The Gambia: Paradoxical dichotomy of tribalism and the imperative of a new political homogeneity

By Mathew K. Jallow, Associate Editor

Ever so often, online political conversations have found a way of mushrooming into bitter and sometimes acrimonious tribally tinged and malicious discourses. This is nothing new. The online forums and the Bantabas, Attaya vous, market places, and the other venues that offer opportunities and provide platforms for the civil exchanges of ideas, have produced a familiar theme in the political conversation, which often reveal the underlying problems that have infected the political conversation for quite a long time. The issues of tribalism, for obvious reasons, take people away from their comfort zones, since its numbing and overwhelming presence forces us to pretend it does not exist, however, we would not be empowered to challenge its demons unless we are willed by the force of our consciences, to acknowledge its irksome reality.

Mathew K. Jallow, Associate Editor

Tribalism in its contemporary context dates back to the Jawara era, yet, as painful and cruel as its causes and consequences are, its divisive and unjust underbelly cannot be whisk away by ignoring and denying its existence. Yet, while many others attempt to mask their tribal bigotry, for others, tribalism is a lived reality, and a phenomenon of identity preference, which, by its very nature is exclusive. For others, the subliminal manifestation of reckless tribal partiality cannot be masked with any degree of success, because it is so blatant as to be obvious even with the best efforts to cloak it in a coat of deception. Our on-line experiences to date have proven time and again that when national political issues become the conversation, often a defensive argument position, which only serves as a coping mechanism, is raised to mute legitimate issues of concern, rather than address them. The online bluster which characterizes the contentious issues in our political dialogues is, by every standard, a revealing measure of failure in objective judgment and calculated fairness. Notwithstanding this, it is frivolous to think that we could ignore the reality of tribal identity and the attendant identity pride, but this identity relationship, ought not premise, nor entirely dominate the political and social relationship that we develop in the course of our work and political life. The allure of tribal identity can often result to the stereotypical bigotry assigned to the prejudiced tribal identity consciousness that has defined and dominated our political conversations for the past several decades. These concerns, notwithstanding, throughout history, self interest has made it necessary for peoples of different values and belief systems to come together to confront common threats to their collective wellbeing. The Gambia today is at such cross roads where the interface of political necessity and the exclusivity of tribal identity could make or break our common aspirations to rid our country of the barbarian son-of-a-.., Yahya Jammeh.

Our county is one of the few lucky ones in Africa where tribal boundaries and the quest for an entrenched group entitlement based on tribe, have not flared into an open conflict among our tribes. As my brother Ebrima Chongan, himself a bi-product of Fula ethnicity and Wollof cultural identity, noted in a cautionary article last week, the critical issues and the political challenges that face our country ought not to fall victim to our narrow tribal identities. But, the prevailing assumption among many educated Mandinkas that because they form the majority, only they are entitled to occupy State House, is as erroneous as it is delusional, since everyone’s citizenship birthright entitles them to the presidency in our country regardless of whether one is of Jola, Serahule, Manjago, Balanta, Karoninka or Wollof and Fula tribes. The Gambia is a country of minority ethnicities, where no single tribe has the population numbers to elect a president without affiliating with other tribes. To bring a historical perspective to this issue, Sir Dawda Jawara was able to win elections only after the Fulas, headed by the late Michael Baldeh, joined his party. Prior to that, Sir Dawda’s overwhelming Mandinka support lacked the numbers to win him any election at the national level. This unlikely Fula-Mandinka alliance happened primarily because late Michael Baldeh, who led the exodus of the large number of Fula parliamentarians from the United Party, was married to a Mandinka woman, and besides, he was from Mansajang Kunda, perhaps Gambia’s most tribally and culturally homogenized village.

In the same vein, the Wollofs’ attitude towards Mandinka governance as Mr. Chongan has indicated is simply not a sustainable position given that Mandinkas birth and Constitutional rights as citizens of The Gambia give them the power to head a government in our country just like any Jola or Balanta. It is mostly true that many of our fellow citizens oppose Yahya Jammeh, because of the tribe he belongs to, instead of the overriding concerns of his destruction of the social and economic fabric that had sustained us as a country for such a long time. This pathological tribal prejudice can be dangerous, as conflicts across Africa have proven. The younger generation with large numbers, who are the products of inter-tribal marriages, must begin cultural adaptation by learning languages other than the predominant one they are born into. It is true that we are partly the product of the environment we live in, so we the adults are morally obligated not to pass on to the younger generation, the implicit and explicit tribal bigotries and prejudices we learnt growing up and practiced as adults. 

Finally, as 2011 approaches, the fate of our country remains in our hands. The thought of Yahya Jammeh remaining in State House, is unthinkably painful to ponder, making it all the more necessary to find a common solution to our common problem. Jammeh, who is, in fact, not a Gambian, has served three terms and ought not to be allowed to contest any more elections. The aberration; that is the AFPRC military regime under Yahya Jammeh must come to an end, and since Jammeh is of the habit of threatening to take innocent lives and following through with his threats, we have a right in our defense, to seek to end his life as brutally as he has taken others’ lives. But, for now, the other most important thing for our country is the health of our political parties; something which has been in doubt for quite a long while. In a recent BBC article about the state of our political parties, Mr. Fofana made an accurate depiction of the political atmosphere in our country, but the condemnations of his critical and balanced analysis were fast and furious.

Apart from the intermittent press coverage, U.D.P. is by and large a dormant party, which only activates and greases its mostly moribund machine each time another election cycle draws near. Apart from that, the U.D.P has over all these years failed to condemn and demand answers for the more than hundred and fifty Gambian and non-Gambians Yahya Jammeh has murdered, not to mention the fifteen who have disappeared, some for years now and the hundreds still languishing in our prison system. It is now, after Gambia’s online press and regional and international human rights organizations have neutralized the Jammeh evil and weakened his absolute hold on power, that the U.D.P. is assuming courage and pretending boldness of purpose. Besides, a political party must have an infrastructure in place to run and facilitate its organizational management, and U.D.P. lacks this essential element. In addition, from nearly 38% of the votes in the first head to head against Jammeh three election cycles ago, Mr. Darboe’s percentage of the votes has slipped to the low twenties, because he was unable to attract nearly 60% of the voters who stayed home rather than vote for Yahya Jammeh. If Darboe’s share of the votes are decreasing, rather than increasing, why should U.D.P. not consider elevating another viable candidate to a leadership role?

As for NDAM, it is not even worth mentioning as a viable political party; no offence to Mr. Mbenga who I respect and admire for his continued commitment to a Gambia without Yahya Jammeh. With regard to Sallah and his party, the first thing to note is that they are suffering from an identity crisis. They don’t seem to know, and are therefore confusing the public about who and what the party is in the first place; PDOIS or NADD. They seem to be running away from their PDOIS name with all the negative perception the name instigates in the minds of many Gambians, and the PDOIS people are hoping no one is noticing, but we are, with amazement, I might add. Even though NADD has essentially dissolved, Halifa and his men still cling to a notion of NADD that exists only in their imaginations. NADD is represented by one party; PDOIS, because our brother O.J. who is there as an individual, cannot pretend to represent the P.P.P. after its other members declined the proposal. Besides, PDOIS like U.D.P. and Jammeh’s AFPRC military party, is basically and practically an institution of one individual. As for NRP, it is hard to know whether they even exist as a political party. The N.R.P. like all the other parties is a one-man party, and moreover, as its leader Hamat Bah is engaged in other pursuits, his institution is out of neglect, rotting and disintegrating right before our eyes. The totality of these unfavorable political situations make it imperative that we chart a way forward together or we will by our very stubborn tribal prejudices relinquish power to Yahya Jammeh for the foreseeable future. For now, we are faced with the paradoxical dichotomy of tribalism and the imperative of a new political alliance across tribe, across geographic origin and across culture. The choice is ours!