Sunday, 29 April 2012

On reality and the problems we face

The post on here from the 5th April now looks far too optimistic.

With the newly formed FNLA confusing matters further, the situation in Azawad now appears grim:

Many northern Tuaregs are adamant that they do not support the MNLA (Mouvement National pour la liberation de l'Azawad, or National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad), which claim to have military control of Gao and Kidal. "I absolutely do not agree with the MNLA," a farmer only known as Ajawa told IRIN from Abala refugee camp in Niger.
"They say they fight for all the Tuareg people, but many Tuareg people do not support them," he said. "We all just want to be left in peace. Already Mali is relying on aid from the US, UK and Europe. The conflict is just making more divisions - how can we survive as two countries if we can barely survive as one?"

Who of us can disagree with Ajawa? All of us, everywhere, want to live in peace. All National Anarchists support national liberation and secession movements, but how can we reconcile this principal with the great suffering that all too often occurs when the vanguards of a people begin to move? As supporters of the right of ethnic groups to self-determination, National Anarchists and our allies cannot brush aside the current suffering in Azawad with the stock-in-trade "These things unfortunately happen in war" quip. Call me an old peacenik, but national liberation groups need to put the security and well-being of their people at the top of the list. To gain the support of those they speak for, they should formulate socio-political programmes to gain the trust of the masses and ultimately become indivisible from them: a people's movement in every sense of the word. Yes, constitutional paths should also be considered if conditions allow. They may prove to lead into cul-de-sacs, but if the alternative is carnage?

In South Sudan too, the quest for black gold and other resources is causing misery to it's people. Oil is a resource that one day we will no longer see the 'benefit' of. Is it time for secessionist movements to get with the programme of technological regression?!

As secessionists and decentralists we National Anarchists must never brush aside the possible human consequences of what we are advocating. National Anarchists desire a peaceful world of tribal co-existence, but we must not kid ourselves that this will come about via some glorious co-ordinated National-Anarchist revolution. We must therefore support all movements which set things on the path toward our vision. National liberation can be part of this process, but how can we do this without becoming cheerleaders for misery and despair? Unfortunately, I for one, cannot see any easy answers.