Buharry:
This was a piece with sensible, peaceful
and desirable truth. In fact i wrote a similar
piece to the L on the 1st. of May this year.
I think violence should be the last answer to
or disposition of a problem.
Africa is without a doubt going through living
hell for the past 3 decades. It is time for we
Africans to change strategies to conduct any
political or economical deferences in Africa.
Thanks for sharing!
Saul S.Jawara
Sweden.
----- Original Message -----
From: "MOMODOU BUHARRY GASSAMA" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2000 3:45 PM
Subject: A challenge to those advocating violent change in The Gambia
> Hi!
> I have read a lot of messages propagating violence as the only available
> means of bringing about a change of government in The Gambia. I have also
> read how those who propagate other means especially peaceful ones are deemed
> to be living fantasies. I would like to suggest that those propagating
> violence from the comfort of homes in Europe and America are living a
> fantasy as much as those advocating peaceful means. One can be anyone one
> wants to be behind a computer keyboard. One can be Rambo, one can be Malcolm
> X, and one can be Bin Laden. One can even be Ghaddafi if one wishes. That is
> the beauty of the cyber identity. Then comes reality! The reality is that
> one may not be as tough as one portrays from a keyboard. One can be the
> greatest coward and the weakest "lefe lefe" there is yet the implications of
> their macho messages can be far-reaching and even devastating.
>
> If the ones preaching violence as the only available means of bringing
> about change are comfortably sitting in Europe and America, who is going to
> bring about that violent change for them? I would be more convinced if those
> people were on the ground in The Gambia living what they are preaching. I
> would pay more attention to their message if it were Halifa Sallah, Lawyer
> Darboe, Shyngle Nyassi or any Samba or Demba living in The Gambia who was
> preaching what they are preaching. I would be more convinced, perhaps even
> converted if they truly believed in what they are preaching and pack up and
> go back home to be in the midst of the violence they are preaching. Apart
> from that I just say, "Practise what you preach".
>
> The repercussions of the violent prescriptions these people are prescribing
> won't take place in a vacuum. The Gambia is not an empty space. Look at the
> results of violent confrontations in our sub-region. Look at Casamance,
> Liberia and Sierra Leone. It is very easy as stated earlier to sit thousands
> of miles away and prescribe violence knowing fully well that one is far
> removed from its effects. In other words, it is not their hands, feet or
> tongues that are going to be cut off. Yes, it might be their parents',
> children's etc. but it is still not the same. One can walk even if one's
> brother's legs are cut off. I would be more convinced if these people go
> back home and put their feet, tongues, hands etc. at the risk of being cut
> and still preach what they are preaching.
> There have been many cases in the recent past that have outraged many of us
> not only in their brutality but also even in their deliberate assumption of
> Gambians' stupidity. The answer to those acts cannot only be violence.
> Measures have been taken that have yielded results. Why do you think Yaya
> didn't react in his normal way after the student massacres? Why do you think
> all the arrested students were released? Pressure, man, pressure! Pressure
> that has had some effect no matter how much one wishes to downplay those
> effects.
>
> To those advocating violence I ask: do you have any organised means of
> bringing about a violent change? Do you have the finance to support a
> violent movement? Do you have a network somewhere to co-ordinate the
> activities of your movement? In short, what do you have in place apart from
> empty rhetoric? I say empty rhetoric because to propagate violence and
> dismiss the diplomatic approach as fantasy really smacks of a lack of
> understanding of how wars are fought. Ask the Arabs. When Israel was
> declared a state, the Arabs went bonkers and showed their absolute fury by
> attacking Israel. Yes, Israel had the military capability with the help of
> the West to defend itself. It however invested in a more important
> ingredient of war: propaganda and diplomacy. Because of the Jews' presence
> in broadcasting and publishing, they succeeded in transforming world opinion
> in their favour. That is why Israel gets away with basically anything today
> whilst the Iraqs, Yugoslavias etc. are bombed to smithereens for lesser
> sins. The importance of propaganda makes it imperative for guerrilla
> movements to have political organs that put a diplomatic face on the
> bombings and other atrocities perpetrated by their armed movements. To
> underestimate the importance of the non-violent aspect of the machinery of
> change displays a gross lack of understanding of the mechanisms of change.
>
> To cut a long story short, those who are advocating a violent change in The
> Gambia need to come up with action plans. They need to show us how they are
> going to bring about that change and if possible with the least loss of life
> and suffering possible. To lack an action plan yet instigate unarmed people
> to have violent confrontations with armed-to-the-teeth security personnel is
> irresponsible to say the least especially when one is sheltered some
> thousands of miles away. Self-defence is a natural right but instigating the
> UDP to form vigilante groups knowing fully well that they would not be
> granted firearms licences when they would be pitched against armed police
> and soldiers seems like a recipe for disaster. Maybe those advocating a
> non-violent response to the activities of the government do not have a
> panacea to all Gambia's ill but neither do those advocating a violent
> response. The issue therefore should be meet at the crossroads and maybe
> work out something that would be in the interests of The Gambia for surely
> violent confrontation, war and civil strife are not in our country's
> interests. Thanks.
>
> Buharry.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
> Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
