Memoire Online - Multiculturalism in Fiction and Fact in Angola Reading Pepetela's Mayombe After Twenty-Nine Years

Multiculturalism in Fiction and Fact in Angola: Reading Pepetela's Mayombe After
Twenty-Nine Years.

An essay for the course APH 402 Position Paper in Philosophy
And in Preparation for APH 409 Oral Comprehensive Examination
In partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of
BA Honours in Philosophy

Declaration
The body of this essay,
Excluding titles pages, table of contents, notes and list of sources
Contains no more than 8, 000 words

I am grateful to Prof. Anthony Chennells, my advisor through whom I have learned to love literature. I am also grateful to Fr John Moore, SJ, who helped me a lot in the course of my stay at Arrupe College. To the rector, the dean, other members of staff and my fellow Jesuits and friends, I am also grateful. My gratitude also goes to the members of my Jesuit province (Portugal Province) mainly to those `labouring' in the Angolan Mission. Finally, I owe extensive gratitude to my parents.

	a. «Alguns sentem-se mais angolanos do que os outros [Some Feel More Angolans Than Others]» (Isaias Samakuva, The President of the Main Opposition Party, U.N.I.T.A., in Angola, at the eve of the Legislative
Elections)	.11	3.
A Descriptive Summary of Mayombe	.15	4.
Has Multiculturalism any Value?	19	5.
Conclusion	25	6.
Appendix	29	7.
List of Sources	.30

INTRODUCTION

There is a saying in Angola that if you drop a seed into the soil, the next day you will find a fullygrown plant. Similarly, if you plunge a drill into Angola's seabed, oil will come gushing out. Angola is one of the richest countries in the world and its riches comprise not just natural resources, the free gifts of Mother Nature but also human resources, the mental and physical power of its people and man-made resources which are the product of the intellectual and technical engagement by the population with their environment. However, this wealth of resources seems to confer little benefit on the lives of most of the Angolan people. Instead, for twenty-seven years they were being used to feed the catastrophic civil war which left seventy percent of the population in deepening poverty and eighty percent without basic medical care, running water, electricity or access to information. Moreover, much of the infrastructure was destroyed, eighty percent of agricultural plantations were abandoned, dozens of bridges smashed, the trading network was disrupted, most administrative services were and still are corrupt and most medium-level and highly skilled workers had left the country.

The three principal Angolan nationalist movements took their shape from the three main ethnolinguistic groups. UNITA, which was founded in 1966, was rooted among the southern Ovimbundu, whose language is Umbundu, constituting Angola's largest ethnic group - thirtyeight per cent. The MPLA was founded in 1956 and drew its support mainly from the central Mbundu as well as whites, mestiços and the city-based Creoles. The Mbundu whose language is Kimbundu constitute the country's second largest ethnic group - fifteen per cent. The northern Bakongo whose language is Kikongo and who constitute Angola's third largest ethnic group - thirteen per cent - founded FNLA in the 1950s. Even though each of these movements shared the

same objectives - the independence of Angola - they were never able to form a joint front. Both UNITA's and FNLA's leaders Jonas Savimbi and Holden Roberto respectively, viewed MPLA as the movement which was excessively narrow in its ethnic preference for Mbundu citizens and was effectively in the pockets of the whites, mestiços and the Creoles. The two leaders looked on whites, mestiços and Creoles as `non-Africans' and therefore disconnected from the `real' Africa. Thus, while the lack of unity was hindering the popular uprising, racial contempt towards those Angolans who were perceived as non-indigenous had opened a wound, which had long and painful consequences for any possible postcolonial conciliatory approach.

Despite their differences, in January 1975, the Portuguese authority and the three movements signed the Alvor accords, which were supposed to pave the way to independence. The date for independence was set for 11 November and in meantime, a transitional government was formed. The holding of elections was set for October and the movements were working towards that. But, the leaders of the three movements Savimbi, Roberto and Agostinho Neto (MPLA) opted not to serve in the government, each preferring to embark on a desperate race to achieve supremacy before the scheduled date for independence. Russia and Cuba continued to provide military aid to MPLA. The USA, South Africa and China began to send money and weapons to UNITA and FNLA. As a result, the transitional government was making little progress and, with the escalating arms race, in March the battle to hold the capital, Luanda, began. The MPLA held it and on Independence Day proclaimed the `People's Republic of Angola.' Savimbi and Roberto, who were far away from Luanda, proclaimed from Huambo the `Democratic Republic of Angola' (Davidson, Slovo and Wilkinson 86). The departing Portuguese authority rejected any

responsibility for the situation in the country. However, it expressed regret that the three liberation movements were allowed to arm themselves in the run-up to independence.

The civil war went on - no longer against the Portuguese but against the MPLA and its Cuban and Russian allies. Several attempts were made by the then OAU - now the AU - to bring the three movements together but this was fruitless. In 1976 USA enacted the Clark Amendment, which outlawed the sending of US weapons to the warring parties in Angola and both FNLA and UNITA were left on the brink of collapse. While the FNLA was defeated as a fighting force because they could not resist the heavy armaments provided for the MPLA by Russia and Cuba, UNITA retired to the bush to begin a new guerrilla campaign. Nevertheless, in 1985 the USA congress repealed the Clark Amendment and with US-aid, UNITA was able to liberate some `sanctuaries.' The revolution had aimed to create a new order and a more humane future society, not simply to force the Portuguese to relinquish control of the country and leave it to Angolans themselves. But as the people continued to sink into deepening poverty and the inheritors of the colonial rule turned into an elitist ruling party, the meaning of the revolution remained only simply in the potential it once had possessed. In other words, our leaders had failed to lead the nation beyond the rhetoric of Uhuru (independence).

Every society needs harmony and peace. Angola which has been devastated by conflicts of various kinds is devoid of harmony, stability and peace, those essential preconditions for the development of the country. Therefore, mechanisms for the prevention of conflict must be the major concern for the Angolan people. Without these, the country's developmental goal will not be achieved. Ethnic and ideological differences, the depth of mutual mistrust between the

movements, the MPLA's refusal to loosen its grip on state power, racial contempt and external influences have all led to the breakdown and failure of the implementation of agreements like the Alvor Agreement, the Bicesse Accord and the Lusaka Protocol. Even the peace that has been reigning in the country since 2002 has not yet healed the wounds of twenty-seven years of civil war. The country needs to find different mechanisms to prevent further conflicts, to unite its citizens, to accommodate differences and to celebrate each other's horizons. One mechanism for alleviating conflict is for a talented writer to translate a tricky political situation into a work of fiction. In Mayombe, the Angolan writer Artur C. M. P. dos Santos who writes under the name Pepetela, his guerrilla code-name, has done just that for the Angolan situation.

In his novel Mayombe, Pepetela portrays the lives of a group of Angolan guerrillas who are involved in the anti-colonial struggle. Despite their ethnic, tribal, ideological and racial differences, the guerrillas attempt to transcend these differences with a new nationalism informed by the liberation struggle. João and Fearless promote a culture of resistance in which an Angolan person will no longer act as a Kimbundu or a Kikongo but as an Angolan. A purely national identity, however, isolates one from one's local identification which has certain advantages. The experiential multiculturalism as it is depicted in a concrete and `existential' way in Pepetela's Mayombe, may serve only to divide. But a multiculturalism, which does not wash away ethnic particularism but celebrates differences, is another model of what the citizens of Angola should become.

I will analyze Pepetela's approach, dividing my remarks into five parts. The first part comprises
this introduction. The second part consists of an analysis of the roots of the divisions among the

Angolan people, which produced the three political movements. The influential statement which was made by Isaias Samakuva, the leader of the main opposition party, UNITA, just on the eve of the elections in 2008 - «Alguns sentem-se mais angolanos do que os outros [some people feel themselves to be more Angolan than others]» - will also be analyzed in this second part. The third part consists of a descriptive summary of the novel Mayombe. In the fourth part, which is subtitled «Has multiculturalism any value?» I will validate both the ideal of experiential multiculturalism and ethnically derived multiculturalism. Finally, in the fifth part, the conclusion, I shall give an overview of the paper and affirm as well as reaffirm some of the positions emphasized throughout the paper.

THE ROOT OF DIVISION: CIVIL WAR

The divisions between the different Angolan liberation movements were demonstrated by their inability to form a united front. It showed itself most clearly when in the early 1970s they started to fight one another. Savimbi always called for a united front: «Angolans [are] tired of the liberation movements' petty differences [...] the FNLA, the MPLA and UNITA [have] to work together to speed up the decolonisation process [...]There is a great and urgent need for us to unite...The time for accusations and counter-accusations is gone [...]We want to prepare the ground for talks with the Portuguese so that we go to meet them not as rivals but as equals» (qtd. in Bridgland 112-3). An analysis of the distinct ethno-regional origins from which each movement took its shape, an examination of each one's ideological vision and the external influences working upon each of them may be helpful in understanding the roots of the division and conflict that was so obvious between the three movements.

Savimbi along with many other Ovimbundu was once part of the northerners' FNLA despite his unhappiness over the mass killing that FNLA had carried out in which many Ovimbundu contract labourers on the coffee plantations were slaughtered. However, not until Savimbi noticed that most of the executive posts were held, not merely by members of Holden Roberto's own Bakongo tribe, but even by his own family, did Savimbi form a distinct unit known as the `Opposing Group' which was the seed for the future UNITA (Bridgland 58). So, the Bakongobased FNLA and the creation of the `Opposing Group' anticipated the division and conflict which later on came to characterize FNLA-UNITA relationships. Moreover, when the USA called for the two movements to unite, Savimbi's response was that «[...] the FNLA were not a card to be played [...]» (qtd. in Bridgland 266). Furthermore, as Birmingham puts it, «[...] north and south were never able to collaborate effectively in a grand political strategy» (141).

Savimbi left FNLA with people like Tony Fernandes, a mestiço, N'Zau Puna, from one of the royal families of Cabinda's Woyo tribe and Ernesto Mulato, a Kikongo. These people became Savimbi's long-term comrades in the fight against the Portuguese, and later, against the MPLA and its Soviet and Cuban allies. John Stockell, who had been appointed chief of the CIA's Task Force in Angola, after traveling with Roberto to different FNLA bases and having noticed how FNLA had entrenched itself among the Bakongo tribe, observed that «UNITA was an organization of different caliber [having more pluralistic representation] than FNLA» (qtd. in Bridgland 15). Nevertheless, Stockell's impression did not seem to mirror the reality because this movement was also entrenched among the Ovimbundu, who felt they had been marginalized by the mestiços and the Creole elites. Moreover, its leadership was overwhelmingly Ovimbundu, a rare exception being the party's vice-president, António Dembo, who was Bakongo.

Despite drawing its support from the assimilated Mbundu-Luanda middle class, the mestiços, the Creole elites and the white intellectuals, including Pepetela himself, MPLA seems to have been able to aspire to a greater pluralism than its rivals as was shown by the September 1992 first multiparty elections. Like UNITA, MPLA swept the September polls on its `home turf.' But, unlike UNITA, the MPLA attracted support from other areas where the Mbundu presence is limited, winning 77 per cent of the parliamentary vote and 72 per cent of the presidential vote (Hodges 27). A great number of urban Ovimbundu in both highland towns and coastal cities failed to support UNITA and a national urban pattern of voting for the MPLA could in consequence be observed. Therefore, as Anthony Pereira argues, «it is thus difficult to deny that the 1992 elections revealed a strong cross-ethnic support for the MPLA» (qtd. in Hodges 27). But this does not seem to reflect the real situation on the ground. In its campaign, the MPLA revived the early postcolonial ideology of equating itself with the `people' and so implying that all those who did not support the party were already disqualified from taking advantage of the new political order. Because of this, also considering Savimbi' s poor electioneering campaign, people turned back to the `devil they knew', the MPLA, in order to safeguard their rights.

Savimbi and Roberto often found it difficult to work with MPLA because of the mestiço, Creole and white elements in its leadership whom they considered as a `non-Africa.' As Birmingham puts it, «Jonas Savimbi revived his challenge to the [MPLA] regime by accusing it of being in the pocket of foreigners [...] staffed by whites [and] excessively parochial in its ethnic preference for Mbundu citizens» (151). In addition, in 1960 Roberto met Savimbi in Fribourg, asking him to join his movement on the pretext that the MPLA was controlled by mestiços and Roberto himself

was unconditionally for the blacks (Bridgland 45). Savimbi explained later the racist motives that barred possible unity: «it was very difficult at that time for blacks to understand why mestiços should be leading a liberation movement to fight the Portuguese. It was not clear to us that mestiços were suffering in Angola; [for us] they were privileged people» (qtd. in Bridgland 46). But the mestiços leadership had opened a wound which had long and painful consequences for any possible postcolonial reconciliation and reconstruction. As I have shown, the distinct ethnoregional origin from which each movement took its shape contributed to the division among the three movements and each one's ideology would widen it still further.

Influenced by Mao Tse-tung, Savimbi promoted peasant socialism over the Soviet-style MarxistLeninism of the MPLA. In addition, UNITA advocated a political program that blended democratic and socialist elements with a respect for private property and enterprise (Copson 87). They also defended the position that democracy should be adapted to African conditions, that is, by emphasizing consensus and using proportional representation to empower ethnic groups, clans and classes (Copson 87-8). However, the sincerity of UNITA's commitment to all this was increasingly questioned by the 1980s when allegations of intolerance and human rights' abuses were blurring the credibility of the movement. Critics of the party's policy were tortured and killed in Savimbi's presence and these stories became irrefutable when in 1989 UNITA's highranking dissenters such as Tony Fernandes and N'Zau Puna disclosed how over the years Savimbi had thoroughly purged any party member seen as a dissenter (Russell 102).

From its inception, the MPLA was Marxist and after gaining power adopted Marxism-Leninism
as its official ideology. Moreover, it adopted a de jure one-party state, nationalized the economy

and through a Soviet-inspired system, called for a centrally planned economy. Unlike UNITA and FNLA, the MPLA always had a weak link with the social base in its home `turf.' However, the 1977 coup attempt led to radical changes. It was intended to overthrow Neto's regime which was led by Nito Alves, a vigorous MPLA commander who had his ears close to the mass support but was left out as a member of the inner circle in the regime. That is, from aspiring to be a mass movement seeking support from its home base, the MPLA converted itself into a self-selected elite movement mendaciously calling itself a `vanguard party' in the Leninist mould. So, in its first congress, the MPLA was renamed the MPLA/PT (Kaure 25). UNITA and FNLA presented themselves as anti-Marxist, apostles of capitalism and the free market thus attracting support from Western countries, most notably the USA, and as I have said, MPLA's ideology became a key factor dividing the three movements. As for FNLA's ideology, beside its `tribal anachronism,' racial contempt and Anti-Marxist stand, very little is known about it. Nevertheless, by playing the racial card, and thereby opening a whole box of repressed colonial neuro ses, both UNITA and FNLA lit the fuse of a bomb which made it difficult for unity and reconciliation to take place.

The Soviet-Western block Cold War made the external influences on Angolan politics more important than they normally would have been to the extent that none of the movements was willing to seek a compromise but strove to defeat each other. America and Russia in particular supplied weapons to the three movements before and even after independence. There were 50, 000 Cuban ground troops fighting alongside MPLA and Russia had spent $400 million to arm the MPLA and its Cuban allies (Birmingham 148). Fearing the installation of an outpost `evil empire' of the Soviet Union in Angola, US President Ronald Reagan, with the slogan `Africa has

a right to be free,' pushed for the collapse of the Russian-backed and Cuban-protected MPLA's state. By the mid-eighties US military aid to UNITA peaked at about $60 million a year (Russell 110). However, not until the Russian economy began to shrink and with the USA favouring a new approach (i.e. «no democracy, no cooperation» (Copson 172)) did MPLA and UNITA realize that they could not defeat each other militarily. Their only choice was to push towards peace accords.

The Bicesse accords were signed in May 1991 by President José E. dos Santos (who replaced Neto after his death) and Savimbi. But the depth of mistrust, which led to a developing mutual suspicion with each movement assuming that the other was bent on absolute power, intensified by the UN' s failure to back the accords, led to the collapse of these Bicesse accords. Issa Diallo, the UN's special envoy, even said, «UNITA [violated] the Accord during the day and the MPLA during the night» (qtd. in Messiant 103). Furthermore, while a budget of $430 million and 10,000 UN personnel was allocated for the Namibian peace accords, Angola was allocated only $132 million and barely a thousand personnel (Russell 116). Considering the magnitude of the task which was supposed to be carried out, which was more complex in Angola than Namibia, the resources allocated were hopelessly inadequate. With Savimbi's refusal to accept the election results which gave victory to the MPLA (53.7 per cent) and Dos Santos (49.6 per cent) and the MPLA's unwillingness to make any concessions, the war resumed. This only ended when Savimbi was shot dead by the government army on 22 February 2002 and an agreement was reached with the remnants of UNITA.

In 2003, Isaias Samakuva was elected as the man to replace Savimbi. GURN was formed with the three and other movements serving in it. UNITA's parliamentarians who were elected in the 1992 polls took their seats in the National Assembly. The elections for the legislatives were scheduled for 5 September 2008 and for president, a year after. However, on the eve of the polls, Samakuva affirmed in an interview by the Portuguese Newspaper, Agência Lusa, that «alguns sentem-se mais angolanos do que os outros [some people feel themselves to be more Angolan than others]» (qtd. in Angonoticias 1). Samakuva went on to say that «é costume ainda falar dos angolanos e os da UNITA, como se os angolanos da UNITA não fossem angolanos [it is often said `the Angolans and those of UNITA,' as if the Angolans in UNITA were not Angolans at all]» (qtd in Angonoticias 1). Thus, remarks Samakuva, the country has still a long way to go in order to complete its national identity - «o país tem um longo caminho para completar a sua identidade nacional» (qtd. in Angonocias 1).

Samakuva's affirmations take us back to reflect on the situation of the southerners, the northerners and that of the mestiços, Creoles and whites. There were, and there still are, assumptions among many Kimbundu people from Luanda and its Creole elites that people from central and southern Angola are comparatively backward. The account of Savimbi and Neto's encounter in the mid-sixties may be of great help in understanding the extent of this marginalization. During his studies in Portugal, Savimbi met Neto, who was already working for Angola's popular uprising. Savimbi was impressed by Neto's quiet strength and determination; however, Neto' s mistake was to despise Savimbi' s origin and this contributes to the growth of an epic enmity between the young Ovimbundu and many Mbundu people as well as the city-based Creoles. As Neto put it, when Savimbi told him that he was from the south, «it was impossible

that a militant as bright and brave as [Savimbi] could have emerged from the south: surely his family originally came from the north?» (qtd. in Bridgland 41). He goes on to say, «[people] from central and southern Angola [...] do not get involved in the liberation movement. Maybe it's the effect on them of the missionaries [who] don't want us to see clearly [...] That is why I do not believe that someone like you [Savimbi] who is participating in the struggle can be from the south» (qtd. in Bridgland 41-2).

After the 1978 Angola-DRC peace accords, a new generation of northern Angolans who were born in DRC returned `home.' The returnees were not only the children of those who had fled the country in 1961, but also the grandchildren of black commercial entrepreneurs and artisans from Angola who had served the Belgians over decades. Since the returnees were educated in Kinshasa, most of them spoke French and therefore were treated as foreigners by the proud and clannish people of Luanda. Furthermore, they were also treated as strangers and with no old family networks to protect them; they clung to each other, thereby generating envy and suspicion among the natives of Luanda. Like the Ovimbundu, these returning exiles, also called `Zairotas,' are considered as lesser Angolans.

The mestiços were Creole elites, who were Portuguese-speaking and often, but not always, of mixed race, Catholic or Protestant and urban-based. People like Roberto and Savimbi despised them, and the latter in his xenophobic, racist and ethnic rhetoric called them the `bastard' children (qtd. in Birmingham 162). Furthermore, they look on them as `non-Africans' and therefore disconnected from the `real' Africa. The whites who consider themselves Angolans received a

similar treatment. The 1974 census revealed that the number of whites living in Angola was 335 000 of which twenty per cent were `native born' (Bender 227-8).

In the novel, Pepetela's character, Theory, is one such example of someone who is despised for his white and black origins because white people consider him black and black people, white; and so he is haunted by the problem of self-identity. Thus, Samakuva's claims about an authentic identity do not merely refer to UNITA supporters but also others. Through Fearless, Mayombe offers us some of the ingredients needed for the changes to occur: «constant practical confrontation [...] to communicate [and] to face each other» (79). By so doing, says Fearless, «Another generation and the Angolan will be a new man» (151) because Theory will be accepted as a `true' Angolan «[he will] no longer have a colour, [he will be] totally accepted» (26).

Samakuva's remarks stress the importance of recovering indigenous identities, which because of migration and urbanization cannot be traced easily. That is why Fearless says, «we [...] have already forgotten our roots and the village we came from» (8). So, Samakuva's claims do not accurately reflect ethnic history and in fact even the conflict was rarely characterized by outbursts of inter-communal violence or acts of ethnic cleansing. When the war resumed in 1992-3, there were two outbursts of ethnic violence in Luanda, which call for some attention. The first one was led by the MPLA's supporters and aimed at driving UNITA members out of the city. All Ovimbundu were presumed to be UNITA supporters and became the victims of a cruel genocide. An estimated 6, 000 people were slaughtered (Hodges 28). The second outburst was known as Sexta-feira Sangrenta [Friday Bloodshed]. This violence was followed by the government's claim that DRC was aiding UNITA attacks in the north. As a result, there were some attacks

against the northern Bakongo and forty people were killed (Hodges 28). So, these two events pointed to a fracturing along ethnic lines and people's political differences. That this could happen highlights the need for a recognition and strong emphasis on the basic humanity of every human being, black, white or mestiços.

A DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY OF MAYOMBE

Mayombe is a novel which was written by one of the major Angolan writers of fiction, Pepetela, between 1970 and 1971 but published only in 1980. Pepetela fought with the MPLA's guerrillas and so he was an eyewitness of the difficulties which these were facing. The publication of Mayombe was delayed for political reasons and Pepetela remembers asking questions like this - «será que é útil, a revolução era ainda muito recente [...] Poderia o livro servir os inimigos [is it useful? The revolution was still going on [...] Could the book be useful to the enemies]?» (qtd. in «Literatura»). In other words, Mayombe demystifies the MPLA and its militants by showing that the movement was not made up of ideal, heroic revolutionary supermen. Since Pepetela puts into fiction the reality that he himself lived, he also contributes to this demystification. Even Agostinho Neto, the president of the MPLA at the time, agreed that Mayombe should be published.

In Mayombe, Pepetela uses several episodes from the Angolan revolution to portray the relationships among a group of MPLA guerrillas in the Angolan Northern Province of Cabinda. Ethnic and ideological differences and tribalism tend to distract the guerrillas from their many shared ideals and perspectives. Prejudices, suspicion, racism, hatred and jealousy result from ethnicity, tribalism and ideological differences. These divisions are so acute that they hinder the

collective resistance against colonial domination and thus lead to divisions between the guerrillas and even among those in the High Command. Fearless, the Commander, is very much aware of this and on one of the occasions in which the guerrillas refuse to volunteer to rescue Muatianvua, he says, «No-one wanted to volunteer [...] Were [Muatianvua] Kikongo or Kimbundu four or five would soon have come forward [...] Is that how we are going to win the war?» (34). In other words, Fearless shows that because of the loyalties of ethnicity, the significance of national unity and collective action will be lost and the struggle to advance and force the Portuguese out of Angola will loose its momentum.

Even though the guerrillas fight together as a solid collective group against a common enemy - the Portuguese - this collectivity is being undermined by each one of the guerrillas' personal motives, which originally drove them to join the struggle. The Operations Chief (Ops) alludes to the different motives that have involved them in the struggle: «The reasons are different, but the actions are the same» (157). For instance, Theory, who comes from Gabela and is of mixed blood (from a black mother and a white father), joins the struggle so that «no-one [will] notice this about him» (4) and he will be regarded as an Angolan, despite the colour of his skin. Struggle comes from Cabinda and, since the Cabinda people have refused to ally themselves with the guerrillas and are therefore considered to be treacherous, he fights in the frontline so that the other guerrillas will not think of him as someone not to be relied on. As he says, «How to convince the guerrillas [...] that my people are not just made up of traitors? I shall have [...] to assert myself, by being braver than anyone» (175-6).

New World sees himself as not driven by any personal motives. He leaves Europe to join the struggle and because living in Europe would have provided him with a better life, New World sees himself as unselfish (52). He is a Marxist and applies a fundamentalist Marxism to the rationale of the struggle. That is, for him «man as an individual is nothing, only the masses can make History» (52). He enlarges on this: «The Revolution is made by the mass of the people, the sole entity with leadership capacity [...]» (72). Since popular support is needed for the revolution to advance, New World's allusion expresses in theoretical terms what Fearless tries to convey earlier when he says that, «A people' s war is not measured by the number of enemy dead. It is measured by the degree of popular support it has» (12). Unlike New World, Fearless gives up the study of economics to join the struggle with the intent of «making up stories in which [he] was the hero [and] the revolution gave [him] an opportunity to create them in action» (84). Thus, contradicting New World, he says, «what I am doing has a selfish purpose [...] No-one is permanently unselfish» (50). This suggests that the guerrillas are not driven by the motives of a liberated collectivity; ambition and personal interests dominate their motivations and they readily put aside national interests.

Mayombe attempts to transcend these forces of division among the guerrillas with a new multiculturalism based in the culture of resistance and which is shaped by the liberation struggle. João and Fearless are the architects of the culture of resistance for nation-building so that a person will no longer act as Kimbundu or Kikongo but as an Angolan. Fearless' saying that «I do not care if someone is Kikongo or Kimbundu [but Angolan]» (128) testifies to it. It is the exposure to the same political, economic and social forces that bind people together and motivate them even to forget their own tribes. In Amilcar Cabral's terms, «[people] rise above `tribalism'

[...] they realize their crucial role in the struggle [and] break the bonds of their village» (qtd. in Davidson 323). In addition, as Fearless says when they have to defend their base, «We mobilized more than thirty men in under an hour [...] they forgot their various tribes [...] the inconvenience and danger of the action [...] that's why I have confidence in the Angolans. They are meddlers, but they all forget their quarrels and spites to rescue a companion from danger [...] Another generation and the Angolan will be a new man. What is needed is action» (151).

The action that Pepetela conveys through Fearless makes necessary constant dialogue, internal cohesion and the acknowledgement of the rights of the other for these break down the barriers which prevent the promotion of collectivity. It also requires, as Fearless says, «to deny [oneself] in order to be reborn in a different form, or better still, to give rise to another so that instead of making one's ideas absolute truth, these should pass through a regenerative cycle of `death' and `rebirth' and allow one to see the ideas of others, [be they Cabinda or Umbundu] not as coming from `pagans' [but from the `significant others']» (79-80). In spite of washing away individual identification for nation-building, Mayombe is an inspirational work for what the future Angola should be like. The deaths of Fearless, who is a Kikongo and who dies to save a Kimbundu soldier and that of Struggle, who is Cabinda and considered as a traitor throughout the novel but who dies to save a Kimbundu soldier, should be exemplary models for the ideal citizens of the new nation.

HAS MULTICULTURALISM ANY VALUE?

Multiculturalism is a philosophical movement that holds that every culture, by virtue of its being
a culture, has an intrinsic value which is worth respecting. Multiculturalism advocates the

recognition and respect of all cultures and so, as Fleishacker says, it is «the affirmative attitude towards all cultures» (XI). Moreover, multiculturalism can be viewed both in positive and negative ways. It is positive if it brings the riches of cultural diversity to the larger political community, thereby leading to respect for differences, appreciation of diversity and cooperation as well as interaction among cultures. It can be negative if it prevents people from developing any attachment to the larger political community and hence leading to isolationism, ethnic cultism and tribalism. Angola is made up of a diverse range of cultures and identities and both loyalty to the larger political community, as advocated by Pepetela' s Mayombe, pari passu with a multiculturalism which does not wash away ethnic particularism but celebrates differences, will be another way of bringing about what Angola should become to prevent further conflict, to unite the citizens and to transcend people' s differences.

The culture of resistance that Mayombe creates and which is informed by the liberation struggle calls for a nationalistic approach for nation building so that a person will not act as a Kimbundu or Umbundu but as an Angolan. As Fearless asks «Am I Kikongo? Are you Kimbundu?» (8). João picks it up, «Not us. We belong to the minority who have already forgotten our roots and the village we came from» (8) and therefore, the only way in which individuals can realize themselves to the full is by identifying with the nation (the larger political community). João's remark «What would I be without the Movement? An orphan» (100) alludes to the nation. Even though several kingdoms (nations) existed in the contemporary Angola before the arrival of the Portuguese, people's migration and their exposure to the common experience of oppression and discrimination, as well as the cultural fusion that was highlighted by the increased use of the

Portuguese language at the expense of indigenous languages, led to the rise of a national culture, a national loyalty and so to the birth of Angola's nation-state (one nation).

The culture of resistance implies transferring loyalties and commitments from the ethno-cultural groups to the new nation-state. The ideal is, as Tamir puts it, that «national ends have priority over individual ends and personal freedom is attainable only through identification with, and subordination to the `nation's will'» (17). In Etounga-Manguelle' s terms, the nation is the mother and institutions are the children (75). Pepetela' s character New World attests to that when he says that «an individual is nothing, only the masses can make History» (52). National history is being unfolded through the revolution and that is why the Ops says that «people understand [Fearless] only when he expresses himself in action [...] they [even forget] that he is Kikongo» (166). This suggests that an active approach to nation-building is needed for Angola to unite its citizens and to attain the real independence which will come to its term only when, as João remarks, talking to the timber workers, «[...] the trees you chop down may serve the people and not foreigners [...] the petrol in Cabinda may serve to enrich the people and not the Americans» (20). However, after independence, João's remarks became merely rhetorical because leadership of the liberation movements degenerated into elitism.

The rise of Portuguese at the expense of the indigenous languages is a historical fact that supported the growth of that cultural homogeneity which Mayombe attempts to create. A survey carried out in 1996 showed that Portuguese was the second most widely spoken language in the country and was well ahead of Kimbundu and Kikongo. The survey testified that no less than forty-two per cent of children under nine years of age, thirty-four per cent of those between ten

and nineteen, eighteen per cent of those aged from twenty to twenty-nine, including myself, and ten per cent of those over forty spoke Portuguese as their first language (Hodges 26). Besides urbanization, which served as one of the driving forces that led to that, and for the sake of national unity, the MPLA's government never allowed the use of indigenous languages in the public sector. So, Chabal says, «Angola has often been seen to be more `Portuguese' than [any other colony]» (4). According to Neto, «culture results from the material situation and from the state of social development» (493). Since, the rise of the Portuguese language is a historical fact, Neto argues that this «should be presented as the cultural emancipation of the Angolan people» (493). However, by making Portuguese the national language, this will result, as it has already, in its outstripping all the indigenous languages, and this poses a threat to Angola's cultural and multilingual diversity.

As has been demonstrated, the culture of resistance, which Mayombe attempts to create, is seriously flawed. It fosters national unity, national identity, national loyalty, national culture and national integration by fusing the diverse ethnic elements into a new political whole called `the nation.' But, in its failure to take into account of ethnic and linguistic identities, Mayombe ends up promoting cultural and linguistic homogeneities and therefore eradicating ethnic consciousness or identity. Nussbaum says, «[we] need not think of them [ethnic and linguistic identities] as superficial, and we may think of our identity as constituted partly by them» (9) and so instead of `real' nation-building, Mayombe promotes `nation-destroying.' Guerrillas are brought together purposely in order to act and think as if they belonged to one large ethnocultural community. For instance, when the Kikongos start joining the MPLA's leadership, which was dominated by Mbundu, mestiços, Creoles and white, Miracle says bluntly that these «will not

let themselves be bossed by the Kikongos» (19). In other words, the ethos of fellow feeling and mutual recognition among the guerrillas is clearly instrumental - to promote the liberation struggle - and thus, multiculturalism, which does not wash away ethnic particularism but celebrates differences, should also be fostered.

Multiculturalism creates room for cultural diversity, respect for the distinctness of cultures and protection of minority groups. Moreover, multiculturalism is not simply built on many cultures but by the fact of holding that no culture is perfect and all cultures should be open and interactive in their relations with each other because the `significant others' help to define oneself. In Taylor's words, «my discovering my own identity does not mean that I work it out in isolation, but that I negotiate it through dialogue, partly overt, partly internal, with others» (34). In addition, «part of the uniqueness of individuals results from the ways in which they integrate, reflect upon, and modify their own cultural heritage and that of other people with whom they come into contact» (Gutmann 7). Thus, instead of having the Luanda Creole elites despising people from central and southern Angola and the latter considering the former as `non-African', Angolan plurality should contribute to human flourishing and discovering a common purpose within a more diverse society.

Ethnicity, which Mayombe attempts to wash away for the sake of national unity, is one of the outstanding features of a nation. As Gyekye reminds us, the word ethnicity comes from the Greek word ethnos that means «a number of people living together, body of men, class of men, nation, caste and tribe» (96). This suggests that from its etymology, ethnicity essentially implies the fact of people living together and it does not directly imply a sense of kinship and common

descent. Anthony Smith says that the Greek word genos, which has its etymological affiliation in the Greek root gene, was the term reserved for kinship or biological ties (qtd. in Gyekye 97). Moreover, considering the movements of people from one place to another in the wake of wars, inter-ethnic and inter-racial marriages, amalgamation of groups into other distinct units, ethnic identity becomes a matter of personal belief or choice. Since one's ancestry can often not be established with any certainty, instead of a community of people bound by kinship or intrinsically ancestral descent, today what we have are communities of people living together and sharing values, aspirations, ideals and sentiments. Thus, as Gyekye points out, «what is often called `ethnic' identification is almost invariably cultural identification» (99) and Angolans should not see themselves as sharing just one ethnic identity. They are heirs to a multicultural identity that allows them to transcend parochialism.

As has been shown, ethnic communities are far too large to possess any kinship basis. Their sense of common descent, as Anthony Smith argues, «[...] is only a myth, albeit a powerful one» (qtd. in Gyekye 97). The example of Pepetela' s character Muatianvua can be a helpful one here. He is born in Lunda (known as the territory of Tchokue, Angola's fourth largest ethnic group) from an Umbundu father and a Kimbundu mother. He grew up in Benguela (the territory of Umbundu) with white children and children whose fathers were Umbundu, Tchokue, Kimbundu, Kuanhama and Fiote. As a sailor, Muatianvua went as far as Gabon, Ghana, Senegal, Mauritania and Saudi Arabia. When asked to which tribe he belongs, he answers, «I am from all tribes, not only Angola [...] Do I not speak Swahili [...] Hausa [...] Portuguese?» (87) Muatianvua extrapolates a general truth which Angolans face about their specific ethnic belonging and so shows that we are all individuals of multiethnic extraction. The significance of this is that this should help us to learn

and value our own culture, respect other cultures as well as value cultural diversity and see it as a positive thing.

As said earlier, multiculturalism is negative if it prevents people from developing any attachment to the larger political community. The kind of nationalism - the manipulative rhetoric used to preserve a larger nation - which Savimbi, Roberto and the Luanda Creole community promoted, prevented people from developing any national attachment and therefore it led to ethnic cultism, tribalism, racism and superiority complex. While Savimbi and Roberto called the Luanda Creole society `non-African,' the latter, as they were at the heart of the colonial order, saw themselves as the true elites of the country and so developed a superiority complex over the people of the interior. Despite cultural and linguistic divisions, people should identify themselves not only as men and citizens but also as Angolans. We were all exposed to the same political, economic and social forces and this should help us to recognize each other' s horizons, to experience one another, not only as Angolans but also, say, as Mbundu, Bakongo or Ovimbundu. Moreover, we all belong to the community of humankind and therefore, as Wiredu says, «what unifies us is more fundamental than what differentiates us» (32).

CONCLUSION

Twenty-seven years of war left Angola in chaos: much of the country's infrastructure was
destroyed, people were displaced from their homes, adults and children died and the economy
was disrupted. As a consequence, there was a loss of opportunities for the growth and
development of the country. Ethnicity, ideological differences, the depth of mutual mistrust, the
MPLA's refusal to loosen its grip on state power, racial contempt and external influences, all had
opened a wound which had long and painful consequences for any possible postcolonial

conciliatory approach. The MPLA's regime became authoritarian, it conceived itself as synonymous with the Angolan nation and it held the cities and so left rural Angola neglected. For their survival, both UNITA and FNLA used ethnicity as a social and political value as they mobilized the neglected southern Ovimbundu and the northern Bakongo to fight against the MPLA (Mbundu-based). Savimbi even promised to create a `black republic' of Angola to replace that of MPLA, which favored the Kimbundu, mestiços, Creoles and whites. Those reckoning on external influence counted on Russia and Cuba to help the MPLA and USA, South Africa and China to help UNITA and FNLA with weapons and money.

Despite the defeat of FNLA as a fighting force, the war went on between MPLA and UNITA. However, it was not until changes in international politics took place with the Russian economy shrinking and USA favouring a new approach of «no democracy, no cooperation», that the two movements realized that they could not defeat each other militarily. The only choice was to sign the peace accords. Multiparty elections were held and the MPLA and its candidate José E. dos Santos won. Savimbi had been confident that he would win, as neutral observers had predicted, and since Western-style democracy has no consolation prize for coming second («winner takes all» was the policy), he refused to accept the election results and as a result, the war broke out again. The MPLA proved itself totally unwilling to make any concessions to its opponents and in its fourth congress, President dos Santos stated that «the only path to peace was war» (qtd. in Hodges 16). In addition, with the constitutional changes of 1991-92, Angola became a presidential state and all power emanated from the president. Thus, Savimbi refused any compromise solutions, recognizing that the presidential system gives all power to the president rather than to the prime minister or to the elected parliament. One reason for the weakening of

UNITA was the MPLA intervention in DRC, which led to the fall of Mobutu Sese Seko who had aided UNITA to smuggle weapons into Angola through DRC borders. The other was the US recognition of the MPLA's regime in 1993. However, on 22 February 2002 Savimbi was shot dead by the Angolan army.

Savimbi's death opened a new chapter for Angola. Peace accords were signed between MPLA and the UNITA remnants; parliamentary elections were held in 2008 and the MPLA took the lead with 82 per cent and after initial unwillingness, UNITA accepted the defeat. The presidential polls will be held this year 2009. In spite of all this progress, the wounds of twenty-seven years of war are still fresh. Ethnicity, ideological differences, people's political affiliation and racial contempt continue to divide the populace. In other words, as Ngugi satirically shows through his character, the Policeman, in Wizard of the Crow, «You might see us dining [...] laughing and slapping one another on the backs, but this is all a lie» (149). Thus, new dispensations are needed for Angola to unite its citizens, to accommodate differences and to identify and then celebrate each other' s horizons. Mayombe creates a culture of resistance that is promoted by João and Fearless for nation-building so that a person will no longer act as a Kimbundu or Kikongo but as an Angolan. Nevertheless, this isolates one from local identification and Mayombe's approach pari passu with a multiculturalism that is ethnically derived, that does not wash away ethnic particularism but celebrates differences, will be another way of bringing about what Angola should become, a country pledged to prevent further conflicts.

Mayombe advocates a nationalistic approach by which an individual's primary loyalty is to the
larger nation. The common experience of oppression and discrimination, shared values and

history as well as the cultural fusion that was highlighted by the increased use of the Portuguese language at the expense of indigenous languages, were some of the premises which would allow nation-building to occur. An individual's local identification (ethnicity and language) would become secondary to the national culture. However, as Nussbaum says, we are surrounded by a series of concentric circles - the self, fellow countrymen and humanity as a whole (9). Therefore, Angolans should not see themselves as devoid of local affiliations. A multiculturalism that is ethnically derived becomes a sine qua non condition for providing, as Appiah argues, both an individual and a collective dimension of identity (53).

Multiculturalism celebrates differences and it encourages learning about others and by so doing, learning about ourselves. The fact that none of the liberation movements, even though they are regionally based, has ever advocated secession from the country shows that, in spite of our diversity, we share common values - we all belong to the culture of humankind and this should take precedence over national and ethnic origins. Furthermore, instead of being taught about `mythical history' which glorifies the MPLA as the sole builder of the national memory, and so excluding others, we should be taught to be open to otherness, to accept differences, to live with plurality and, as Fearless says «[accept] that the Cabinda people are the same as the rest of Angola» (41). Our leaders should continue to work to transcend national emotionalism, to eliminate the barriers to plurality, justice, freedom and peace, which are still crippling the country. They should also, as Ousmane says, «[...] not become the new oppressors of the people, of god's bits of wood» (207). Finally, we should all learn, as Fanon puts it, that «Each generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission, fulfill it, or betray it» (166).

APPENDIX The characters of Mayombe Leadership

Fearless the Commander, a Kikongo João the Political Commissar, a Kimbundu born in Caxito

Theory the Teacher, coloured, born in Gabela from a black mother and a white father

Pangu Akitina the Medic, a Kikongo The Stores Chief born in Quibaxe, a Kimbundu

Muatianvua detribalized born in Lunda, from an Umbundu father and a Kimbundu mother

Vw the youngest soldier, a Kikongo Ondine the teacher and João's girlfriend Truth

List of Sources

Appiah, K. Anthony. «Ethnic Identity as a Political Resource.» Explorations in African Political Thought: Identity, Community, Ethics. Ed. Teodros Kiros. New York: Routledge, 2001. 45-53.

Bender, Gerald J. Angola under the Portuguese: The Myth and the Reality. Trenton: Africa World Press, Inc., 2004.

Birmingham, David. «Angola.» A History of Postcolonial Lusophone Africa. Ed.

Patrick Chabal, et al. London: Hurst and Company, 2002. 137-84. Bridgland, Fred. Jonas Savimbi: A Key to Africa. New York: Paragon House

Chabal, Patrick. «E Pluribus Unum: Transitions in Angola.» Angola: The Weight of History. Ed. Patrick Chabal and Nuno Vidal. London: Hurst & Company, 2007. 1-18.

Copson, Raymond W. Africa 's Wars and Prospects for Peace. Armonk: M.E. Sharp, 1994.

Davidson, Basil. In the Eye of the Storm: Angola 's People. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1972.

Davidson, Basil, J. Slovo and A. Wilkinson. Southern Africa: The New Politics of Revolution. New York: Penguin Books, 1976.

Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress. Ed. Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel P. Huntington. New York: Basic Books, 2000. 65-77.

Fanon, Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. Transl. Constance Farrington. London: Penguin Books, 1967.

Fleishacker, Samuel. The Ethics of Culture. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1994.

Gutmann, Amy. «Introduction.» Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition. Ed. Amy Gutmann. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994. 3-24.

Gyekye, Kwame. Tradition and Modernity: Philosophical Reflections on the African Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Hodges, Tony. Angola: from Afro-Stalinism to Petro-Diamond Capitalism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.

Kaure, Alexactus T. Angola: From Socialism to Liberal Reforms. Harare: Sapes Books, 1999.

Kymlicka, Will. Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.

Messiant, Christine. «The Mutation of Hegemonic Domination: Multiparty Politics without Democracy.» Angola: The Weight of History. Ed. Patrick Chabal and Nuno Vidal. London: Hurst & Company, 2007. 93-123.

Neto, Agostinho. «Concerning National Culture.» African Literature: An Anthology of Criticism and Theory. Ed. Tejumola Olaniyan and Ato Quayson. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2007. 492-95.

Ngugi wa Thiong'o. Wizard of the Crow. London: Vintage Books, 2007. Nussbaum, Martha C. «Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism.» For Love of Country:

Ousmane, Sembene. God's Bits of Wood. Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers, 1962.

Pepetela. Mayombe. Transl. Michael Wolfers. Harare: Zimbabwe Publishing House,

Russell, Alec. Big Men, Little People: Encounters in Africa. London: Macmillan,

Tamir, Yael. Liberal Nationalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. Taylor, Charles. «The Politics of Recognition.» Multiculturalism: Examining the

Wiredu, Kwasi. «Are there Cultural Universals?» The African Philosophy Reader. Ed. P.H. Coetzee and A.P.J. Roux. London: Routledge, 1998. 31-40.