CONCLUSION
Twenty-seven years of war left Angola in
chaos: much of the country's infrastructure was
destroyed, people were
displaced from their homes, adults and children died and the economy
was
disrupted. As a consequence, there was a loss of opportunities for the growth
and
development of the country. Ethnicity, ideological differences, the
depth of mutual mistrust, the
MPLA's refusal to loosen its grip on state
power, racial contempt and external influences, all had
opened a wound which
had long and painful consequences for any possible postcolonial
conciliatory approach. The MPLA's regime became authoritarian,
it conceived itself as synonymous with the Angolan nation and it held the
cities and so left rural Angola neglected. For their survival, both UNITA and
FNLA used ethnicity as a social and political value as they mobilized the
neglected southern Ovimbundu and the northern Bakongo to fight against the MPLA
(Mbundu-based). Savimbi even promised to create a `black republic' of Angola to
replace that of MPLA, which favored the Kimbundu, mestiços,
Creoles and whites. Those reckoning on external influence counted on
Russia and Cuba to help the MPLA and USA, South Africa and China to help UNITA
and FNLA with weapons and money.
Despite the defeat of FNLA as a fighting force, the war went
on between MPLA and UNITA. However, it was not until changes in international
politics took place with the Russian economy shrinking and USA favouring a new
approach of «no democracy, no cooperation», that the two movements
realized that they could not defeat each other militarily. The only choice was
to sign the peace accords. Multiparty elections were held and the MPLA and its
candidate José E. dos Santos won. Savimbi had been confident that he
would win, as neutral observers had predicted, and since Western-style
democracy has no consolation prize for coming second («winner takes
all» was the policy), he refused to accept the election results and as a
result, the war broke out again. The MPLA proved itself totally unwilling to
make any concessions to its opponents and in its fourth congress, President dos
Santos stated that «the only path to peace was war» (qtd. in Hodges
16). In addition, with the constitutional changes of 1991-92, Angola became a
presidential state and all power emanated from the president. Thus, Savimbi
refused any compromise solutions, recognizing that the presidential system
gives all power to the president rather than to the prime minister or to the
elected parliament. One reason for the weakening of
UNITA was the MPLA intervention in DRC, which led to the fall
of Mobutu Sese Seko who had aided UNITA to smuggle weapons into Angola through
DRC borders. The other was the US recognition of the MPLA's regime in 1993.
However, on 22 February 2002 Savimbi was shot dead by the Angolan army.
Savimbi's death opened a new chapter for Angola. Peace accords
were signed between MPLA and the UNITA remnants; parliamentary elections were
held in 2008 and the MPLA took the lead with 82 per cent and after initial
unwillingness, UNITA accepted the defeat. The presidential polls will be held
this year 2009. In spite of all this progress, the wounds of twenty-seven years
of war are still fresh. Ethnicity, ideological differences, people's political
affiliation and racial contempt continue to divide the populace. In other
words, as Ngugi satirically shows through his character, the Policeman, in
Wizard of the Crow, «You might see us dining [...] laughing and
slapping one another on the backs, but this is all a lie» (149). Thus, new
dispensations are needed for Angola to unite its citizens, to accommodate
differences and to identify and then celebrate each other' s horizons.
Mayombe creates a culture of resistance that is promoted by
João and Fearless for nation-building so that a person will no longer
act as a Kimbundu or Kikongo but as an Angolan. Nevertheless, this isolates one
from local identification and Mayombe's approach pari passu
with a multiculturalism that is ethnically derived, that does not wash away
ethnic particularism but celebrates differences, will be another way of
bringing about what Angola should become, a country pledged to prevent further
conflicts.
Mayombe advocates a nationalistic approach by which an
individual's primary loyalty is to the
larger nation. The common experience
of oppression and discrimination, shared values and
history as well as the cultural fusion that was highlighted by
the increased use of the Portuguese language at the expense of indigenous
languages, were some of the premises which would allow nation-building to
occur. An individual's local identification (ethnicity and language) would
become secondary to the national culture. However, as Nussbaum says, we are
surrounded by a series of concentric circles - the self, fellow countrymen and
humanity as a whole (9). Therefore, Angolans should not see themselves as
devoid of local affiliations. A multiculturalism that is ethnically derived
becomes a sine qua non condition for providing, as Appiah argues, both
an individual and a collective dimension of identity (53).
Multiculturalism celebrates differences and it encourages
learning about others and by so doing, learning about ourselves. The fact that
none of the liberation movements, even though they are regionally based, has
ever advocated secession from the country shows that, in spite of our
diversity, we share common values - we all belong to the culture of humankind
and this should take precedence over national and ethnic origins. Furthermore,
instead of being taught about `mythical history' which glorifies the MPLA as
the sole builder of the national memory, and so excluding others, we should be
taught to be open to otherness, to accept differences, to live with plurality
and, as Fearless says «[accept] that the Cabinda people are the same as
the rest of Angola» (41). Our leaders should continue to work to transcend
national emotionalism, to eliminate the barriers to plurality, justice, freedom
and peace, which are still crippling the country. They should also, as Ousmane
says, «[...] not become the new oppressors of the people, of god's bits of
wood» (207). Finally, we should all learn, as Fanon puts it, that
«Each generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission,
fulfill it, or betray it» (166).
| 
