Ubuntu: Together we are one

Second in a series by guest author Mbaezue Emmanuel Chukwuemeka

Emmanuel
Mbaezue Emmanuel Chukwuemeka

It has been argued that civil societies have been at the forefront of efforts geared toward the growth and sustenance of non-violent struggle, particularly in Africa.

The pertinent question is: how close is civil society in Africa to adopting non-violent ways of settling conflicts?

To answer this question, we must first trace back the concept of non-violent struggle to the African Dispute Resolution mechanisms of the pre-colonial era. Studies have revealed that the various indigenous African Dispute Resolution mechanisms were not only peaceful in nature but also thrived on rebuilding and sustaining relationships among disputants.

Thus, diplomatic measures like negotiation, mediation, and restorative justice were not introduced to Africa by the West, as some might claim, but were already in use in Africa before the days of colonialism. For instance, let’s consider Ubuntu, originating from the Bantu people of the lower Congo.

Ubuntu, which means “together we are one,” promotes the sacredness and sanctity of human life. The concept emphasizes that individuals can only discover their true nature through relationships and interaction with others. Ubuntu accepts all people as members of the community of the living and promotes the spirit of love, care, tolerance, empathy, and accountability.

Similar to Ubuntu is the Ujamea principle, originating in Tanzania, which also promotes freedom, unity, and equality. The Tanganyikan people believe that it is only equality that can breed cooperation, and unity that begets peace and development.

Consider for yourselves these two questions: (1) To what extent did European settlers in Africa operate on the principles of Ubuntu and Ujami either in their homelands or in Africa? (2) To what extent are people likely to achieve non-violent resolution of conflicts if they do not operate on the basis of those principles?

Mbaezue Emmanuel Chukwuemeka has a Masters of Science in Conflict Management and Peace Studies from University of Jos, Jos, Plateau State. He is a member of Institute of Chartered Mediators and Conciliators, and works as a paralegal counsel at the Legal Aid Council for the Federal Ministry of Justice in Nigeria.

The federal budget: Invasions, yes! Peace, no!

At least that’s what the politicos are telling us.

By now, everyone must have heard something about the debates about the new U.S. budget. You may know that to address the deficits that have accrued since former President Bill Clinton created a budget surplus, powerful forces in Congress seek, among other things, to

  • Gut the Environmental Protection Agency
  • Block spending for health care
  • Cut food and other assistance programs for children, the elderly, and the disabled
U.S. Institute of Peace building
U.S. Institute of Peace, Washington, D.C.

But did you know that while declaring funding for the Pentagon off-limits for budget considerations, a majority in the House of Representatives also voted to eliminate funding for the United States Institute of Peace (USIP)?

The USIP, established by Congress in 1984, conducts research and training designed to prevent and end wars and to promote international peace, stability, and development. In recent years it has engaged in mediation and conflict resolution activities in Afghanistan, the Balkans, Colombia, Iraq, Kashmir, Liberia, the Korean Peninsula, Nepal, Pakistan, the Palestinian Territories, Nigeria, Sudan, and Uganda.

Despite the fact that the U.S. spends as much on what is euphemistically called “defense” as the rest of the world combined, Congress wants to end this independent nonpartisan organization with a budget that is only one tenth of one percent of the State Department budget.

The previous budget for USIP was minuscule compared to the spending in Iraq and Afghanistan (approximately $42.7 million every 142 minutes according to Congressman Dennis Kucinich).

What message is Congress sending to the American public?  To the rest of the world? Why is there so much more commitment to the arms industry than to peace?

Please send us your answers—and consider becoming an activist on behalf of peace and justice.

For inspiration, check out this BBC video and consider how we are all one people and if we want to survive in all our commonalities and all our uniqueness, we need to support efforts for peace.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology