic and so on. The State has to be re invented, re-organized. A nation state that does not serve the interest of its citizens can't exist forever.

It has been said here that we must put an end to tribalism and we must also take control of our wealth. But how do we do it if the State is in the pockets of others? It is only the people themselves who can take control of this, not the intellectuals who can be bought. The people are the sovereign of the whole political system, even in Africa, socialist or not. Thank you.