Caught between Scylla and Charybdis: Participate or Boycott Swaziland Elections

SWAZI IDENTITY

Scylla and Charybdis were mythical sea monsters. Later Greek tradition sited them on opposite sides of the Strait of Messina between Sicily and the Italian mainland. Scylla was rationalized as a rock shoal (described as a six-headed sea monster) on the Italian side of the strait and Charybdis was a whirlpool off the coast of Sicily. They were regarded as a sea hazard located close enough to each other that they posed an inescapable threat to passing sailors; avoiding Charybdis meant passing too close to Scylla and vice versa. This is a perfect metaphor for the people of Swaziland whether to participate or boycott in the impending Elections.  The two have their now implications that might or not deliver an open monarchail society from the Tinkhundla authoritarian system. Whilst the argument pro-boycotting is prominent, this writer notes it as participation. The paper seeks to unveil boycotting and voting implications for the Swazis.

Boycotting in itself is participating but boycotting towards effecting change to an open society is not enough but close to shooting oneself in the foot. Those pro Operation Boycott are not putting their proposals after boycotting. To me that their proposal does not even need elections to be part of this debate as they can implement their after Operation Boycott any day any time. The writer believes Swazis has been in the boycott operation since the time she has been in elections as the number of possible voters is far below the registered voters, usually 60% cast their votes under the Tinkhundla system. Of course they deny that they were participating by never casting the vote yet note voting is participating. The system has been supported by a few associate who have gained financial whims and fancies from the elected officials and of course the paranoid who are subjected to functional illiteracy.

From a superficial argument, they were participating but their participation undermined the competitiveness of democracy for more than 2 decades. Constitutionally it is ones right to vote or not to. However, the absolute monarchy through the constitution allows the elections of the house of assembly as window dressing to democracy. It made it superficially useless for one to cast the vote as Nkosi override the parliaments decisions whenever, wherever. The reason boycotters validly indicate as have influenced their decision.

As I look at those for the Boycott Operation, what they can do, those who participate and try to influence from with can also do. However, it pity they wont be able to vote. 

Operation Participate by voting is supported by the comrades who have the view that the Swazis have been boycotting elections and the process has not yield any results. Results have not been realised because of lack of strategy on the way forward as it is generally limited to just but debates in circles far from influencing change. It is unfortunate that the writer find sense in participate by voting operation rather than boycotting. In the sense that what boycotters can do voter can but what voters can do boycotters cannot. Of course boycotters will argue that it is beyond reason but I am yet to see their reason.

Voting despite being difficult, calls for an organised strategy where the Swazis will identify comrades in support for the same cause for an open society, who will be voted for. This strategy will fight the political parties ban form the 1967 decree. Thus more coordinated candidates will be elected to parliament for a reason. The reason towards the emancipation of the Swazis to an open society coloured by democracy.

The mantra is based on fighting from within the Tinkhudla system where the elected officials would cause what authoritarians would call havoc/mayhem and democrats call freedom of expression, association, speech you name it. They simply denounce the constitution set a motion for a new democratic one. This may find them fired by the King definitely. Then what is the question then comes to mind. A Swazi uprising that is internationally recognisable can follow with the masses. Another question is the Swazis capable of uprising. This is what the boycotter wont be able to do. Assumable if they rise, constitutionally they can be labelled rebels as their uprising will lack legitimacy that can be fuelled by elected MPs. The international community will work to fight rebels who want to fight a legit government. 

The King might be compromised not to fire the Members of Parliament and opt for negotiations since uprising has consequences of the total fall of the Monarchy and Tinkhundla. Boycotters wont have such a scenario in their pipeline dream of fighting the oppression. The security forces will thrash them in the name of upholding the constitution and sovereignty of Swaziland. 

The Members of Parliament may also present to the King a petition ironing out issues the Tinkhudla challenges. If the King responds negatively, other avenues to present the pettiton would be through SADC, the Commonwealth, AU. The writer makes it clear that SADC might not establish an equal hearing to the cause but favour the Tinkhundla Regime.

Having members of Parliament for the motion of an open society will be a step in the rightest direction for the people of the Kingdom to emancipation. Ah some faithless and none risks takers will argue that the elected follows will be eloped by the Tinkhudla system ending up selling out. That mind set alone is seeling out the struggle. This ia a new avenue and new risk should be felt along the way no doubt but courageous people wont sway away if they are for the cause of the people.

The people of Swaziland are in the dilemma of choosing the next step to deliver them from Tinkhundla Oppression. Young people with a population slightly above 70% can take charge and decide how to deleiver the kingdom to an open society. The old gaurds have done nothing much to take home and I will expect less from the despite their importnance in the struggle.

Tinashe Chirape @ Mbabane City Post

This piece comes from the heartfelt experience I got when I was in the Kingdom for 10 days at Malolotja Nature Reserve with a group of young leaders. It was an eye opener but am happy the minority in political power but majority in Swazis population are questioning Tinkhudla System, why Swaziland needs an Army that blows 2.4 million per day. Why scholarships are enriching South African universities and not build Swaziland more. As we move to the open society it will not come easily but the struggle should go beyond debates to action.

My saying to all youths in Swaziland and beyond is that, “youths are always a generation in conflict with the older generation. We are the changing generation and they are the status quo generation. We are the revolutionary generation tomorrows deciders/shapers and they are yesterday/history.

Aluta Continua Comrades

The Struggle Continues