Buharry: This was a piece with sensible, peaceful and desirable truth. In fact i wrote a similar piece to the L on the 1st. of May this year. I think violence should be the last answer to or disposition of a problem. Africa is without a doubt going through living hell for the past 3 decades. It is time for we Africans to change strategies to conduct any political or economical deferences in Africa. Thanks for sharing! Saul S.Jawara Sweden. ----- Original Message ----- From: "MOMODOU BUHARRY GASSAMA" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2000 3:45 PM Subject: A challenge to those advocating violent change in The Gambia > Hi! > I have read a lot of messages propagating violence as the only available > means of bringing about a change of government in The Gambia. I have also > read how those who propagate other means especially peaceful ones are deemed > to be living fantasies. I would like to suggest that those propagating > violence from the comfort of homes in Europe and America are living a > fantasy as much as those advocating peaceful means. One can be anyone one > wants to be behind a computer keyboard. One can be Rambo, one can be Malcolm > X, and one can be Bin Laden. One can even be Ghaddafi if one wishes. That is > the beauty of the cyber identity. Then comes reality! The reality is that > one may not be as tough as one portrays from a keyboard. One can be the > greatest coward and the weakest "lefe lefe" there is yet the implications of > their macho messages can be far-reaching and even devastating. > > If the ones preaching violence as the only available means of bringing > about change are comfortably sitting in Europe and America, who is going to > bring about that violent change for them? I would be more convinced if those > people were on the ground in The Gambia living what they are preaching. I > would pay more attention to their message if it were Halifa Sallah, Lawyer > Darboe, Shyngle Nyassi or any Samba or Demba living in The Gambia who was > preaching what they are preaching. I would be more convinced, perhaps even > converted if they truly believed in what they are preaching and pack up and > go back home to be in the midst of the violence they are preaching. Apart > from that I just say, "Practise what you preach". > > The repercussions of the violent prescriptions these people are prescribing > won't take place in a vacuum. The Gambia is not an empty space. Look at the > results of violent confrontations in our sub-region. Look at Casamance, > Liberia and Sierra Leone. It is very easy as stated earlier to sit thousands > of miles away and prescribe violence knowing fully well that one is far > removed from its effects. In other words, it is not their hands, feet or > tongues that are going to be cut off. Yes, it might be their parents', > children's etc. but it is still not the same. One can walk even if one's > brother's legs are cut off. I would be more convinced if these people go > back home and put their feet, tongues, hands etc. at the risk of being cut > and still preach what they are preaching. > There have been many cases in the recent past that have outraged many of us > not only in their brutality but also even in their deliberate assumption of > Gambians' stupidity. The answer to those acts cannot only be violence. > Measures have been taken that have yielded results. Why do you think Yaya > didn't react in his normal way after the student massacres? Why do you think > all the arrested students were released? Pressure, man, pressure! Pressure > that has had some effect no matter how much one wishes to downplay those > effects. > > To those advocating violence I ask: do you have any organised means of > bringing about a violent change? Do you have the finance to support a > violent movement? Do you have a network somewhere to co-ordinate the > activities of your movement? In short, what do you have in place apart from > empty rhetoric? I say empty rhetoric because to propagate violence and > dismiss the diplomatic approach as fantasy really smacks of a lack of > understanding of how wars are fought. Ask the Arabs. When Israel was > declared a state, the Arabs went bonkers and showed their absolute fury by > attacking Israel. Yes, Israel had the military capability with the help of > the West to defend itself. It however invested in a more important > ingredient of war: propaganda and diplomacy. Because of the Jews' presence > in broadcasting and publishing, they succeeded in transforming world opinion > in their favour. That is why Israel gets away with basically anything today > whilst the Iraqs, Yugoslavias etc. are bombed to smithereens for lesser > sins. The importance of propaganda makes it imperative for guerrilla > movements to have political organs that put a diplomatic face on the > bombings and other atrocities perpetrated by their armed movements. To > underestimate the importance of the non-violent aspect of the machinery of > change displays a gross lack of understanding of the mechanisms of change. > > To cut a long story short, those who are advocating a violent change in The > Gambia need to come up with action plans. They need to show us how they are > going to bring about that change and if possible with the least loss of life > and suffering possible. To lack an action plan yet instigate unarmed people > to have violent confrontations with armed-to-the-teeth security personnel is > irresponsible to say the least especially when one is sheltered some > thousands of miles away. Self-defence is a natural right but instigating the > UDP to form vigilante groups knowing fully well that they would not be > granted firearms licences when they would be pitched against armed police > and soldiers seems like a recipe for disaster. Maybe those advocating a > non-violent response to the activities of the government do not have a > panacea to all Gambia's ill but neither do those advocating a violent > response. The issue therefore should be meet at the crossroads and maybe > work out something that would be in the interests of The Gambia for surely > violent confrontation, war and civil strife are not in our country's > interests. Thanks. > > Buharry. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L > Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------------