Consultative meeting for Peace in Angola, Kopanong Conference Centre, Gauteng 19 October 2001.

Summary of Proceedings

Mr. Matias Capapelo of Angola 2000, chaired the opening session of the Consultative Meeting for Peace in Angola and introduced the participants. Participants included representatives from various national and international NGO's as well as observers from the South African government and business communities as per the attached list.

The Chair indicated that the consultation had three objectives:

1. To obtain support for civil society initiatives in Angola;
2. To strengthen participatory processes in and for Angola;
3. To create an international solidarity campaign with the people of Angola since the plight of the Angolan people IS ignored by the international community and media at large;
4. And finally, to form an advisory council for Angola 2000.

Angola 2000 has got vision and strength but needs expertise and support from all like-minded organizations nationally, regionally and internationally.

Welcome

The Director of Angola 2000, John Rocha, thanked participants for their commitment and support to the Angolan people in general and to Angola 2000 in particular. He then proceeded to give a briefing on the Angola 2000 movement and its objectives. The imperative of young Angolan expatriates in South Africa and the continued plight of their peoples, family, relatives and friends in Angola led to the formation of Angola 2000 with a vision for a peaceful and prosperous future of Angola that needs to be realized. Angola 2000 does not have political affiliations but its main concern is the welfare of the people of Angola who carry the burden of the continued conflict in the country. Angola 2000 does not consider the people of Angola as mere statistics of humanitarian concern: they are living and feeling people who deserve the assistance of all to regain the right to their own future.

Angola 2000 has several objectives that include assisting civil society in Angola on four areas of work:

1. Peace education and conflict resolution;
2. Disarmament, demobilization, and de-mining;
3. Democratisation, human rights and governance; and
4. Development.

John Rocha indicated that the moment is ripe for civil society action in Angola: civil society has had enough of war in Angola and the window of opportunity is there for us to support and draw attention to the wishes of the Angolan people and create a general mobilization of international public opinion. Angola is not a forgotten cause; we must not allow it to be a forgotten cause; Angola is standing up and being counted and we, internationally, must do the same. John Rocha appealed to all participating organizations to the consultation to commit themselves to defend and support the people of Angola. The Conflict in Angola is not simply about the use of light weapons but is about massacres and human suffering which should not be tolerated anywhere in Africa or the world.

Session One: Civil Society Peace Initiatives and State of the Nation

Mrs. Hannelie de Beer from SaferAfrica and the Africa De-mining Institute was the first speaker. She referred to humanitarian statistics prevalent in Angola included infant mortality, population growth, and poverty where over 70% of the population in Angola are in abject poverty. Out of 12,4 M people, more than a quarter of it is a mass of displaced people. Why is the humanitarian situation so bad: the continuation of war over a protracted period of time is undoubtedly to blame for this and the deterioration of the security situation over the last two years. Both government and rebels are using the suffering of the people as part of their own campaigns and these are the principal victims of the ongoing war. Humanitarian agencies have difficulty in reaching all the needy in Angola and this is getting worse as forecasted for 2002. Both sides are equally guilty of planting mines, of forced recruitment, and of displacing people.

Equally both sides have been accused of banditry, pillaging and stopping freedom of movement and of speech in the areas that they control in the country. At humanitarian levels, there are really two culprits in Angola. A report from Oxfam was quoted in that the means might be available to make a difference for the people but the will to use it to that end and not for personal gain or warring purposes is not there. Figures that are available are only applicable to government held areas and not those in control of UNITA and this makes it more difficult still for any international assistance to be organized. A bad situation is just getting worse.

On the political side, there is talk of elections and that even that the president will not seek re-election but the elections keep getting postponed year by year. On the negotiations side, the hopes that were prevalent in April of 2001 are fading fast and the differences between the two sides are increasing. For real negotiations there is a need to talk of a cease fire but that is not a consideration at this point for either side. This leaves us only with one ray of hope: the emerging voIce of the Angolan civil society itself as it struggles to take charge of Its own future and stop its continued abuse.

Mr. Filomeno Vieira Lopes from the Angolan Peace Network (founder member) thanked Angola 2000 for the Invitation to attend the meeting. South Africa Is a very Important country In our region and a better understanding of the situation In Angola Is very Important for the stability of the SADC region and of Angola Itself. For this reason we did not hesitate to come from Angola to speak on behalf of peace in Angola here In South Africa.

He proceeded to give a brief historical background In relation to the Lusaka Protocol and Bicesse accord as well as the Intervention from the United Nations. He indicated that no matter what the international intervention was over the years in Angola, there was no Intervention by civil society nor was granted a role to play on behalf of their own peace process. The struggle by civil society to regain a foothold In the discussion of Its own future Is only now starting in Angola but It will prevail. With the entrance of civil society In the debate and In the hope of Influencing its own political and developmental processes, the situation is now ready to create the space and pressure needed for peace to prevail.

Mr. Vieira Lopes reflected that neither during the colonial era nor during the cold war, political parties allowed for the creation and sustainability of strong civil society voices In the determination of their futures. If we had to make analysis of Africa in the decolonisation era, we see that whenever a strong party assumed power there was also a very Important group that was equally prevented from taking part in this political process. There were many groups that did not feel part to the political situation prevailing at the time: this also happened In South Africa. We had and have the problem of lack of participatory processes in many countries In Africa such as Nigeria and DRC. How can we resolve the problem of the lack of cooperation, integration and participation In the democratisation and development processes of Africa. This situation was not just subject to the decolonisation era but also exploited In the Cold War era. Today, the autocracy of the belligerents and the procedures prevalent In the International community only give voice to those with power to manipulate the natural resources and the riches of the country.

Angola has never been a nation: we are different peoples. Until today we have never had one unique African direction in our country. We live like in the colonial period and there are many people who have never been represented under a single flag. This creates a great identity crisis. which has aggravated with the insertion of the one party system In Angola, which ultimately institutionalised the discrimination of groups of people. Finally, the unequal exploitation of the riches of Angola has also created a privatisation of the resources of Angola to the benefit of a tiny elite of people on both sides of the warring divide. In these conditions, civil society was repressed or had to be linked to one political line if it was supposed to exist. This clearly has not been conducive for normal social development.

Repression, the police system and the continued action of rebel movements generated on the whole a repression of the mind where civil society did not have a norm that would allow it to prosper and develop. Civil society had no voice and had no hope of having a voice. In the post cold war of the last ten years, the human rights violations and the repression of the emerging civil society grew in character as the International community became more and more disinterested in supporting the rise of the voice of the people of Angola.

Mr. Viera Lopes discussed the lack of separation of powers In the government structures of Angola, which makes It very difficult to defend the fundamental human, and citizen rights of the Angolan people. Peace and democracy are interlinked. It is Impossible to set up a nation consisting of different grouping of people without guaranteeing the rights and protection of those peoples to be able to pull together towards a common future.

We have to promote a common guarantee to all peoples but promote one single citizenship. The lack of democracy has an impact on the peace process because there cannot be a real criticism to the conduct of war. The war also creates a pretext against the rise of democracy since the excuse is that with war all democratic rights are suspended. For this reason Civil Society in Angola has an important role to play In both the promotion of democracy and of peace in Angola.

The main victims of the Angolan conflicts are Angolan citizens and 90% of casualties are Indeed civilian. Poverty is also particularly attached to the common people versus tiny elites. This in turn is eroding few remnants still left In the population of the social, cultural and traditional structures and values of the Angolan peoples. If we take a look at the economic development in Angola, we also reach the conclusion that no unified economic institutions can prevail with the existing situation.

Civil Society since 1990, with the introduction of the Angolan Civic Association, began to speak openly for the need for peace in Angola through other means other than war. AT the time when the first movements emerged, Angola was still under the one party system. This did not allow for the young organizations to prosper and multiply. In 1992, the Bicesse Accords left civil society participation out of the Angolan peace process. In this context the electoral process was given more priority than peace itself: the electoral campaign therefore paradoxically ended up promoting the continuation of conflict.

People develop defence mechanisms in times as these and some left the country, others joined up in different groupings to support each other, the churches started to discuss about the need to generate common actions leading to change. Churches, themselves, had also been divided according to party lines but the establishment of the Inter-denominational Committee for Peace In Angola (COIEPA) seeks to bring all like-minded organizations and movements together.

COIEPA brings together all Ideologies and church movements behind the single Integrated objective of achieving peace and democracy In Angola. Only In 1999 the civil society, with the assistance of these movements, began to have a voice In relation to their own future and the demand for peace in the country. Civil society was harassed as of that date. Peace manifestos that joined many different peoples: churches, workers, even government officials and political parties joined their voices behind a single goal.

Since then the peace movement In Angola started to gain a new momentum and a strategy was developed which foresaw that the integration of all citizens was needed to secure peace. The first event that had a big impact was the Pro-pace Congress, which was transmitted by radio and other means to the population directly. It became very clear in terms of national perspective that the majority of the people want peace. It also became clear that national reconciliation is a very important tool to bring about peace In Angola. People want an inclusive process so as to guarantee success.

A second open debate occurred In 2000 where the consequences of war to the Angolan people and therefore the latter had to react to regain a voice for peace. Several church, women and other movements emerged and met in conference and workshops. These new and old groups came together and decided to form the Peace Network of Angola. The group launched the cease fire campaign for Angola on 22 September of 2001. This campaign will not be stopped until a cease fire is obtained. Meanwhile the Network has three fundamental principles for action: a) to participate fully in the format of the peace process in Angola; b) participate fully in the management of the peace process of Angola; and c) to monitor the peace process In Angola. These three principles have become the main objectives of the Peace Network of Angola while their Campaign for Cease fire is taking place. The network also presents itself not only as a pressure group for peace but also as facilitator between the parties to achieve cease fire and peace and to draw attention on the need to promote civil society .

COIEPA is assuming this role and at this time they have good contacts with the two parties in conflict, with the citizens of Angola and with the international community. We understand, accept and welcome the role of Angolan communities living abroad, particularly in relation to Angola 2000 who Is a member of this peace network although it is not resident in Angola. The Angolan community inside and outside Angola has a mission to generate public awareness and establish lines of communication between Angola and the international community and its peoples at large.

We have to have the capacity to promote these objectives and we need your support to ensure that capacity so that civil societies across borders can assist each other and support each other on behalf of the people of Angola and the emergence of strong civil society in the country.

Discussion

The chairman led the discussion by creating a summary of the facts expressed in the two presentations focusing on the problem of power sharing In the peace process through support and strengthening of civil society and through international solidarity to that end.

What happened In 1999 to cause the strong emergence of civil society? Nothing specific but a realization that society had suffered war for a very long time but had no courage to declare openly that peace should not be brought about by continued war. The resumption of war in 1998 created a very serious social situation In Angola, which also drew attention to the fact that war Is not the manner to resolve the long-standing conflict in the country.

The humanitarian impact of the resumption of all out war In 1998 did have an Influence on the decision of civil society to speak out. The public pronouncements in favour of peace by many different peoples and movements within Angola led to the awareness that the only hope for peace in Angola was the emergence of civil society as a voice in the peace process. The International Community, moreover, was not providing the leadership for peace so it was civil society that had to take the lead to resolve its own problems.

Power sharing in Angola Is not as big an issue as it is In the DRC? How does Angola manage the artificial constructs created by the manipulation of local resources by both local and external actors? There Is no doubt that the origins of the war in Angola are many and varied and can include the artificial manipulation of resources as well as the exploitation of social and ethnic contradictions. The leadership have a huge responsibility for the war of Angola, which has lasted 26 years. Through the process of this war new justifications began to emerge to justify the continuation of the war by the leadership.

In 1975 the main reason was the political Ideological problem; there was also a cold war factor Intervention in the Angolan conflict and therefore also expressed foreign interests in Angola; each liberation movement had an exclusive problem in relation to their vision of the Angolan problem which created compatibility in the exterior and interior motives for the continuation of the war. Once the cold war was over, the main motivators were economic and political for the government to retain control of resources and UNITA to also acquire economic bases. We have proof of private economic agreements between UNITA and the government for mutual economic profit for which the ultimate victims are the Angolan people and the future of the country.

There are local considerations in the use and possession of land de-facto and de-jure by occupiers to the land over many years In both sides of the Angolan divide. These local, national and international interests create the pressure to continue war and manipulate its evolution. But the war Is also manipulated by political and social constructs in Angola that do not wish to have a democratic distribution of Angolan resources to benefit the people, therefore democracy and not just peace Is also under constant attack.

From the side of ordinary people, in extreme poverty, it Is easy to militarise people as an alternative to survival. Therefore the war Is also a survival and employment tool that people with no means and in abject poverty cannot afford to Ignore.

The International community has now stronger economic Interests in Angola than ever before and this fact Is clouding their ability to see the need to support the Angolan people and their claims to their own future. In the first conferences of the united civil society movements in Angola as of 1999 the International community got upset at being reminded of its economic interests and the manner In which these are promoted over and above the Issue of ensuring democracy and peace for all the people of Angola through participatory processes.

COIEPA is trying to educate the international community in that a promotion of peace and democracy now, and to allow for power sharing In the peace process is strategically important for their own economic Interests. The priority given to economic Imperatives over people in Angola by the international community is difficult to attack because Angolan individuals and elites themselves are generating this impression of economic imperatives over democracy and peace.

Two other things that played a role in the change of civil society in Angola: knowledge and responsibility. The role of the IMF in the last few months was also of importance. In terms of transparency and responsibility, NGO's are looking carefully at the social responsibility of multinationals and special committees of the UN drew attention to the problem.

a. What are the percentages of people living in UNITA held areas
b. What context has the peace network with Unita, at what level and what was discussed.

The three million was an estimation of a UN report of 1999. It Is very difficult to say at this time Including the 3.1 displaced. It also depends on the actual movements of people every month.

All the public pronouncements of the peace movement have had an effect on the political structure of UNITA. UNITA started to respond to the queries placed by civil society. There have been letters between for example the Catholic Church and Savimbi and they are public exchange of correspondence. Other types of contacts are taking place with UNITA representatives abroad such as Samakuva and here the civil society group (the net) demanded the cease fire. UNITA said they understood but they demanded that there are political questions to be dealt with before cease fire and second the mechanism to monitor the cease fire. COIEPA Is discussing these questions with the government and with the UN representatives and the troika observers.

More questions

c. Which political Issues does UNITA want to discuss with the government before negotiations?
d. What is the grassroots support for the peace network and Its components?
e. What would the impact be of withdrawal of multinationals from Angola?
f. Does the policy of isolation of key people who did specific actions work in Angola?
g. How participatory are the constitutional discussions?
h. What does network do to enhance freedom of expression?

Peace network is composed of many organisations which do grassroots work, for example all the churches, Mass Movement, Peace Messengers. Peace network are also going to include organisations working on development, human rights, building schools, demining Peace network is still organising Itself and are now preparing for a mass march before the end of the year. Radio Ecclesia also carries many positive comments from the population about the network. When the network was launched, the venue could not accommodate all the people who wanted to attend.

Multinationals must develop a corporate responsibility in terms of how they act or get involved; they must take up social responsibIlity and they must take up an ethic responsibIlity (not promote corruption).

Also no supply or sell weapons to government. A lot of the revenue comes from the 011 Industry. Government stated they had $50 million available for social projects. Very poor people depend not on the government but on themselves or International organisations.

The constitutional debate Is manipulated by the government. There is yet no agreement if the opposition parties can participate as the government do not want them to participate, but the government need them, as the government do not have a two-thirds majority. Civil society had debates about it in Lubango and Cabinda and one is now prepared in Cuanza Sul, but the government did not participate. The war is complicating the debate.

UNITA raised the question of UNITA Renovada. In terms of the Lusaka Protocol Issues which must still be completed, It must be established who must fulfil it.

On the freedom of expression, there is an independent radio station and also newspapers. The public institutions are oriented remove the network's rights to freedom of speech and is used for propaganda.

Comments

Angola 2000 wants to focus on people of Angola. They do not want to distinguish between who did what, but concentrate on what was done. They want to galvanise the support for the population.

The meeting also received a message of support from Dr. Daniel Ntoni-Nzlnga, the Executive Secretary of the Inter-denominational Committee for Peace in Angola (COIEPA) in which he emphasized the need to strengthen the capacity of civil society by forging:

1. A strong sense of unity among Angolans in general and within the civic movement in particular.
2. Focus the debate on the conflict, causes rather than on Individual personalities and symptoms.
3. Developing mechanisms and strategies that should enable Angolan communities to combat all forms of violence.

He concluded by appealing to the civic movement In South Africa to join hands with their Angolan counterparts In developing mechanisms to end the war and assist Angolans In the reconstruction process.

Session 2: Cooperative support to the Angolan Democratisation process through civil society - focus on capacity building

Proposals

Conference on governance and democratisation for SADC - maybe a coalition to organise it or SaferAfrica. Angola 2000 international solidarity campaign - maybe a solidarity month - how can we show solidarity without compromising other activities - look at role of business. Capacity building and skills building - do we support Angola 2000 in it - can we ask our organisations to give one place on training courses for them?

Session 3: Civil Society in Democratisation Processes - Paper by Ivor Jenkins

Critical partnership is important, not opposition to government. Role with civil society Is to make sure that It Is strong, and so the government - strong democracy needs a strong, well-organised, effective government and a strong, well-organised, vibrant civil society. A long-term vision is needed.

Question:

What was the role of civil society in the negotiations in SA?- NGO's were the glue between the two sides. It created opportunities for members of the two sides to meet and communicate and also carried messages between the sides. NGO's were also the resources of information for the sides, outside of the negations as back-ups. After negations, NGO's became the facilitators of capacity - training schools for the government. NGO's became significant independent voices to both sides during and after negations - critical and supporters, not trusted but needed.

Question:

Advice to civil society in Angola. His Impression was a lack of civic Involvement In Angola, It seems that people just want to survive - advice is to regenerate civic energy through small projects and Initiatives, dialogue must be stimulated.

CCR did a study of needs of peace building organisations In organisations south of the Sahara and according to It, organisational development was the biggest need. It is also a need of Angola 2000- they have approached IDASA for training on it.

Questions:

Characteristics of the relationship between SA gov and civil society? Overall, SA government does not have an unanimous position on NGO's, but is very positive and there are no restrictions overtly on NGO's.

How do SA NGO's raise funding? There is no business spirit of giving to institutions. Funding Is dominated by foreign aid, probably up 80%. The 20% Is made up by gov tenders. Membership is not common In SA. There is movement of funding to NGO's.

Comments.

The environment In Angola differs with SA: There Is no model for NGO's In Angola. There Is no judicial system with the necessary capacity. Angola Government Is hostile towards civil society on certain issues and sees them as a threat. It Is very difficult to register a civil society organisation and expensive. There is no support to civil society. Angola government want a partnership with civil society In terms emergencies and building schools - thus to use them as an Instrument. The civil society is weak In terms of advocacy and developing a vision for civil society as It maybe In direct contrast to the alms of the Angola Government.

Role of Angola 2000:

• Source of communication between outside and inside NGO's.
• Capacity building to enable future training.
• Act as secretariat for this process.
• Through partnerships, act as resource centre.

Angolan Civil Society has developed a general plan of action which Identified the following needs:

International solidarity campaign:

• Form advisory board (Angola 2000 could approach people).
• Bring on board organisations and key people (Angola 2000 must activate sub committees).
• Need action In host country of NGO's, support to Angolan NGO's, study International Influence on Angola.

Month of solidarity with Angola

• The month must be decided by Angola 2000, Peace Network and COIEPA

Way forward:

• The peace network code of conduct (common values) will be translated and emailed to everybody for discussion.
• Report will be distributed to all.
• Sub-committees must activate on each need.
• Send email addresses of attendants to Oxfam and they will send its report on Angola to everybody.

Participants

Physical address: Travessa Engracia Fragoso · Prédio nº22 · 1º Andar, Apartamento nº 1 · Ingombota-Luanda
Tel: 244- 222 39 98 47 Fax: 244-222 33 82 76