# taz.de -- Genocide against Herero and Nama: „We know where the land is“ | |
> Paramount Chief of Ovahereros explains what's wrong with the Joint | |
> Declaration between Germany and Namibia – and what Hereros and Namas | |
> demand. | |
Bild: Paramount Chief Mutjinde Katjiua in Berlin, 6/11/2022 | |
taz: Professor Katjiua, now Germany and Namibia seem to re-negotiate the | |
Joint Declaration about reconciliation that war initialized 2021 after five | |
years of negotiations. You have had a problem with the whole process right | |
from the start. Why? | |
Mutjinde Katjiua: In 2006 the National Assembly of Namibia adopted a | |
resolution that was brought to parliament by the late Paramount chief Dr | |
Kuaima Riruako with three key aspects. The first is that Germany must | |
recognize that what it has committed was a genocide. The second one says | |
that there should be negotiations, a dialogue between the affected | |
communities, the Hereros and Namas, and the German government. The third | |
point is the Namibian government, as an interested party, must facilitate | |
the negotiations. | |
Has the Namibian government followed this resolution? | |
No. When the Geingob administration took over in 2015, it deviated from the | |
resolution and started a state-to-state negotiation process. We have been | |
making it very clear that we will not accept a discussion about us without | |
us, that we must be present at the table. It is only the Ovaherero | |
traditional authorities and the Nama Traditional Leaders Association that | |
can represent Hereros and Namas at the negotiations. Because we have many | |
Hereros and Namas who are not Namibians, these are groups in South Africa, | |
in Botswana, in the USA, in Canada. The two governments can only speak for | |
people here in Germany or in Namibia. The state-to-state negotiations | |
exclude diasporans. | |
Both governments argue that you could have been part of the negotiations | |
and that some traditional representatives actually did that. Why did you | |
not? | |
When we pushed that we should participate then the Namibian government | |
created a forum of Chiefs to advise the negotiations. But they did not | |
participate in the process directly. They did not sit at the table and | |
negotiate. That is why, when the joint Declaration came out, some of those | |
chiefs who were part of the Chiefs forum, were surprised of the | |
declaration- and they pulled out. But the overhelming majority of the | |
Herero leaders and all the Nama leaders refrained from being part of that | |
advisory team from the start. We knew that this was fake. | |
Let us talk about the Joint declaration itself. What do you think about it? | |
It's only a declaration and nothing is binding. There is no contractual | |
obligation on any of these two governments because it's an intent. This is | |
the first thing. Secondly, this declaration has deviated from the | |
resolution of 2006 of the National Assembly. Thirdly, this declaration does | |
not speak about reparation. In effect, it says „from today's perspective | |
those events“ – they really speak of events – „can be classified as | |
genocide“. Only from today's perspective! But when it happened it was not a | |
genocide. It was fine to exterminate us, it says. Germany did well. That is | |
why Kaiser Wilhelm II gave the highest military order to General von Trotta | |
who issued the so called „extermination orders“ – for doing a great job! | |
The German government would not say that! | |
When we went to court in New York 2018 our lawyers were pushing for the | |
application of the Restatement of International Law of 1868, which states | |
that any „extermination, annihilation of a tribe capable of cultures and | |
language would be a violation of international law“. The German lawyers | |
were arguing that we were not protected by the Restatement of International | |
Law because we fall in a category of tribes considered as „wild“, or | |
savages. So from the German point of view we are not part of that | |
protection. | |
Do you think they did not want to name it genocide because this would mean | |
that you have the right for reparations? | |
Exactly. If you talk of genocide you also talk of reparation which comes | |
with certain liabilities. Thus „reparation“ is not mentioned in the whole | |
document. | |
The German government also argued that the term genocide was not yet | |
invented by 1904-1908. | |
It is correct that the term came in 1948. But it's the same German | |
government that recognized the Armenian genocide of 1915, seven years after | |
ours. It is recognised here in the Bundestag that this was a genocide. So | |
why don’t they recognize ours? | |
What is it exaclty that you demand from Germany? | |
Our demands are that they come at the table and we will put our case to | |
them. And we negotiate our case. | |
And in the end? | |
It will be an agreement that would result in a reparation of damages, of | |
our sufferings, of our dignity. And it will address the needs of Herero and | |
Nama everywhere in the world, in the diaspora as well as in Namibia. | |
Is it mainly a question of more money? | |
No! This agreement between the two governments is looking at money and it | |
is looking at addressing Namibia's five year development programs. And the | |
programs are identified as rural electrification, roads, water | |
infrastructure. But nowhere is it addressing the psychological trauma of | |
Herero and Nama, the loss of language and culture of Herero and Nama in | |
Botswana, South Africa and elsewhere. So those things are not included. | |
How can you measure such things in money? | |
That can always be worked out. If you have lost the language and you want | |
to learn it, how much does it cost to teach a language? What sort of | |
programs should be in place for you to be exposed to your lost culture? | |
What sort of improvement do we need to do for your community where they are | |
based? But we can only come to those discussions when we are at the table | |
and can say: Look guys of the needs to address, this is the loss, this is | |
the damage, this is what it cost to repair. And it becomes an issue of | |
negotiations. | |
The German government also said that a government cannot negotiate with | |
people, with traditional leaders. It could only negotiate with another | |
government. | |
That's a an excuse. At some point of the negotiations the special envoy of | |
the German government Ruprecht Polenz was saying: We don't know and we | |
don't care who comes to the table – that is an issue for the Namibian | |
government to discuss. So they're contradicting themselves. | |
In Germany many people think all this is more than 100 years ago, what does | |
it have to do with our present life? And they don't understand what present | |
impacts the genocide still has for your people. Maybe you can explain? | |
Till to date some Hereros are still being buried at the places where their | |
ancestors were buried at those private farms occupied by Germans. But some | |
of these German commercial farmers in Namibia are prohibiting Hereros to | |
access their holy sites, their sacred sites. | |
They cannot go to the graves of their ancestors? | |
And we are a religious group who believes in the life after death and the | |
presence of our ancestors. And the 70 per cent of land that is mainly | |
occupied by the Germans were taken from the Namas and Herero. We know where | |
this land is. We know that the descendants of those who expropriated the | |
land are still on that land. So this long term impoverishment derived from | |
dispossession is still present. Also the lack of culture, the cultural | |
genocide of our people in Botswana, in South Africa, that we are visiting | |
yearly is still a cost to us. So it is very much present. Where I live | |
today is determined by where I moved to when the displacement that had | |
taken place. So it is still present. | |
At the conference last week in Berlin at the Haus der Kulturen der Welt it | |
was said that something like a truth commission would be helpful or even | |
necessary. What do you think? | |
It is necessary because it will eliminate this issue of denial. A lot of | |
Germans are sitting on our land enjoying the fruits of our blood. But | |
they're denying that we were on the land when they occupied it, and that we | |
were killed and displaced. But that denial doesn't make the land theirs. So | |
a truth and reconciliation commission or such a framework would be best for | |
people to express their losses, their sufferings, and for others to | |
recognize that the ancestors have contributed to pain in parts of our | |
community as Namibians. | |
So it would also be important to close the gaps within the Namibian | |
society? | |
Yes of course! At the moment we have more Germans here who are sympathizing | |
with our case than in Namibia. The Germans in Namiia are all denialists. | |
They are no Germans who are sitting with us and argue for reparation. We | |
are sitting on the other side of the fence. We're sitting outside and they | |
are taking comfort in the SWAPO government because the government also | |
doesn't want us to be paid reparations in nutshell. | |
And why is that? Why is still 70 per cent of the land in the hand of the | |
Germans as you call them? Didn’t the Swapo government want to make a land | |
reform some years ago? | |
The reality is that the government that is running the country is dominated | |
by people who have not lost theirs land. So the land reform program is | |
cosmetic. It's basically a settlement program. And they are trying to | |
settle every person without considering the history of land loss or land | |
dispossession. That government is not in the interest of those who have | |
lost land. It is serving the interest of the Germans. | |
Because they are the economic most powerful group in the country? | |
No, I think the government itself doesn't want to address our needs. It is | |
probably gaining wealth by marginalizing us. And of course, the Germans | |
development aid that comes to Namibia is to protect the German interests. | |
It goes to the Namibian government and they use it to enrich themselves or | |
to divert it wherever they want it. | |
Now the Namibian government seems to change its mind. The [1][vice | |
president last week said that they would like to renegotiate] the | |
declaration and that no agreement with Germany is made so far. | |
It's politics. It is only through our efforts, the pressure that we have | |
put on both governments that the German government first moved to say it | |
was a genocide in public. And only then did the Namibian government started | |
to use the same term genocide. So when the government now is saying this | |
declaration ust be renegotiated and that the people in diaspora must be | |
included – it's lip service. It's soon in the election year. I don't think | |
they are genuine in that request, but it has come because those chiefs who | |
are with the government, they also started to say that the diasporans must | |
be included. The negotiation must be start afresh or renegotiated and so | |
forth. So it is that pressure that is cosmetically changing the | |
government's tone. The government basically is trying to use these pseudo | |
chiefs to bargain, to increase its bargaining power to go to Germany and | |
say, increase the money. | |
So they only want more money? | |
Yes. And then in the end, when Germany will give some more money, they will | |
sign it. | |
But the Namibian parliament has to sign, or not? | |
Well, it's not clear whether parliament will have to sign it. But of course | |
it was in Parliament, it has to go back to parliament. But the president | |
may use his own discretion and the Foreign Affairs Ministry will sign it. I | |
don't know. But we're not going to leave that case there. | |
I heard that you and some Namibian lawyers want to bring the case to the | |
high court of Namibia, is that correct? | |
We are in preparation to file the case to the Namibian court. | |
Do you think that there is a realistic option that you could win? | |
Courts are courts. Sometimes courts are political instruments. So you may | |
have the best case, but courts make the decisions. But we're always hopeful | |
and will exhaust all legal means. That's our first priority. But as we have | |
always said, if all legal means and all political means come to an end, we | |
know where the land is. We shall mobilize our people to re-occupy their | |
lands. | |
You would occupy the land? | |
That's the only thing when all peaceful means do not work. | |
Do other Namibians support you in that? What does the majority of the | |
Namibians think of all this? I mean the Germans, the whites are only a | |
small minority. | |
A lot of awareness had to be created. During the second National Land | |
Conference in 2018 a team went around to interview Namibians the majority | |
agreed that the issue of ancestral land must be discussed and agreed that | |
the Herero and Namas, Damaras and San have lost the land. Therefore, that | |
must be discussed and is an issue of interest to those communities. So that | |
came out clear. | |
In the conference here in Berlin the group [2][Forensic Architecture] | |
presented new scientific results that many places of the genocide are lost, | |
unknown or even replaced by present buildings and streets. Why are places | |
of rememberance so rare in Namibia? | |
It's a thing of the Namibian government for trying to make this genocide | |
very insignificant. You will be surprised that in Swakopmund where we have | |
the mass graves of victims of genocide no single Namibian official has ever | |
visited that site. You'd be surprised that where the extermination order | |
was issued in the Omaheke region for the Herero there is nothing. No | |
Namibian official has ever been there in their official capacity. | |
Now you are here in Germany to attend the conference about the genocide. | |
And you probably meet politicians who stand at your side and may be can put | |
some pressure on the German government? | |
We're trying to do that. You know that the Green Party has always been on | |
our side when it was in opposition. And also Die Linke. | |
Now the Greens are part of the government. Do you see any change since the | |
Greens lead the ministry of foreign affairs? | |
They adopted the same approach as the government before. They have kept | |
Rupert Polenz as the chief negotiator or envoy, and they are saying they | |
have already signed or initialized the joint declaration and that they are | |
not willing to renegotiate. So the Green Party is as all parties in | |
Germany: The German interest counts more than the interest and justice of | |
Hereros and Namas. That's why they're not willing to start the negotiations | |
afresh. But it has to take place. Whether it's going to take another | |
hundred years, we'll pursue. | |
16 Nov 2022 | |
## LINKS | |
[1] /Voelkermord-an-den-Herero-und-Nama/!5893037 | |
[2] https://forensic-architecture.org/investigation/restituting-evidence-genoci… | |
## TAGS | |
Deutscher Kolonialismus | |
Schwerpunkt Völkermord an den Herero und Nama | |
Deutscher Kolonialismus | |
Namibia | |
Lateinamerika | |
## ARTIKEL ZUM THEMA | |
Genozid an Herero und Nama: „Wir müssen mit an den Tisch“ | |
Am „Versöhnungsabkommen“ mit Namibia soll wieder verhandelt werden. Der | |
Paramount-Chief der Herero erklärt seine grundsätzliche Kritik daran. | |
Völkermord an den Herero und Nama: Versöhnungsabkommen wackelt | |
In Namibia ist die geplante Versöhnung mit Deutschland umstritten. Die | |
dortige Regierung will Nachverhandlungen – doch Berlin mauert. | |
Kolonialverbrechen in Namibia: Genozid, keine Kriege | |
Deutschland hat die Verbrechen der deutschen Kolonialmacht im heutigen | |
Namibia als Völkermord anerkannt. An Schulen wird das kaum behandelt. |