Nzongola-Ntalaja (1987)
The Second Independence Movement in Congo-Kinshasa
Overview of the Second Independence Movement
Time Frame: 1963-1968
Context: First major resistance against the post-colonial state in Africa.
Participants: Mass-based movement involving workers, peasants, urban unemployed youth, students, lower civil servants, and radical nationalist leaders.
Key Concept: Recognized as the ‘second independence movement’.
Purpose of Study: To analyze strengths and weaknesses of both the state and popular alliances in the context of neo-colonialism.
Research Background: Ongoing investigation started in 1969 about the national liberation struggle in Zaire (Congo-Kinshasa).
Defining ‘Second Independence’
Origin: Concept championed by ordinary people in the Kwilu region.
Meaning: For locals, independence was hollow without a better standard of living, increased civil liberties, and better futures for children.
Post-Colonial Context: Politicians from Belgian rule replaced colonial elites yet lived in greater luxury and wielded violence against their people.
Discontent: First independence was seen as a failure, fueling aspirations for a true independence—manifested in the 1964 uprisings.
Revolutionary Attempts
Control: Popular alliance managed to control nearly half of Zaire.
Leadership: Led by Lumumbsist politicians, representing class struggles against the neo-colonial ruling class and its foreign allies.
Scope of Struggle: The struggle was both social and national; anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist.
Defeat of the Movement
External Intervention: Key US-Belgian intervention on November 24, 1964, at Kisangani.
State Survival: The neo-colonial state could not endure without external military support, relying on mercenaries and foreign troops.
Weaknesses of Popular Alliance: Loss of strength due to:
Lack of revolutionary intellectuals in leadership (except for a few like Pierre Mulele).
Reliance on deceptive magico-religious beliefs and practices.
Ethno-regional factors affecting revolutionary politics.
Unpreparedness for prolonged military conflict against superior forces, including CIA-organized anti-Castro Cubans and mercenaries.
Analysis Structure
Part One: Examination of the rise of the popular alliance in Zaire due to the oppressive colonial system.
Part Two: Analysis of the second independence movement as a continuation of the struggle for liberation:
Transformation of the popular alliance post-decolonization.
Strengths of the movement versus the neo-colonial state.
Weaknesses in the face of external intervention.
The Rise of a Popular Alliance
Historical Roots: Emerged from anti-colonial struggle (1956-1960), uniting diverse social classes.
Colonial Impact: Belgian colonialism exemplified exploitation and repressive systems aimed at resource extraction for Belgium.
The Belgian Colonial System
Characteristics of Exploitation:
Wealth accumulation through repression.
Transition from King Leopold II to Belgian state governance (1908).
Existing colonial structure involved direct economic exploitation and local abuse.
Existing Conditions upon Belgian Administration:
Sparse populations of locals and a fragmentary customary society.
A legacy of violence and exploitation inherited from the Free State regime.
Colonial Legacies
Economic Systems:
Direct exploitation was standard; enforcement through violence continued under colonial administration.
Cultural Impact: Minimal changes to African cultures under colonial rule; traditional societies remained largely intact but battered by colonial activities.
Economic Transformations under Colonialism
Emergent Classes:
Proletariat: Workers class formed under colonial capitalism.
Petit-Bourgeois Class: Employees and small entrepreneurs engaged in colonial economy.
Lumpenproletariat: Unemployed urban masses developing informal economies.
Economic Inequality: Vast economic disparities existed between European settlers and indigenous populations.
In 1956, estimated income per capita was:
$377 in total national income.
$41 for Africans.
$29 for rural population, emphasizing severe economic inequality.
Alliance Formation and Leadership
Educated Elite: Leadership primarily from petits-bourgeois classes with limited formal education.
Role of Évolués: More educated members linked aspirations of the masses to the fight for independence, despite their limited formal education.
Roots of Anti-Colonial Alliance: Conflicting perspectives regarding the educated elite's role vs. the masses' participation in anti-colonial struggle.
Thomas Hodgkin and Frantz Fanon's perspectives on mass understanding and nationalism.
Mobutu’s Regime and Political Dynamics
Crisis of Post-Colonial State: Post-independence discontent due to unmet expectations; betrayal felt by masses against newly replaced local elites.
Counter-Revolutionary Dynamics: Establishment of cooperation between moderate leadership and imperialist forces following Lumumba's assassination; consolidation against radical forces resulted in the birth of a new ruling class.
Internal Conflicts: Led to a split in national maneuvers and control, causing shifts in power dynamics leading to radical failures.
The Nature and Impact of the Second Independence Movement
Inception: The second independence movement aimed to reconstitute the popular alliance to fight against the neo-colonial state while seeking genuine liberation, leading to the organized opposition against the new ruling elite.
Key Leaders: Figures like Pierre Mulele represented the transformation and radicalization of popular discontent towards sustained revolutionary endeavor against neo-colonial political structures.
Challenges Faced: The movement faced military superior enemies alongside the loss of grassroots support due to fragmentation and mismanagement by leadership.
Conclusion
Reflection on Revolutionary Lessons: Addressing the shortcomings exhibited by popular alliances, such as poor leadership and the fragmentation of revolutionary movements, serve as critical future points of consideration for ongoing political mobilization efforts in the Congo and similar regions.
Call to Action: The need for genuine, mass-based socio-political movements to continue striving towards authentic liberation as envisaged during the original anti-colonial efforts in Zaire.
The key takeaways from the Second Independence Movement in Congo-Kinshasa (1963-1968) include:
Concept of 'Second Independence': This grassroots movement emerged because the first independence in 1960 was viewed as a failure. The local politicians who replaced Belgian colonialists were seen as a new elite who lived in luxury and used violence against their own people, failing to improve the basic standard of living.
Broad Social Base: The movement was a popular alliance that included peasants, workers, urban unemployed youth (lumpenproletariat), students, and radical nationalist leaders, making it one of the first major mass-based resistances against a post-colonial state in Africa.
Revolutionary Scale: At its peak, the alliance controlled nearly half of the country, challenging the neo-colonial state through both social and national liberation struggles.
Economic Grievances: The rebellion was fueled by massive inequality. For example, in 1956, the average income for rural Africans was only 29 compared to a total national per capita income of 377.
Reasons for Defeat: The movement was suppressed due to a combination of external and internal factors:
External Military Support: The neo-colonial state survived through intervention by the United States and Belgium, including the use of CIA-organized mercenaries and foreign troops (notably in Kisangani on November 24, 1964).
Internal Weaknesses: The movement lacked a core of revolutionary intellectuals, became bogged down by ethno-regional divisions, and relied on magico-religious beliefs which were ineffective against modern weaponry.
Pierre Mulele: Mulele stands out as a key radical leader who attempted to transform spontaneous popular discontent into a structured revolutionary movement.