Enlarge image
Herero prisoners in what was then German South-West Africa (around 1904): "Every Herero is shot within the German border"
Photo: INTERFOTO
It is not exactly images that come to mind on the subject of reconciliation.
Hundreds of demonstrators in the Namibian capital Windhoek climb over the fence in front of the parliament and storm the grounds at the end of September.
They are protesting against an agreement that is actually supposed to bring about peace.
Not only in front of, but also in the House of Representatives, there is currently a heated argument about the "Joint Declaration" between Germany and Namibia.
The declaration should have been adopted months ago, but the debate in Parliament is still going on.
This was due to a devastating corona wave from May to July - and the heated tempers in Namibia.
It remains to be seen whether the agreement will ever be signed.
“Every Herero within the German border is shot with or without a rifle, with or without cattle.
I no longer take in women and children, drive them back to their people or have them shot at. ”Lieutenant General Lothar von Trotha, commander of the German colonial troops in Namibia, gave this order in October 1904.
The only option for the defeated and expelled Herero was to flee to the arid Omaheke steppe.
Thousands died of thirst in agony.
The events from 1904 are now recognized by the federal government as genocide.
But how do you deal with this genocide?
After years of negotiations, the parties believed they had found a compromise: a reconciliation agreement that avoids the term compensation and instead provides for financial support amounting to 1.1 billion euros over a period of 30 years.
It is also planned that a German government representative will officially apologize in Namibia.
Former CDU general secretary Ruprecht Polenz saw the struggle for German-Namibian reconciliation first hand, he was the negotiator on the German side.
In the interview he reports on the tough struggle to find a solution, possible compromises and hostility that hurts.
SPIEGEL:
Mr. Polenz, can the agreement still be saved?
Ruprecht Polenz:
I perceive the critical voices.
But I also see others who are now advising to embark on a reconciliation process on the basis of this Joint Declaration.
I think that right now there is simply no other option than to wait and see how the debates in parliament will continue and how the Namibian government will then act.
SPIEGEL:
There are calls for more money from all sides, including from representatives of the Namibian government.
Is there a way around such renegotiations?
Polenz:
We negotiated for more than five years. I can well remember the negotiations in Berlin. It has often been interrupted because the Namibian delegation tried to get in touch with government officials in Windhoek every day. So the Namibian government has basically agreed and the negotiations are thus initially concluded. But we are always in talks with Namibia, if only because of the ongoing development aid, which is paid independently of the Joint Declaration. There are certainly also talks about the implementation of the declaration. But if you say you are not satisfied with the amounts, the German side would like to know what the expectations are. What I've read goes up to 170 billion euros. I don't think a new government would agree to it either.My impression is that there are groups at Herero and Nama who have a really unrealistically high idea of what Germany could be prepared to do here.
SPIEGEL:
But that means that it is not impossible that the sum will be discussed again?
Polenz:
The negotiations are over.
There is no intention of reopening this text now.
I think that can be ruled out.
In the text there are some passages with the total and that both sides assume that they have finally settled the financial questions.
SPIEGEL:
Do you
think
that this is how the agreement will pass through the Namibian parliament?
Polenz:
I don't know.
SPIEGEL:
You also discussed bringing forward the payouts.
Polenz:
Some have said: If we strictly divide the agreed 1.1 billion euros by 30 years, it won't be that much money in one year.
And then I said: there is definitely the possibility of using more of this billion at the beginning, and perhaps a little less later.
SPIEGEL
: One of the loudest critics of the agreement, Herero chief Vekuii Rukoro, has since died of Covid-19.
DER SPIEGEL spoke to him a few days before his death in Windhoek.
In the interview he raged against the agreement and even accused you of a "racist attitude" personally.
Does it hurt to hear something like this?
Polenz:
I'm sorry.
If he were still alive, I would ask why he comes to this very absurd view.
But unfortunately I can no longer ask him.
SPIEGEL:
Many Herero are accused of negotiating not directly with the affected groups, but between the governments.
Was that a mistake?
Polenz
No.
There is no generally legitimate representation of Herero and Nama.
There are many different groups with very different interests.
So it could only be government negotiations.
The Namibian government attaches great importance to speaking for all Namibians.
Of course, the Namibian government has also seen that the issues it is negotiating with us concern the Herero and Nama in a special way.
That's why she made a Herero negotiator.
There were several Herero and Nama representatives at the table in every negotiation round.
Those who were not included at the negotiating table by the Namibian government then complained.
SPIEGEL:
It is also criticized that the agreed funds are not called “reparations”.
Polenz:
That can be. But there were good reasons not to call it that. Because the international law convention of 1949 only applies to genocides that have been or are being committed since then. This does not apply retrospectively. It is therefore not legally applicable to the case we have been negotiating. Now, from the fact that it is not a legal issue, some have concluded that it is worth less. And that determines the debate in Namibia and the criticism. I would disagree with that. Morality is no less than right. And that's why I think it's absolutely right to talk about a political and moral obligation, especially when it comes to asking for an apology. What is an apology worth if convicted by a court of law?
SPIEGEL:
But couldn't the payments still have been called compensation if the word meant so much to those affected?
Polenz:
The experts from the international law department have repeatedly said: We must and should avoid any legal term.
So as not to let any misunderstandings arise here.
And that's how we ultimately formulated the declaration.
SPIEGEL:
The agreement would not be binding under international law.
What can the Namibian side do in the event that payments should stall at some point?
Could she complain?
Polenz:
The federal government gives its word and it will stand by it.
And the Namibian government knows that too.
The agreement will be implemented in individual contracts that can be relied on.
There is absolutely no reason to have any doubt about this.
SPIEGEL:
The core problem in Namibia is still the land conflict.
In the course of the genocide, the Nama and Herero were expelled from their land across the board.
It is largely owned by white farmers to this day.
How can this injustice be redressed?
Polenz:
The Namibian constitution guaranteed private property and deliberately chose a different path than, for example, Zimbabwe, where the country was practically expropriated with independence.
I think that Namibia has basically done well with this decision.
The white Namibians also contribute greatly to the country's economic development.
A process of expropriation, as one or the other might have in mind, would rather generate new injustice.
SPIEGEL
: You yourself accompanied the negotiations for years.
How big is your frustration that the topic has not yet been concluded?
Polenz:
I'm not frustrated at all.
It is extremely difficult, after more than 100 years, to negotiate how to deal with a past that on the one hand dates back so long and on the other hand its consequences are still visible today.
The approach we followed was to ask: What can we do to improve the life chances of the Namibian Herero and Nama living today.
I am of course concerned that it will take a long time to implement the agreement.
This contribution is part of the Global Society project
Expand areaWhat is the Global Society project?
Reporters from
Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe
report under the title “Global Society”
- on injustices in a globalized world, socio-political challenges and sustainable development.
The reports, analyzes, photo series, videos and podcasts appear in the international section of SPIEGEL.
The project is long-term and will be supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) for three years.
A detailed FAQ with questions and answers about the project can be found here.
AreaWhat does the funding look like in concrete terms?
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) is supporting the project for three years with a total of around 2.3 million euros.
Are the journalistic content independent of the foundation?
Yes.
The editorial content is created without the influence of the Gates Foundation.
Do other media have similar projects?
Yes.
Big European media like "The Guardian" and "El País" have set up similar sections on their news sites with "Global Development" and "Planeta Futuro" with the support of the Gates Foundation.
Have there already been similar projects at SPIEGEL?
In the past few years, SPIEGEL has already implemented two projects with the European Journalism Center (EJC) and the support of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation: the “Expedition ÜberMorgen” on global sustainability goals and the journalistic refugee project “The New Arrivals” as part of this several award-winning multimedia reports on the topics of migration and flight have been produced.
Where can I find all publications on global society?
The pieces can be found at SPIEGEL on the topic Global Society.
