Germany’s genocide in Namibia: deal between the two governments falls short of delivering justice
In early December 2024 the German and Namibian governments concluded negotiations over a joint declaration recognising the genocide committed by the German empire in South West Africa. Germany ruled the country as a colony between 1884 and 1915. It was declared a mandated territory by the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.
On 19 December 2024, Namibia announced that the cabinets of the two countries had reached a landmark decision
related to the signing of the Joint Declaration on the Genocide, Apology and Reparations between the Namibian and German governments.
Germany concedes that the “abominable atrocities committed ... from today’s perspective would be called genocide”. It accepts “a moral, historical and political obligation to tender an apology”. In return, Namibia’s “government and people accept Germany’s apology” and the government “deeply appreciates its friendly relationship with Germany”.
Both governments will set up a “reconstruction and development support programme ... to assist the development of descendants of the particularly affected communities”. €1,050 million is allocated over a period of a maximum of 30 years. Another €50 million will be dedicated to “projects on reconciliation, remembrance, research and education”. It is agreed that “these amounts ... settle all financial aspects of the issues relating to the past”.
Negotiated since 2015, a draft was initialled in May 2021. Special envoys then bargained over an addendum behind closed doors.
The governments will now seek to seal the controversial pact.
I have followed, analysed and commented on the negotiations since they started. It was widely recognised as a pioneering step by a former colonial power to show remorse for colonial crimes. But disappointment over its limitations followed.
An apology was negotiated instead of made upfront. It avoids legal consequences. The atonement also stops short of conceding reparations. The declaration omits the word.
But the worst shortcoming is that negotiations violated the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Signed by both states, its Article 18 states
Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures.
The main agencies of the descendants of communities affected by the genocide and German atrocities were not at the negotiation table. They are in the main represented by the Ovaherero Traditional Authority and the Nama Traditional Leaders Association.
It’s estimated that up to two-thirds of the Ovaherero (50,000 to 65,000) and one-third of the Nama (10,000) did not survive the warfare and its consequences between 1904 and 1908. Neither were the descendants of the Damara and San given a voice. They were also victims of the settler-colonial annihilation.
The amended and now accepted joint declaration does not correct any of the fundamental flaws. They will cause more divisions among Namibians – the opposite of reconciliation.
Who negotiated?
Ovaherero and Nama descendants have made it clear that they were inadequately represented in the negotiations.
When these got underway in 2015 the Namibian government created chiefs’ forums to play an advisory role. But they remained largely invisible.
The joint declaration remained a matter between two governments, and the representatives of the two groups didn’t feel they were represented by the Namibian state. The Namibian government is to a large extent based on election results, in which a majority of voters are from regions less affected by the genocide.
When the special envoys initialled the draft in May 2021, the Ovaherero Traditional Authority and Nama Traditional Leaders Association dismissed it as a
public relations coup by Germany and an act of betrayal by the Namibian government.
In October 2022 Namibia’s vice-president, Nangolo Mbumba, failed to convince the two groups to accept the negotiated results. They remain adamant that “anything about us, without us, is against us.”
Uncertain road ahead
The controversies that have bedevilled the process look set to continue.
Weeks after the declaration was announced the chiefs’ forums were addressed by ministers acting as special envoys to endorse the final package. It seems to have been taken for granted that the selected counterparts would not object or would not have the right to object to the agreed deal.
Next steps announced are also briefings to communities in the diaspora, mainly in Botswana and South Africa. Their inclusion is one of the few changes in the declaration. But it’s not clear how they are represented.
When the roadshow was announced, the Ovaherero and Nama traditional authorities of the Okandjoze Chiefs’ Assembly on Genocide reiterated their rejection. Not having been privy to the bilateral cooperation mechanism, they demanded a return to the drawing board.
After the roadshow, the foreign ministers will sign the agreement. Then it will be presented in the German Bundestag and the Namibian National Assembly for further consideration and ratification.
But on both counts there could be problems.
Following the criticism articulated in the Namibian National Assembly debate in late 2021, the Ovaherero Traditional Authority and the Nama Traditional Leaders Association submitted a lawsuit to the high court in early 2023. It seeks a judicial review to declare the declaration as unlawful in terms of Namibia’s constitution and in breach of a motion adopted by the National Assembly in 2006.
The court hearing has since been postponed.
Can the government ignore a pending case without disrespecting the rule of law?
On the German side, the government coalition has collapsed. New elections take place on 23 February 2025. Any implementation of the declaration depends on the German Bundestag endorsing its budget implications.
German policy might have other priorities. The declaration has never been supported by all parties. Notably the Liberal Democratic Party (FDP), which brought about the government’s downfall, avoids any reference to colonialism in its election manifesto.
A further wrinkle is that Germany is currently preparing an official apology for President Frank-Walter Steinmeier. Namibia will review it before it is finalised. If all goes to plan, the German president will then formally tender an apology to the affected communities. But at a location of their choice?
No end in sight
In a statement rejecting the new push towards closing the negotiations, the traditional leaders in the chiefs’ assembly of Okandjoze declared:
However long it may take, eventually the battle would have been won with a credible legacy for future generations, putting the spirits of our ancestors to a well-deserved eternal rest.
Reconciliation remains an uphill battle. As they seek to come to terms with the crimes perpetrated under German rule, Namibians still confront a lack of atonement for the past.
• Henning Melber is extraordinary professor, Department of Political Sciences, University of Pretoria.
On 19 December 2024, Namibia announced that the cabinets of the two countries had reached a landmark decision
related to the signing of the Joint Declaration on the Genocide, Apology and Reparations between the Namibian and German governments.
Germany concedes that the “abominable atrocities committed ... from today’s perspective would be called genocide”. It accepts “a moral, historical and political obligation to tender an apology”. In return, Namibia’s “government and people accept Germany’s apology” and the government “deeply appreciates its friendly relationship with Germany”.
Both governments will set up a “reconstruction and development support programme ... to assist the development of descendants of the particularly affected communities”. €1,050 million is allocated over a period of a maximum of 30 years. Another €50 million will be dedicated to “projects on reconciliation, remembrance, research and education”. It is agreed that “these amounts ... settle all financial aspects of the issues relating to the past”.
Negotiated since 2015, a draft was initialled in May 2021. Special envoys then bargained over an addendum behind closed doors.
The governments will now seek to seal the controversial pact.
I have followed, analysed and commented on the negotiations since they started. It was widely recognised as a pioneering step by a former colonial power to show remorse for colonial crimes. But disappointment over its limitations followed.
An apology was negotiated instead of made upfront. It avoids legal consequences. The atonement also stops short of conceding reparations. The declaration omits the word.
But the worst shortcoming is that negotiations violated the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Signed by both states, its Article 18 states
Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures.
The main agencies of the descendants of communities affected by the genocide and German atrocities were not at the negotiation table. They are in the main represented by the Ovaherero Traditional Authority and the Nama Traditional Leaders Association.
It’s estimated that up to two-thirds of the Ovaherero (50,000 to 65,000) and one-third of the Nama (10,000) did not survive the warfare and its consequences between 1904 and 1908. Neither were the descendants of the Damara and San given a voice. They were also victims of the settler-colonial annihilation.
The amended and now accepted joint declaration does not correct any of the fundamental flaws. They will cause more divisions among Namibians – the opposite of reconciliation.
Who negotiated?
Ovaherero and Nama descendants have made it clear that they were inadequately represented in the negotiations.
When these got underway in 2015 the Namibian government created chiefs’ forums to play an advisory role. But they remained largely invisible.
The joint declaration remained a matter between two governments, and the representatives of the two groups didn’t feel they were represented by the Namibian state. The Namibian government is to a large extent based on election results, in which a majority of voters are from regions less affected by the genocide.
When the special envoys initialled the draft in May 2021, the Ovaherero Traditional Authority and Nama Traditional Leaders Association dismissed it as a
public relations coup by Germany and an act of betrayal by the Namibian government.
In October 2022 Namibia’s vice-president, Nangolo Mbumba, failed to convince the two groups to accept the negotiated results. They remain adamant that “anything about us, without us, is against us.”
Uncertain road ahead
The controversies that have bedevilled the process look set to continue.
Weeks after the declaration was announced the chiefs’ forums were addressed by ministers acting as special envoys to endorse the final package. It seems to have been taken for granted that the selected counterparts would not object or would not have the right to object to the agreed deal.
Next steps announced are also briefings to communities in the diaspora, mainly in Botswana and South Africa. Their inclusion is one of the few changes in the declaration. But it’s not clear how they are represented.
When the roadshow was announced, the Ovaherero and Nama traditional authorities of the Okandjoze Chiefs’ Assembly on Genocide reiterated their rejection. Not having been privy to the bilateral cooperation mechanism, they demanded a return to the drawing board.
After the roadshow, the foreign ministers will sign the agreement. Then it will be presented in the German Bundestag and the Namibian National Assembly for further consideration and ratification.
But on both counts there could be problems.
Following the criticism articulated in the Namibian National Assembly debate in late 2021, the Ovaherero Traditional Authority and the Nama Traditional Leaders Association submitted a lawsuit to the high court in early 2023. It seeks a judicial review to declare the declaration as unlawful in terms of Namibia’s constitution and in breach of a motion adopted by the National Assembly in 2006.
The court hearing has since been postponed.
Can the government ignore a pending case without disrespecting the rule of law?
On the German side, the government coalition has collapsed. New elections take place on 23 February 2025. Any implementation of the declaration depends on the German Bundestag endorsing its budget implications.
German policy might have other priorities. The declaration has never been supported by all parties. Notably the Liberal Democratic Party (FDP), which brought about the government’s downfall, avoids any reference to colonialism in its election manifesto.
A further wrinkle is that Germany is currently preparing an official apology for President Frank-Walter Steinmeier. Namibia will review it before it is finalised. If all goes to plan, the German president will then formally tender an apology to the affected communities. But at a location of their choice?
No end in sight
In a statement rejecting the new push towards closing the negotiations, the traditional leaders in the chiefs’ assembly of Okandjoze declared:
However long it may take, eventually the battle would have been won with a credible legacy for future generations, putting the spirits of our ancestors to a well-deserved eternal rest.
Reconciliation remains an uphill battle. As they seek to come to terms with the crimes perpetrated under German rule, Namibians still confront a lack of atonement for the past.
• Henning Melber is extraordinary professor, Department of Political Sciences, University of Pretoria.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article