INSLA
Despite cancelling a tour of Swaziland, DJ Black Coffee performed in Mbabane earlier this month.
Mbabane
The eleventh-hour withdrawal of one of SA’s most popular pop singers, Ringo Madlingozi, billed to appear in a concert in Swaziland recently, has revived a “cultural boycott” aimed at promoting democratic change in Africa’s last absolute monarchy.
The boycott, called by the Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN), drew some attention in mid-2011, but by the year’s end was ignored by several SA entertainers. Their appearances at local venues led political commentators to dismiss the boycott as a half-hearted effort.
South African DJ Black Coffee said when he cancelled a gig at Swaziland’s main arts festival last April: “We can’t be happy when Swazi people are suffering. We support the call to boycott the festival and I am not going.”
However, the DJ performed in Mbabane earlier this month.
Then the SSN announced that the amiable Ringo would not perform at Swaziland’s top entertainment venue, House on Fire in Malkerns, 20 minutes east of Mbabane. Despite heavy promotion and pre-sales of 400 tickets at R100 (which is significant for impoverished Swaziland), the singer pulled out the day before the concert.
In protest against the situation there, singer Ringo cancelled his performance in Swazilands moments before he was due to take the stage.
INLSA
One of the SSN’s chief allies is the Creative Workers’ Union of South Africa (Cwusa.) The union brought together Madlingozi’s management team and the SSN.
As for the fecklessness of Black Coffee and other South African DJs who have been showing up in Swaziland, the SSN was not amused.
“Their insensitivity and lack of political consciousness adds to the existing stereotype that kwaito and house musicians are generally shallow and feeble-minded,” the group said.
The cultural boycott is controversial in Swaziland, even among some pro-democracy advocates, who see it as an effort that cannot work. In its original call for international artists and tourists to bypass the Kingdom of Swaziland until King Mswati III and his royal family yield power to a democratic government, the SSN said the idea of a culture boycott “cannot work in isolation”. Such a boycott would have to be part of more substantial sanctions.
However, no government, international organisation or private individual has plans to mount an arms boycott, financial sanctions, travel restrictions for the royal family, trade sanctions or any other substantive measure that would pressurise the king into political reform.
Originally, the SSN presented a cultural boycott as the icing on a cake of sanctions, comparing it to the anti-apartheid cultural boycott of the 1980s that helped boost international awareness of apartheid. However, the anti-apartheid cultural boycott was a relatively minor part of a major international sanctions drive.
In Swaziland, a cultural boycott is all there is; a confection that is all icing and no cake. The boycott is also selectively applied. Big entertainment festivals like the Simunye Fun Fair in September and Bush Fire Festival of the Arts in May are targeted, as are individual South African artists when their Swaziland concerts are announced.
However, the country’s main cultural events produced by the royal family, such as the maidens’ Reed Dance or the Kingship Ceremony (Incwala), have been ignored. Tourism promotion in Swaziland is centred on these events. Swaziland’s game parks, hotels, amusement areas, tour bus operators, local tourist attractions and tourism companies – none have been affected by the cultural boycott, and none say that they have heard from the SSN.
The Times of Swaziland, the country’s only news organ not under the control of the royal family, opined in an editorial: “The organisers of the cultural boycott must know that the people they seek to disturb are not in any way affected by the boycott.”
Bongani Mamba, former vice-chairman of the Swaziland National Council of Arts and Culture, said: “This action is not directed at government but directed at the ordinary Swazi, unfortunately. The general populace are not the agents of the change we all need. The agents are known, and the culprits are known.”
The cultural boycott drew attention last year when the Bush Fire Festival had the misfortune of occurring five weeks after the April 12 uprising when pro-democracy activists were violently suppressed by government security forces.
The ANC Youth League got involved, and urged kwaito star Professor, a Sama award winner, to withdraw from a concert organised by King Mswati’s eldest son, Prince Lindani, at a large open-air venue in Manzini.
It was left to American rap artist Jadakiss, who apparently did not receive the ANC Youth League memo, to perform to a few dozen spectators. Kwaito singer L’Vovo, Metro FM DJ T-Bo Touch and Afrotainment’s DJ Tira also agreed to perform at the closing match of the Premier League of Swaziland and then pulled out to observe the boycott.
Caiphus Semenya was the biggest star to withdraw from the Bush Fire Festival, saying: “Every country has its own dynamics, but the Swazi people should be able to enjoy what we have here in Mzansi. We support the call to boycott the cultural festival. We also support the Swaziland Solidarity Network in their quest to bring democracy.”
Swaziland’s entertainment promoters say they are upset that they were not consulted by the SSN and other groups behind the cultural boycott.
The SSN responded that consultations were held over the years, not with private business interests whose profits they say would be affected but with groups spearheading democratic change in the country.
One SSN member asked: “Would the management of Sun City have supported the cultural boycott against apartheid in 1985?”
Opponents of the cultural boycott say it is a violation of human rights because it suppresses freedom of expression.
But it is an argument they do not make against the Swaziland government.
Launching the Bush Fire Festival this month, organisers said: “Although we acknowledge the importance of engaging the cultural community in the debates around Swaziland’s future, we strongly believe this is best achieved by welcoming artists with a range of voices and opinions to perform in the country. We uphold the right to freedom of expression by artists, wherever they are from.”
An SSN member who would not allow himself to be identified, because he said dissent was not allowed in Swaziland, asked: “What freedom of expression are they talking about? The freedom to express yourself in music, I guess.
“Do you know what would happen if someone took to the stage at Bush Fire to support the pro-democracy movement, or to give a shout out to the banned political parties, or to denounce Mswati the way they do in the South African press and other places in the world?
“That person would be immediately deported, unless he’s a Swazi. The Swazi would be jailed and tortured and his family would be evicted from their ancestral lands. House on Fire would be closed down.” – Mercury Foreign Service
