Hi Sister Jabou!
The scholarliness, maturity and humility displayed in your response
are some of the reasons I always look forward to reading your posts.
Thank you for engaging.
We do not have any disagreements with regard to speaking out about
human rights abuses and lack of respect for the rule of law. The issue
is how that speaking out is done, what is proposed and how what is
proposed is presented. While you might feel that you can speak for all
Gambians, others might disagree. There are many people who disagree
with what I identify as being problematic in Gambia and are opposed to
what I propose as solutions just as I disagree with what they present.
That is the beauty of the democracy we wish for Gambia. Disagreeing
with each other does not however mean that we cannot work together to
bring about meaningful change. It means that we have to listen to and
learn from each other. We can debate fiercely and present and guard our
points of view with vigour but we must understand that what we present
is true to us but might not be true to others. We therefore need to
convince each other. If we fail to convince each other, we just agree
to disagree. We might disagree on one topic but agree wholeheartedly on
another.
I have debated with you and read your debates online for more than a
decade and I know where you stand on many issues because you have
always been steadfast in presenting and defending them. The issues I
raised regarding clamourous condemnation of people on the ground, the
urging of people to take to the streets, the issue of fence-sitting
etc. were not only limited to your response or to this current debate.
Halifa and PDOIS have been known for example, for writing open letters
and press releases and have been condemned for doing so as lately as
the witch-hunting issue. The issue of urging people to take to the
streets has been around for many years. Some time ago, I read some
writings on the issue of fence-sitting from the Gambia Post archives.
Sister Jabou, I shall never accuse you of blowing hot air because I
know better. I have known you as someone who fights for what she
believes in both in writing and otherwise. As you stated, we have been
on other venues where the thrust was not only debate but project
oriented. I sometimes read the archives of the L, Post and other sites
and see how many people have, over the years, come and gone with
extremely radical pronouncements and instigations for people to take to
the streets. These issues are not new and my opinions on them have been
expressed over the years and are therefore not new.
With regard to misunderstanding what you wrote, it is no problem. While
online communication offers great benefits, one of the main
disadvantages is the lack of personal touch. One might write something
that is misunderstood but would not have been so if it was a
conversation with the ability to see facial expressions etc. Then there
is the issue of the ?Angalé? (English) per the broken French we speak.
It is not our language and for some of us in these parts of the world
where it is not the mother tongue, we can go on for weeks or even
months without speaking it.
We agree on your other points. The way we present our points may be
different but their essence is the same. Educating and presenting our
viewpoints to the average Gambian is very important. Not assuming that
they see things the way we do is vital. You have raised very important
questions that need to be studied and dealt with. Your statement ?I
have been debating these issues for a long time here on and have lately
come to the conclusion that we need to move from debate to actual
tangible, sensible, attainable solutions? is very true. I thank you for
engaging in this debate and hope that the points presented by you and
others have added light and facilitated retrospection and
introspection. In the desire for true democracy in Gambia, we are on
the same page. If you have any more questions on the issues I dealt
with, I will try to deal with them. Otherwise I would like to book a
seat on the fence by Pa Musa?s side for a while before continuing the
thread after having exhausted my fifteen minutes in the spotlight.
Maybe LJD can be of help (lol). Have a good day.
Buharry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----Original Message----
From: [log in to unmask]
Date: 2009-03-16 8:20
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Subj: Re: [>-<] Of Militants, Cowards and Fence-sitters:
Disaporan Gambians and the Political Situation in Gambia
Hello Buharry,
Thanks for the response.
I am of the point of view that most of the activity, responses,
pronouncements etc that disapora Gambians who are opposed to the
regime
are engaged in has to do with opposition to their human rights
violations and the lack of respect for the rule of law more than
anything else. Therefore, any response I have given is in relation to
those two issues only.
First, I must explain that my response to your article was largely
intended to address your question of whether those who are vocal
online
speak for all Gambians again with regard to those two issues. My
answer
was a resounding yes, and I then proceeded to give the reasons for my
answer and why speaking out is also in fact a responsibility for those
who can and who chose to.
If my response conveyed a different impression, then I failed to be
clear and this may be due to me taking shortcuts with my answers due
to
laziness, lack of time to devote to my response or plain writer's
fatigue
(I have been debating these issues for a long time here on and have
lately come to the conclusion that we need to move from debate to
actual tangible, sensible, attainable solutions and of course the jury
is still out on just how we can attain that given all the variables)
and/or making assumptions that I perhaps should not make in an
exchange
that demands much more clarity to avoid misunderstanding.
You
wrote:
"What I wrote was neither a recipe for nor an endorsement of
"maslaa". It was meant to provoke a process of retrospection and
introspection."
I agree. "masla" was a word I used to refer to or define those
individuals who may acknowledge the physical progress such as new
schools etc but who may also turn a blind eye or feign ignorance to
the
other gross human rights violations they know exist right before their
eyes. I should have offered a more thorough explanation of this so
that
it does not appear that I was relegating all the points you were
trying
to make into just "masla?. So please accept my apology for that.
Also, if my response gave the impression that I was defending the
notion of sitting comfortably at a safe distance miles away and urging
Gambians on the ground to directly confront the regime in ways that
will endanger them, then I think you misread me or I was not clear in
what I was trying to convey.
I also believe that it is in fact dishonest and cowardly to sit
outside
the country and urge people to engage in things that one may not do if
one was on the ground. I have always held the firm belief that unless
I
am on the ground to lead a march for example, I have no right to ask
or
encourage anyone to engage in same and to be truthful, I never fail to
be alarmed whenever I see any kind of appeal by those outside the
country for people to take
confrontational action.
I believe my statement that you referenced goes to prove my position
on
this when you quoted me as having said:
?You also stated that we ?may understand that those who are closer in
proximity to the tyrant government of Yaya Jammeh are less free to
express themselves for fear of reprisal?
For as long as I have been expressing my views with regard to this
regime, and it has been since 1997, I have never in anything I have
written, urged anyone on the ground to engage in anything that will
put
them in harm's way for the reason already mentioned. As such, I never
said anything in my response that would even remotely suggest or
support such a thing. I have always expressed my viewpoints and my
observations unequivocally and left the rest to people to make up
their
own minds what position to take.
You wrote:
?That is why we should not be so condemning of them if they fail to
express outrage the way we do thousands of miles away. The
Argument is not about expressing outrage. It is about how the outrage
is expressed. Most of us would not be expressing outrage the way we do
in Stockholm, London, New York etc. if we were in Banjul, Serrekunda,
Bakau etc. We cannot be telling people to take to the streets and do
this and that without any contingency plans to aid them should they be
arrested, fired from work, killed etc.?
Again, I think
my position on this point is very clear and I do not
believe that I have ever engaged in spending a great deal of time
condemning anyone or urging them to put themselves in harm?s way. On
the contrary, part of my argument was that those of us on the outside
who can speak out and who chose to do so have an obligation to
continue
to do just that because of the limitations faced by people on the
ground.
You wrote:
"I have not argued anywhere that people ignore facts and
accept fantasy explanations or that they should not express outrage at
anything they view as deserving of such. I agree that there should not
be ?divided camps in how we view tyranny and why it has to take all of
us, in and outside of The Gambia being on the same page to defeat it.?"
And indeed you did not and again, perhaps this is another indication
of
my failure or perhaps laziness to explain myself clearly and in detail
in my response and not make assumptions. When I wrote of people
engaging in accepting fantasy explanations etc, I was not presenting
that as your argument at all. Rather, that is my opinion of the
position that those you refer to as the average Gambian who has a
different point of view regarding the regime have taken and my view on
that issue is that no matter the fact that some Gambians have a
different view of the regime, my view is that those same people cannot
ignore the fact that
unexplained murders, disappearances and illegal
detentions have become the order of the day and the Daba Marena and
co.
case stands as a shining example of this as offered by Lamin Darboe.
That for those people to be satisfied with simply measuring progress
by
infrastructure development alone or the fact that they and their loved
ones are untouched by the regime?s disregard for the law or who pacify
themselves that there is no tyranny in Gambia for any other reasons or
the notion that any other issues people face on the ground is divorced
from what those who oppose tyranny are talking about is an indication
of living in fantasy given the present day realities in today?s Gambia.
Further, my view is also that while some Gambians have the right to
beg to differ with regard to the whether Jammeh is a tyrant, there is
reality on the ground that they cannot ignore and that we will never
have meaningful change if for whatever reason, those same people
refuse
to acknowledge that while the regime has built schools, and while they
are faced with having to manage survival "in the belly of the beast"
so
to say, they cannot afford to engage in ignoring the fact that the
same
regime has also taken away their rights and instilled fear in the
general populace and they have murdered and maimed our people and this
violent trend is escalating and has touched their relative, neighbor
co-worker etc and if
people do not wake up to the fact that there is a
lot that is wrong and that development alone is not enough and is only
a part of the entire equation, that living under any government that
does not respect the rule of law and pretending that all is well
presents a very untenable situation indeed. That it is our duty to
keep
hammering this point home for the sake of everyone.
So perhaps the question of a need to consider the views of the average
Gambian should also consider the question of whether those on the
ground who have a positive view of Jammeh?s government should not also
endeavor to do a retrospective and ask themselves what the reasons
they
support the regime are and whether it is serving the interest and
protecting the rights of all Gambians and whether the protection of
rights is important or not.
You wrote:
"I agree that there should not be ?divided camps in how we view
tyranny
and why it has to take all of
us, in and outside of The Gambia being on the same page to defeat it.?"
My point was an attempt to convey the point that continuing to educate
our people so that even those who hold a different point of view
regarding the regime will come to terms that all is not well, even if
the only option we have for that are these online forums must continue
is one way we can get on that same page, so I do not think there is
any
disagreement there, pe
rhaps just a misunderstanding.
You wrote:
"What I argued was that in order to ?be effective conduits of
progressive change, we should realign our thought patterns and think on
the level of the average Gambian and learn to identify the issues that
Gambians hold dear and not the issues we expect them to hold dear.? We
cannot just assume that all Gambians view the government as tyrannical
because that would be fallacious."
I agree with this point of view. However, my thought is that depending
on what one is actually advocating for or speaking out against, in
this
case human rights issues, speaking out against the regime is not
necessarily synonymous with a lack of understanding of the issues that
Gambians hold dear or forcing them to an acceptance of a view contrary
to their?s of course depending on what the average Gambian?s views of
what constitutes human rights are. In my view, while urging people to
engage in direct confrontation with the regime is another matter and
again something I do not believe in doing, advocating for the rule of
law and speaking out against human rights abuses and the abuse of
power
by the regime is not at odds with what people should hold dear and
does
not constitute a departure from an understanding of what the average
Gambian holds dear.
I can accept that there are additional things that those who want to
organize against the regime need to include in their strategies,=2
0but my
response are limited only to those aspects of the activities that
diaspora Gambians who oppose the regime engage in, the issue of human
rights.
We are Gambia born and bred and speaking for myself as an outspoken
Gambian and I am sure many others, know very well the limitations that
people face on the ground and the fact that they have to survive under
a brutal regime. All of us already know this very well. However, it
does not and cannot mean that while the people have to face certain
realities on the ground, our advocacy for the rule of law is in fact
incompatible with the concerns of the average Gambian. Furthermore, I
argue that even if the average Gambian or anyone else thinks that
constantly advocating for and lamenting the absence of the rule of law
(not urging people to expose themselves to danger through revolt from
afar), under the Jammeh regime is an indication of lack of
understanding of what matters to them, then as opposed to this being
an
indication of a lack of understanding of what issues matter to them,
it
is rather an indication of a need on our part to convey to them that
our desire is for a better Gambia where one does not have to choose
between pure survival by the seat of your pants, a semblance of
material gain and loss of dignity and good governance that respects
the
rule of law. We understand the situation of the people and the
conditions unde
r which they have to live already. For those of us for
whom human rights is the overriding issue, if there is a need to
connect with the average Gambian, it is perhaps a need to convey that
we do in fact understand the daily survival issues they hold dear but
that there is an urgent need for them not to ignore the reality that
under a government that has and continues to take away their rights
and
commit heinous acts against them, those daily issues that pre-occupies
them must include an appreciation for the need to find some means of
acknowledging that tyranny exists in Gambia and that struggling
against
tyranny in whatever peaceful manner they can do it is in fact
essential
to the long term survival of everyone, both supporters and opponents
of
the regime and confrontation is by no means the only way to struggling
against tyranny.
Therefore, while I agree that to accomplish our goal for the
betterment
of all, there is a need for education and better understanding on both
sides, we do not have to compromise on trying to encourage our fellow
citizens to accommodate some of those issues some of us hold dear,
especially on the issue of whether we have a tyranny or not in The
Gambia.
I think that most clear thinking human beings will agree that there is
no doubt that our country is under the grips of a tyrannical and
brutal
regime that has relegated our constitution to toilet paper. I also
think that all justice loving human beings recognize that tyranny is
tyranny and the rule of law is the rule of law. So as I have stated
before, you either have justice and the rule of law or you have
tyranny, and although some people may choose to ignore the gross human
rights violations in the Gambia, and may even go so far as to argue
that they did not happen, there are ample facts to prove otherwise.
Therefore, on the question of "realigning our thought patterns and
thinking on the level of the average Gambian and learn to identify the
issues that Gambians hold dear and not the issues we expect them to
hold dear", for those opposed to human rights violations, this one has
to be one of the issues we expect and hope that all Gambians will hold
dear.
You wrote:
?What some us do is not only claim to be speaking on behalf of those
who are silent. We condemn them over and over without even knowing the
reason for their failure to participate. We expect them to carry out
what we deem necessary without even knowing if they agree with what we
believe in.?
As acknowledged by you already. I wrote this:
I am also of the firm belief that those of us who are able
to speak without fear have a responsibility to do so and yes indeed,
we speak for those who cannot or are too timid to do so, or even out of
sheer ignorance and even if they do not recognize or appreciate=2
0this.
My statement above is not and was not intended to condemn anyone who
is
silent or a challenge to them to speak out. I speak out because that
is
what I believe and what my conscience leads me to do. I also see it as
an opportunity to represent those who oppose the regime and who may
want to speak out but cannot for various reasons. I have and continue
to communicate with people outside of Gambia who are opposed to the
regime but do not care to openly manifest that and I have respected
their positions otherwise they would not confide in me.
You also wrote:
?Other people have vociferously condemned injustice and argued their
points of view without condemning people for refusing to accept their
viewpoints. They have presented and defended their case and then let
the people choose what they want and finally agreed to disagree.?
But yous also wrote:
"Jabou, you have vigorously argued your beliefs online but I
don?t remember you constantly forcing your beliefs and trying to force
people to accept them and constantly condemning them for refusing to do
so."
So I think that my position on this issue is already known to you.
However, I will add that naturally, it goes without saying that not
everyone agrees with my point of view and I feel no need to coerce
anyone into anything. Everyone has to go where their conscience leads
them. I have family members who are firmly in the Jammeh c
amp and I do
not even attempt to speak for them much less others. At the same time,
I do not measure their worth to me by the fact that they are Jammeh
supporters. On the contrary, how I feel and what I say against the
regime is an open secret and we have agreed to disagree and leave it
at
that. However, their support of Yaya Jammeh has not and will never
drive a wedge between me and my responsibilities in keeping certain
family connections intact.
At the same time, I also believe that Yaya Jammeh is a tyrant and does
not have the interest of any Gambian in his agenda, supporters and
opponents alike an in opposing him and speaking out against I am
advocating for even those who may not appreciate it.
You wrote:
?The case of Malcolm X and the Black Power Movement is different from
ours. The Black Power Movement from the Black Muslims, the Black
Panthers to the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), The
Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and followers all had
organization and ability. The SCLC and SNCC were able to organize civil
disobedience because they had the logistics, manpower and organization
to effectively do so.?
I am afraid that you had read way too much into my simple quotation of
Malcolm X. Of course our case is quite different and by quoting his
statement that ?we will set you free even if we have to shove freedom
down your throats was not=2
0intended to compare our case to the Black
Power movement. Our case, as you stated is different from all the
struggles you mention and for exactly the same reasons you listed, the
most important points being that all these organizations were able to
form organizations and they were operating under a government that
respects their constitution and had an independent judiciary and where
there were people ready and free to protect their rights should they
be
breached. I hardly think any of us will even remotely mistake that
situation with the situation in present day Gambia.
My quote was intended to do nothing but emphasize the statement I made
above, namely that in speaking out against the regime, I believe that
we are speaking for even those who oppose our outspokenness and who
consider us so-called troublemakers and even if this is not
appreciated.. That was it.
You wrote
?If PDOIS or UDP can only offer open letters, press releases
etc., that is what they are able to do under the circumstances. If we
want them to do something different or against their policies and
principles, why don?t we provide the logistics, manpower etc. to enable
them to do so? We have over the years seen warriors come and go online,
blowing hot air and forcing what they deem solutions, albeit
unachievable, on people through intimidation. I have always wondered
what some people would do if they had the mandate and power Yaya Jammeh
has
because of the way they behave online without either power or
mandate.?
Brother Buharry, you can confirm that you and I have been in venues
where the issues of how we can make a contribution to efforts on the
ground have been the main agendas of discussion and I am certain that
no one can conclude that my position at those venues has not always
been that the best thing we on the outside can offer is to find out
what projects those on the ground want to implement to help our people
and to then offer material support. As I already pointed out, I also
do
not think that I can be accused of being among the warriors coming
online, blowing hot air and forcing unachievable proposals on anyone.
You wrote:
?I don?t disagree with the need for enlightenment. That is why I am a
PDOIS sympathize.?
As you know, I am also a PDOIS sympathizer and I am all for educating
and enlightening our people so they can make the right choices for
themselves.
I think that aside from a lack of appreciation of any efforts to
instigate people to engage in direct confrontation, I personally do
not
believe that there are any major departures between what the average
Gambian on the ground and what those in the Diaspora think as far as
the efforts to oppose issues of human rights violations are concerned.
I say this because I firmly believe that a great number if not most
Gambians o
n the ground know and acknowledge that there are human rights
violations and they also know that they are limited in how or even if
they can express their opposition to those violations and they
appreciate the fact that those of us at a distance can speak out on
their behalf. I also think that there is no lack of understanding by
both people in and outside of the Gambia that people engage in
survival
tactics to survive a brutal regime.
After that is said and done, and aside from the fact that there are
indeed infrastructure improvements, there is the reality of what
ensues
on the ground with regard to human rights issues on a daily basis.
Some
survive because they are part of the regime or have ingratiated
themselves to the powers that be and it is to their best interest to
chose to ignore any unusual happenings and maintain that things are
just fine and those of us crying foul are crazy. Others conform out of
fear and have developed survival tactics and think this is enough and
do not want anyone to rock the boat. Then there are those who are
vehemently opposed and who do not want to conform but are forced to
out
of a lack of an alternate option and are stuck.
In conclusion, may I offer the following with regard to your argument
that in order to be effective conduits of progressive change, we
should
realign our thought patterns and think on the level of the average
Gambian and learn20to identify the issues that Gambians hold dear and
not the issues we expect them to hold dear.
In order to accomplish this, we must also necessarily ask the average
Gambian on the ground to answer the following questions:
1. What is their definition of a free society and a tyranny and which
do they think exists in The Gambia and why?
2. What is their thought on the murders, disappearances and rampant
imprisonment of Gambians? What do they think has happened to those who
have disappeared, and are they satisfied with the explanations offered
by the government?
3. Do they and t heir families feel safe and secure and are they
confident that their rights are well protected in today?s Gambia?
4. Are they satisfied with the way things are and is this how they
want
Gambia to be for the foreseeable future?
5. What do they think about those Diaspora Gambians who are speaking
out against human rights violations at home? Is what they are doing
seen as something useful and necessary and if so, is it appreciated by
them? If they do not see this advocacy as useful and necessary, why?
6. Can we get a realistic representation of what the people really
think given the current atmosphere of fear?
7. What are the major issues of concern for the average Gambian
and
does that concern supersede the issue of human rights and the rule
of law as it exists in the Gambia today?
Realistic=2
0answers to these questions would have to be obtained if we
want to gauge whether we are in touch with the issues that matter to
the average Gambian or not but the challenges we will encounter in
trying to collect this information brings us back to the very reason
we
are speaking out.
Have a wonderful week Buharry.
Jabou Joh
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-
L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
|
