Visit the AfricaFocus
Country Pages

Algeria
Angola
Benin
Botswana
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Central Afr. Rep.
Chad
Comoros
Congo (Brazzaville)
Congo (Kinshasa)
Côte d'Ivoire
Djibouti
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Kenya
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Mauritania
Mauritius
Morocco
Mozambique
Namibia
Niger
Nigeria
Rwanda
São Tomé
Senegal
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Somalia
South Africa
South Sudan
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
Western Sahara
Zambia
Zimbabwe

Print this page

Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived document may not work.

Southern Africa: US Legislators Visit
Date Distributed (ymd): 951012

Excerpts From The Report of The Africa Fund Delegation of
U.S. State Legislators to South Africa, Namibia and
Zimbabwe, May 1995

Published July 1995

Executive Summary

In May 1995 The Africa Fund organized a visit by three state
legislators to South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe. This
delegation visit was part of a project made possible by a
grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, to promote
the involvement of U.S. state and municipal officials with
U.S. policy towards southern Africa.

State and municipal elected officials in the United States
played a critical role in influencing U.S. foreign policy
toward apartheid South Africa in the 1980s. Many worked
closely with the Africa Fund, frequently turning to it for
information and analysis. In the aftermath of South African
liberation, leading legislators wanted to maintain their
involvement but recognized the need to become familiar with
the new issues facing the wider southern Africa region.

The Delegation

We were privileged to have a team of three distinguished
state legislators in this first delegation. Representative
Arthur Hamilton of Arizona, Representative Irma Hunter Brown
of Arkansas and Senator Virgil Clark Smith of Michigan have
over fifty-four years of legislative experience between
them, a period far longer than the nations they visited have
lived in freedom.

Dumisani Kumalo, Projects Director of The Africa Fund,
accompanied the delegation.

In each country visited, the delegation sought to gain an
in-depth understanding of the current situation, assessing
the changes taking place. They planned to initiate strong
contacts with local legislators and exchange legislative
experiences and knowledge about drafting laws, constructing
budgets and raising revenues. In addition to meeting many
individuals, the delegation participated in a number of
specially organized regional working forums with legislators
in several centers in each country, making formal
presentations and engaging in extended dialogue with their
counterparts.

The Countries

The Africa Fund delegation chose to visit three countries as
a means of widening the near total American focus on South
Africa to encompass the broader region.

Together, South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe reflect the
diversity of southern Africa's experience with freedom.
South Africa has only been free for a year. Namibia, long
illegally occupied by South Africa as a colony, won its
independence in 1990. Zimbabwe achieved liberation fifteen
years ago.

Common Problems - Challenges Being Met

Even more striking than their differences are the
continuing, severe common problems produced by many decades
of apartheid, colonial and white minority rule which the
delegation observed, in varying degrees, in all three
countries visited.

Delegation members were struck by the overwhelming disparity
between the haves and have-nots, with the pattern,
throughout the region, of continuing white wealth and Black
poverty. Fifteen years after independence, Senator Smith
points out, almost 70 percent of Zimbabwe's Black population
lives in rural areas and is mainly engaged in subsistence
agriculture, while most commercial agriculture is still
controlled by whites.

Delegation member welcomed the commitment to democracy they
found throughout the region, and were impressed by the
determination of local legislators to strengthen their
capacity to act effectively on behalf of their
constituencies. But they warn that the almost complete lack
of economic resources, and thus the inability of either
central or local government to deliver even such basic needs
as adequate schools, sewage and running water poses a
serious threat to the building of peaceful, stable
democratic societies. As Art Hamilton says of South Africa,
at the beginning of his report, "There is a perception in
the United States that Mandela is President, the majority
rules and democracy is secure. A nice thought but not the
truth."

The delegation was frequently asked to discuss issues
relating to affirmative action -- which is broadly used to
mean overcoming all the inequities, of wealth, education,
skills, access to employment, that still characterize daily
living for most members of the Black majority in all three
countries visited. People long discriminated against,
particularly in South Africa, but across the region, are
understandably impatient for radical improvements in their
lives. They want better jobs, homes and opportunities. The
delegation observed that these reasonable desires, unmet,
may lead to a loss of confidence in the democratic process.
In some ways legitimacy of government is pitted in a race
with popular expectations and it will be very important for
the people to win some prizes.

In South Africa the delegation was impressed by the idea of
the government of national unity and the thrust for
reconciliation. But they report frequent signs, in all three
countries, of a continued reluctance on the part of the
economically privileged white minority to share resources in
ways that would most swiftly address Black dispossession.

Across the region the delegation found an eagerness for open
discussion, particularly about ways in which democratic
participation, popular, local and at national level, could
be strengthened and economic progress encouraged.

The delegation also found an eagerness for greater
connection and contact with the U.S. Members have made
several individual observations about ways this might be
achieved and the mutual benefits that such links could
generate.

At the same time the delegation underscored the importance
of responding to the agenda's being set within each country:
As Art Hamilton comments, "The people we met ... want our
help, our assistance and our guidance. But they clearly do
not want to be dictated to, or told the best way to do
things...."

Without in any way wishing to prescribe for the countries
they visited the delegation felt that the youngest democracy
might in some ways be able to benefit from observing the
Namibian and Zimbabwean experiences.

The individual delegation reports stress the importance of
perspectives provided by direct contact and communication.
Delegation members felt such contact could be usefully
expanded. As Irma Hunter Brown comments on her experience:
"It is my ... hope that the dialogue ... will develop into
long term relationships. I think much can be learned and
much can be shared which can benefit us all."

The delegation was excited by the widespread mood of
optimism, the willingness to experiment, the enthusiasm they
found among most of the elected officials and community
leaders they met. Challenges are being met. They see the
region as a potential anchor for democracy in Africa with a
potential for great economic growth. In this context they
urge greater U.S. public and private engagement and
investment. In Art Hamilton's words, "We now have an
opportunity to help secure democracy in a part of the world
that colonial rule made a powder keg. With the rapid growth
of the African nations a relatively small investment now
will pay huge dividends down the road. This is good
government policy and good business."

South Africa

The delegation met with members of Nelson Mandela's
government of national unity elected in South Africa's first
democratic elections in April 1994 and held working forums
with members of five of the nine provincial parliaments. In
addition to meetings with leading public officials at the
national, provincial and city levels, representing all the
leading political parties, the delegation also had extensive
discussions with representatives from important sectors of
civil society, including the Congress of South African Trade
Unions (COSATU), the Black business community, the South
African Council of Churches and the Women's Development
Foundation.

In addition to the their overall observations set out above,
the delegation was impressed by the importance accorded at
all levels to the government's Reconstruction and
Development Program, which seeks to address the legacy of
apartheid through long term comprehensive economic
development. The delegation considered that this program
provides important priority-setting capabilities. Housing
construction and job creation are current key development
areas.

Many legislators expressed concern over proposals to cut
U.S. assistance to Africa. There is near universal concern
with the need to initiate economic growth and considerable
enthusiasm for encouraging U.S. investment.

Other concerns frequently raised were how to assure
effective affirmative action in favor of the Black majority
in all spheres of social, economic and political life, and
how to ensure broad democratic participation in government.

As Dumisani Kumalo reports, one of the current hotly debated
issues in South Africa is how power will be shared between
the central government and the provinces.

Namibia

Namibia, after five years of independence, has well defined
democratic, national, regional and local government
structures, and a feeling of great promise. But the
delegation was also struck by extreme difficulties facing
the major part of the population, living in considerable
rural isolation in the north. The delegation also noted
still visible scars of the recent war for liberation.

In addition to meetings in the capital, Windhoek, the
delegation traveled to the far north and the Atlantic coast
to hold working forums with representatives from several of
the most remote of Namibia's 13 elected regional councils.

Major concerns included how, with very limited resources, to
effectively direct government services towards those who
need them the most. Local leaders described tensions with
white tax payers who resent their tax money being spent on
people in the Black townships.

President Nujoma summed up his country's priorities for the
delegation. "We get concerned when some people in the United
States are calling for cutting aid to Africa. American aid
is not just money to us. It is ammunition for the toughest
fight we are involved in: the fight against poverty and
ignorance.... We must do something and we need the United
States to continue to be on our side."

Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe gained its independence in 1980 and has been
grappling impressively with the problems of nation building,
economic reconstruction and democratization for 15 years.
Yet the delegation observed that this still seemed to be a
society actively seeking to define and redefine the nature
of its society and the structure of its institutions. As
described by Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary
Affairs, Mr. Emmerson Mnangagwa, Zimbabwe "began as a
socialist government. But now we are changing towards a
democratic, market oriented system...."

The delegation met with the Speaker of Parliament,
government ministers, Members of Parliament, regional and
municipal elected officials. It traveled across the country,
west of the capital, Harare, to Mashonaland West and the
Victoria Falls. It participated in a legislative forum with
the Chinhoyi Regional Council and also met with Zimbabwe's
leading human rights organization.

Zimbabwean elected officials frequently raised questions
relating to strengthening democratic procedures at local
level.They were eager to increase active participation in
the democratic process and were interested in suggestions as
to how to improve communication with constituents and
networking with counterparts.

They were profoundly concerned that Zimbabwe should achieve
a level of sustainable development sufficient to improve the
lives of the people. They saw this as complicated by World
Bank and International Monetary Fund polices that are
compelling the government to redirect resources away from
social services to encourage growth in sectors of the
economy such as export industries.

Recommendations:

The main recommendations of the three delegation members,
set out in their individual reports, reflect similar
conclusions and can be summarized as follows:

1. U.S. policy should be aimed at helping the governments
and people of southern Africa preserve and extend their hard
won democracy. Democracy in southern Africa is still
fragile. The delegation recognizes that achieving the goals
southern Africans desire, establishing a popular culture of
peaceful, participatory democracy, with transparency of
process and effective mechanisms for constructive criticism,
will take time. Its achievement will have valuable
consequences for both the U.S. and Africa, and deserves the
fullest possible U.S. support.

2. U.S. policy makers should assist the countries of
southern Africa address the basic needs of their citizens.
This means supporting long term economic growth as well as
social programs to heal the wounds of apartheid and colonial
rule. The extreme disparity between the haves and have-nots
threatens the progress of the new democracies. The
delegation urges a long term U.S. commitment involving not
only financial assistance but also talent and expertise.

3. U.S. aid to southern Africa should be increased, or at a
minimum maintained at the present level. This is both in the
U.S. national interest and in the interest of southern
Africa. Aid must be given on the basis of the southern
African agenda rather than one imposed from Washington. The
aid program should support and sustain development
strategies defined by the people of the region. The U.S.
should ensure that its assistance policies are socially as
well as economically responsible and target the poorest of
the poor rather than those who are already advantaged.

4. The delegation urges evaluation and monitoring of the
effectiveness of assistance programs.

5. The delegation strongly encourages U.S. legislators to
work with the National Conference of State Legislatures, the
National Black Caucus of State Legislators and The Africa
Fund, to swiftly expand legislative exchanges, build direct
links and share experiences and expertise which can help
enhance legislative capacity in southern Africa. Continuing
ties between legislators in the U.S. and their counterparts
in southern Africa will help U.S. legislators effectively
impact on national policy.

6. The delegation encourages increased trade and investment,
which will be mutually beneficial to the U.S. and southern
Africa. State legislators can help to identify products and
resources within their own states that could be the basis
for mutually beneficial trade. They should also encourage
socially responsible investment by corporations from their
home states.

7. The U.S. should develop a special relationship with South
Africa over the next decade, because a successful transition
in South Africa will benefit the entire region. This
relationship is rooted in ties that have been built over the
last twenty years between the people of the United States
and the people of South Africa. It would encompass expanded
aid flows, closer political and social relations, and should
include the early appointment of an African American
Ambassador. A precedent for such a relationship can be found
in the U.S. support for the countries that were parties to
the Middle East peace process.

Although this delegation was primarily concerned with
meeting its counterparts at regional level, the great
interest expressed by municipal leaders encourages the
delegation to recommend that organizations such as the U.S.
Conference of Mayors should undertake programs to strengthen
municipal government, especially in South Africa where the
first democratic municipal elections are scheduled for
November 1995.

------------------

Excerpts from the Report of Arthur M. Hamilton, Arizona
State Representative

SOUTH AFRICA

South Africa is a country trying to undo decades of
apartheid without doing violence to either the new majority
or the old ruling minority. Time and time again, we heard
requests that things get immediately better for everyone.
Trying to expand their economy fast enough to be all things
to all people will not be possible. Trying to share the
current economic pie with everyone while hurting no one will
not be possible. Explaining these facts to all South
Africans while making none of them unhappy will not be
possible.

....

There was considerable discussion of affirmative action
programs. Much of the discussion we've endured in the U.S.
on affirmative action is now besieging South Africa. While
the government has changed, most of the bureaucracy that
runs the country is still white. A decision to protect
previous employment made this government of national unity
possible. This protection has also made rebalancing the
employment scales impossible in the short term. It is also
clear that a lack of dramatic improvement in employment for
Blacks and other discriminated against people will be
equally unacceptable.

....

I must add this: South Africa will need our willingness to
be of help without our need to dictate. We must allow for
South African solutions to South African problems. These
ideas have a far better chance of working. Their success
will be our payoff.

The U.S. government should grant to South Africa the same
special status that we've granted to a few other special
states such as Israel and Egypt. In these cases we have
decided that a special relationship exists that must be
nurtured by special attention.

The showplace for the success of democracy and racial
harmony on the African continent must be South Africa. It
must be held out as a living example of the power and
opportunity democracy holds. With all of its "special
advantages," if democracy fails in South Africa then the
future is bleak for the African continent. It is in the
interest of the United States and its allies for South
Africa to succeed.

....

Let me add that as a state legislator, I saw much that must
be done to strengthen provincial and local governments.
While it is clear South Africa does not desire our system of
federalism, it is equally clear that provincial governments
that are merely clones of the central government will not be
satisfactory. Members of provincial and local governments
expressed time and again their desire to experiment, to
innovate, to fashion solutions to the unique problems of
their area. The new constitution ought to allow for this.
This allowance should include some money for the provincial
governments with broad discretion as to how it's spent. (At
the moment, provincial governments have no taxing authority
and central funding allocations are made for specific
purposes - education, hospitals, water, electricity, etc. -
Ed) These provincial governments must also ultimately have
some limited local taxing authority to accelerate solving
local problems. Otherwise, people will come to believe that
all solutions flow from Pretoria or Cape Town.

-----------------

A complete copy of this report, including individual reports
by each of the delegation, is available from The Africa
Fund, 17 John Street, New York, NY 10038 USA (212) 962-1210
for $6.00 ($10.00 outside the U.S.) The delegation's trip
and the report were made possible by a grant from the
Carnegie Corporation of New York, although the views
expressed in this report are the sole responsibility of the
delegation and The Africa Fund. For more information about
The Africa Fund and its programs to promote human rights and
economic and social development in Africa please contact us
at the address above or via email: AFRICAFUND@igc.org.
copyright 1995 The Africa Fund

*******************************************************
This material is being reposted for wider distribution, with
permission, by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC).
APIC's primary objective is to widen the policy debate in
the United States around African issues and the U.S. role in
Africa, by concentrating on providing accessible
policy-relevant information and analysis usable by a wide
range of groups and individuals. APIC is affiliated with the
Washington Office on Africa (WOA), a not-for-profit church,
trade union and civil rights group supported organization
that works with Congress on Africa-related legislation.

*******************************************************