Practical Peacemaking
Wisdom from Africa:
Reflections
on Ubuntu
Programme Officer
Programme in Peacemaking and Preventive Diplomacy
United Nations Institute for Training and Research
(UNITAR)
Palais des Nations, 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Tel: +41-22-917-8595; Fax: +41-22-917-8047;
E-mail: tim.murithi@unitar.org
(The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not
represent the
views
of the United Nations)
Practical Peacemaking
Wisdom from Africa: Reflections on Ubuntu
TIMOTHY MURITHI
Programme in Peacemaking and
Preventive Diplomacy, United Nations Institute for
Training and Research (UNITAR)
This study examines the cultural
world-view known as ubuntu
which highlights the essential unity of humanity and emphasizes the importance
of constantly referring to the principles of empathy, sharing and cooperation
in our efforts to resolve our common problems. The discussion will focus on how
Archbishop Desmond Tutu utilized the principles of ubuntu during his leadership of the South African
Truth and Reconciliation Commission. This study will also outline the five
stages of the peacemaking process found among ubuntu societies, including: acknowledgement of guilt, showing remorse and
repenting, asking for and giving forgiveness, and paying compensation or
reparation as a prelude to reconciliation. Potential lessons for peace and
reconciliation efforts are highlighted with the premise that the ubuntu approach to the building of human
relationships can offer an example to the world.
There has been an increasing
interest in the role that culture plays in determining human relations, and in
the social sciences we are beginning to witness a growing focus on the impact
of a culture of peacemaking (1-4). Every society since the beginning of time has developed its own
mechanisms and institutions for managing disputes in a way that preserves the
integrity and fabric of the society. It should come as no surprise therefore
that cultural approaches for managing disputes around the world will play a
vital role in promoting peace and social order within communities and even
nations. In the case of South Africa, a difficult political situation was
addressed through various peace-building institutions and mechanisms for
governance. These helped the people of this country to transcend the
bitterness, hatred and suspicion of the past and to make the transition to a
more stable - albeit still imperfect - political order. There has been a
growing interest in the cultural values and attitudes held by South Africans
that enabled a spirit of forgiveness and a willingness to move beyond the
legacy of the apartheid state. From the outset, Desmond Tutu was of the
conviction that as far as South Africa as a nation-state was concerned, there
could be Ôno future without forgivenessÕ (5). Informed by his own adherence to the African
world-view of ubuntu, Tutu,
as Chairman of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, was able
to provide leadership, advice and guidance to his fellow countrymen and women
in the difficult and precarious transition through which the country was
passing.
What
are the lessons that can be drawn from this notion of ubuntu? In particular, how can ubuntu contribute towards the ongoing debates among
practitioners and researchers of peace as to how culture can also inform our
efforts to implement practical and effective conflict resolution initiatives?
Conflict and the Revival of
Values for Peacemaking
People derive their sense of meaning from their culture. What does it mean to be human? What is - or ought to be - the nature of human relations? These notions feed into the attitudes and values that we choose to embrace, which in turn determine how we interact with each other. Cultural attitudes and values therefore provide the foundation for the social norms by which people live. Through internalizing and sharing these cultural attitudes and values with their fellow community members, and by handing them down to future generations, societies can - and do - re-construct themselves on the basis of a particular cultural image.
When we survey various parts of the world we are confronted with images and cultures of violence. Societies appear to be tearing themselves apart and the attitudes and values in these societies seem to be based on self-interest, private accumulation and the competitive drive for power and resources. This Ôcultural logicÕ promotes exclusion on a fundamental level and feeds a cycle of poverty, debt and economic marginalization. By extension, this logic also generates and regenerates the vicious cycles of perpetual violence that we are currently witnessing. Any effort to arrest these vicious cycles requires an intervention at the level of culture, with specific reference to how people perceive themselves and their responsibilities, in relation to others. Until significant steps can be taken to reduce the adherence to a culture of violence and exclusion, we will continue to postpone genuine peace. But where do we begin in our attempts to reverse this persistent and pernicious culture of violence?
In
order to initiate the social reconstruction of war-affected communities, a key
step would be to find a way for members of these communities to Ôre-informÕ
themselves with a cultural logic that emphasises sharing and equitable resource
distribution. This, in effect, means emphasising the importance of reviving
cultural attitudes and values that can foster a climate within which peace can
flourish.
Values for Peacemaking in South
Africa: Archbishop Desmond Tutu on Ubuntu
The world recently witnessed the
example of the South African transition towards democracy based on universal
suffrage. It goes without saying that this process of change was marred by
instances of violence between members of the African National Congress (ANC)
and the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) - as well as by the general violence
perpetrated by the then South African Defence Forces on sections of the population.
However, most observers were nevertheless surprised by that fact that the
entire country was not plunged into a violent and devastating confrontation
engulfing all sectors of the population (6). The prevailing view is that the transition was ÔrelativelyÕ peaceful.
How was it possible for such a social and political transformation to be
achieved? The authoritarian apartheid regime had fostered, over a period of
several decades, a culture of violence and brutality built upon attitudes of
hatred and fear, and embracing negative values of social and political
exclusion and economic marginalization. The ability of the country to move
beyond the conditions created by this
legacy, without a culture of vendetta and revenge taking over the minds
of the oppressed, remains a key lesson for the rest of humanity. As Nelson Mandela observed: Ôtime and
again the prophets of doom have been confounded by the capacity and
determination of South Africans to resolve their problems and to realize their
shared vision of a united and peaceful and prosperous countryÕ (7).
The
social and economic project is by no means complete and indeed the situation
can only be described as one in which a fragile reconciliation exists. The
economic well-being of large sections of the population remains to be addressed
if a more sustainable reconciliation process is to be consolidated. For the
purposes of this study the focus will be on the cultural attitudes and values
that enabled the country to move forward with progressive change. What are the
cultural values underpinning this ÔcapacityÕ for transformation that Mandela
refers to? Can these values also contribute towards Ôre-informingÕ other
communities across the world that are struggling to make peace between their
members? It has been common practice for certain South African leaders to be
invited to go to places such as Northern Ireland and the Middle East, as well
as around Africa, to share with these societies the practical wisdom which can
be derived from the South African experience (5).
South
Africa is a model of unity in diversity, and has been referred to as the
Ôrainbow nationÕ. It is clear that different groups and individual members of
the society would have drawn from aspects of their own cultures when dealing
with the process of transition. Many drew upon their own family values and
their religious background. An analysis of all the different cultural
backgrounds and belief systems is beyond the scope of this study; rather the
focus will be on ubuntu; an
African way of viewing the world which a significant number of ethnic groups
and individuals adhere to, some of whom were involved in guiding the nation
through its troubled phase.
As
Chairman of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Tutu
reflects in his book No Future Without Forgiveness, that he drew upon both his Christian values as
well as his cultural values (5). In particular, he highlights that he constantly referred to the notion
of ubuntu when he was
guiding and advising witnesses, victims and perpetrators during the Commission
hearings.
Ubuntu is found in diverse forms in many societies
throughout Africa. More specifically among the Bantu languages of East, Central
and Southern Africa the concept of ubuntu is a cultural world-view that tries to capture the essence of what it
means to be human. In southern Africa we find its clearest articulation among
the Nguni group of languages. In terms of its definition, Tutu observes that:
Ôubuntu is very difficult to render
into a Western language. It speaks to the very essence of being human. When you
want to give high praise to someone we say, ÒYu, u nobuntuÓ; he or she has ubuntu. This means that they are
generous, hospitable, friendly, caring and compassionate. They share what they
have. It also means that my humanity is caught up, is inextricably bound up, in
theirs. We belong in a bundle of life. We say, Òa person is a person through
other peopleÓ (in Xhosa Ubuntu ungamntu ngabanye abantu and in Zulu Umuntu ngumuntu
ngabanye). I
am human because I belong, I participate, I share. A person with ubuntu is open and available to
others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and
good; for he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes with knowing that he
or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated
or diminished, when other are tortured or oppressed, or treated as if they were
less than who they are.Õ (5, pp34-35).
As
a Ôhuman being through other human beingsÕ, it follows that what we do to others
feeds through the interwoven fabric of social, economic and political
relationships to eventually impact upon us as well. Even the supporters of
apartheid were in a sense victims of the brutalizing system from which they
benefited economically and politically: it distorted their view of their
relationship with other human beings, which then impacted upon their own sense
of security and freedom from fear. As Tutu observes: Ôin the process of
dehumanising another, in inflicting untold harm and suffering, the perpetrator
was inexorably being dehumanised as wellÕ (5).
This
notion of ubuntu sheds
light on the importance of peacemaking through the principles of reciprocity,
inclusivity and a sense of shared destiny between peoples. It provides a value
system for giving and receiving forgiveness. It provides a rationale for
sacrificing or letting go of the desire to take revenge for past wrongs. It
provides an inspiration and suggests guidelines for societies and their
governments, on how to legislate and establish laws which will promote
reconciliation. In short, it can Ôculturally re-informÕ our practical efforts
to build peace and heal our traumatized communities. It is to be noted that the
principles found in ubuntu
are not unique; as indicated earlier, they can be found in diverse forms in
other cultures and traditions. Nevertheless, an ongoing reflection and
re-appraisal of this notion of ubuntu can serve to re-emphasise the essential unity of humanity and gradually
promote attitudes and values based on the sharing of resources and on
cooperation and collaboration in the resolution of our common problems (8, 9).
The Ubuntu approach to Conflict Resolution and
Reconciliation
How then were
the principles of ubuntu traditionally
articulated and translated into practical peacemaking processes? Ubuntu societies maintained conflict resolution and
reconciliation mechanisms which also served as institutions for maintaining law
and order within society. These mechanisms pre-dated colonialism and continue
to exist and function today (10,11,12). Ubuntu societies
place a high value on communal life, and maintaining positive relations within
the society is a collective task in which everyone is involved. A dispute
between fellow members of a society is perceived not merely as a matter of
curiosity with regards to the affairs of oneÕs neighbour; in a very real sense
an emerging conflict belongs to the whole community. According to the notion of
ubuntu, each member of the
community is linked to each of the disputants, be they victims or perpetrators.
If everybody is willing to acknowledge this (that is, to accept the principles of ubuntu), then people may either feel a sense of
having been wronged, or a sense of responsibility for the wrong that has been
committed. Due to this linkage, a law-breaking individual thus transforms his
or her group into a law-breaking group. In the same way a disputing individual
transforms his or her group into a disputing group. It therefore follows that
if an individual is wronged, he or she may depend on the group to remedy the
wrong, because in a sense the group has also been wronged. We can witness these
dynamics of group identity and their impact on conflict situations across the
world.
Ubuntu societies developed mechanisms for resolving
disputes and promoting reconciliation with a view to healing past wrongs and
maintaining social cohesion and harmony. Consensus building was embraced as a
cultural pillar with respect to the regulation and management of relationships
between members of the community (12). Depending on the nature of the disagreement or dispute, the conflict
resolution process could take place at the level of the family, at the village
level, between members of an ethnic group, or even between different ethnic
nations situated in the same region.
In
the context of the ubuntu
societies found in southern Africa, particularly among the Xhosa, disputes
would be resolved through an institution known as the inkundla/lekgotla which served as a group mediation and
reconciliation forum (10).
This inkundla/lekgotla
forum was communal in character in the sense that the entire society was
involved at various levels in trying to find a solution to a problem which was
viewed as threatening the social cohesion of the community. In principle the
proceedings would be led by a Council of Elders and the Chief or, if the
disputes were larger, by the King himself. The process of ascertaining
wrong-doing and finding a resolution included family members related to the
victims and perpetrators, including women and the young. The mechanism
therefore allowed members of the public to share their views and to generally
make their opinions known. The larger community could thus be involved in the
process of conflict resolution. In particular, members of the society had the
right to put questions to the victims, perpetrators and witnesses as well as to
put suggestions to the Council of Elders on possible ways forward. The Council
of Elders in its capacity as an intermediary, had an investigative function and
it also played an advisory role to the Chief. By listening to the views of the
members of the society, the Council of Elders could advise on solutions which
would promote reconciliation between the aggrieved parties and thus maintain
the overall objective of sustaining the unity and cohesion of the community.
The actual process involved five
key stages:
To be frank, this process was not
always straightforward, and there would naturally be instances of resistance in
following through the various stages of the peacemaking process. This was
particularly so with respect to the perpetrators, who tended to prefer that
past events were not re-lived and brought out into the open. In the same way,
victims would not always find it easy to forgive. In some instances forgiveness
could be withheld, in which case the process could be held up in an impasse,
with consequences for the relations between members of the community. However,
forgiveness, when granted, would generate such a degree of goodwill that the
people involved, and the society as a whole, could then move forward even from
the most difficult situations. The wisdom of this process lies in the recognition that it is not be possible
to build a healthy community at peace with itself unless past wrongs are
acknowledged and brought out into the open so that the truth of what happened
can be determined and social trust renewed through a process of forgiveness and
reconciliation. A community in which there is no trust is ultimately not viable
and gradually begins to tear itself apart. With reference to the notion of I
am because we are and that of a
person being a person through other people, the above process emphasises drawing upon these ubuntu values when faced with the difficult challenge
of acknowledging responsibility and showing remorse, or of granting
forgiveness.
As
mentioned earlier, this traditional peacemaking process covered offences across
the board from family and marriage disputes, theft, damage to property, murder
and wars. In the more difficult cases involving murder, ubuntu societies sought to avoid the death penalty
because, based on the societyÕs view of itself - as people through other
people - the death penalty
would only serve to cause injury to the society as a whole. Though it would be
more difficult to move beyond such cases, the emphasis would still be on
restoring the broken relationships caused by the death of a member of the
community.
The
guiding principle of ubuntu
was based on the notion that parties need to be reconciled in order to re-build
and maintain social trust and social cohesion, with a view to preventing a
culture of vendetta or retribution from developing and escalating between
individuals, families and the society as a whole. We continue to observe how
individuals and sections of society in the Republic of South Africa, epitomized
by Mandela and Tutu, have drawn upon some aspects of their cultural values and
attitudes to enable the country to move beyond its violent past. The South
African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which has as many critics as it
has supporters, also relied on the willingness of victims to recognize the
humanity of the perpetrators, and there are documented cases of victims
forgiving particular perpetrators (13). Tutu himself would
always advise victims - if they felt themselves able to do so - to forgive. His
guiding principle was that without forgiveness there could be no future for the
new Republic.
Ubuntu lessons for the Global Village
It is evident then that ubuntu approaches to conflict resolution and
reconciliation can offer some important lessons as we continue to work towards
world peace. Four key lessons are:
2. the utility of supporting victims and encouraging perpetrators as they go through the difficult process of making peace;
Susan Colin Marks, a South African
conflict resolution practitioner, in a chapter entitled Ubuntu, the Spirit
of Africa: An Example for the World makes an important point: the question that faces us today in the
context of our globalized world, is whether we can draw from the lessons of Ôubuntu forms of peacemakingÕ, and with this
recognition of our essential unity, work towards Ôubuntu forms of governanceÕ with public participation
and Ôubuntu economiesÕ that
emphasise fair resource distribution and thus the sharing of the earthÕs
resources for the benefit of all (14).
References
TIMOTHY MURITHI, b. 1970, MA in
International Relations (University of Kent, 1994); PhD in International
Relations (University of Keele, United Kingdom, 1998). Programme Officer,
Programme in Peacemaking and Preventive Diplomacy, United Nations Institute for
Training and Research (UNITAR), Geneva, Switzerland (1999 - ). Current interests: culture and
conflict resolution; forgiveness and reconciliation.