Nyerere as a failure

Press, 10 March 1982, Page 20

Nyerere as a failure

By

XAN SMILEY

of “The Times,” London

Whatever Dr Julius Nyerere’s achievement as a forceful exponent of genuine Third World grievances on the international stage, his right to speak up for democracy is certainly negligible. . That is not because he has imposed a one-party system on Tanzania. There are many excellent arguments in favour of the one-party States in Africa, where often there is no national consensus and multipartyism invariably descends into tribal rivalry. Only seven of the Organisation of African Unity's 50 member countries practise some form of pluralism. But although some African oneparty States are bloodthirsty tyrannies, in others there is . lively public debate in Parliament and a combative press. . In Tanzania there is no press to speak of. The editorials of the only national newspaper, “The Daily News,” are sometimes dictated from State House. The majority of Parliament is elected indirectly by State bodies. Candidates for the elected seats are vetted by the ruling party. The country’s, key body, the Central Committee, consists mainly of presidential nominees or ’ appointees, of bodies already under presidential influence. At village .level,

Tanzanians can argue about parochial day-to-day issues, but they cannot question the validity of national policy, which is laid down by President Nyerere and a few trusted colleagues. The President has been careful to keep the wages of urban labour reasonably high, with the trade union leadership nominated by the Government. There has been heated debate within the corridors of State House, but key bodies' are so tightly packed by Dr Nyerere that the possibility of a palace cabal ousting him looks remote. Since 1964, the officer cadre of the Army has come under the strict supervision of the ruling Party. Since the -Ugandan campaign to-oust Idi Amin in 1979, the size of the Army and militia has swollen to more than 63,000 and has become a headache for Dr Nyerere. But there has been no sign of serious plotting, though that would present the most likely manner of President Nyerere’s downfall. Mr Oscar Kambona, who resigned as Secretary-General of the ruling Party in 1967, and then fled to Britain, is a symbolic focus of discontent for some Tanzanians, but' has no credible underground organisation and is not a realistic alternative. • The Preventive Detention

Act has been frequently and effectively used by Mr Nyerere against dissidents. Amnesty International counted more than 1500 Tanzanians (excluding Zanzibaris) detained without trial in 1977, for “economic” as well as political offences, though the number has since fallen considerably. Mr Kambona still has relations and supporters in Tanzanian prisons, but they do not constitute an alternative government to Dr Nyerere. There is, indeed, no certainty that Dr Nyerere’s removal from the power he has held since independence in. 1961 would do Tanzania much good, nor would it probably do much harm. As master of rhetoric and champion of the causes of the poor world he is second to none. His ideas have inspired many people across the African continent but their implementation at home has been lamentable. Some advances in health and education have been made (though no more so in Tanzania than in many other parts of Africa) and Dr Nyerere’s egalitarianism has been consistent, but ,at a price of reducing Tanzania’s - productivity and prosperity as a whole. As a national leader, he can be considered only as a failure — a view shared by almost all serious students of African politics.