When I see His Excellency President Joseph Boakai sitting alongside Former Presidents Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Sahle-Work Zewde of Ethiopia, Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria, and Madame Bineta Diop of Senegal, I can’t help but think of history. My husband, Former President Hage Geingob, carried a Liberian passport during Namibia’s pre-independence. He also had Senegalese and Sierra Leonian passports. Why? Because he was exiled as a refugee while fighting for the freedom of Namibians, and the people I see in the front row are all from countries that all showed solidarity with the plight of Namibians.
As much as we believe that the world is experiencing unprecedented times, historians may beg to differ. History provides parallels and lessons to draw from any period of time. The same is true of gender equality. When considering overcoming the barriers preventing gender parity and the unprecedented pushback, it may be opportune to reflect on lessons from history.
A historical parallel I would like to draw from is Namibia’s liberation from racist South Africa, which imposed apartheid in Namibia. President Obasanjo will recall how Nigeria funded liberation
movements, including SWAPO, the first liberation movement to open an office in Nigeria and how
Namibian children were hosted in Nigerian schools and homes.
When I see the former President of Ethiopia and the former and incumbent Presidents of Liberia, I
reflect on the Second Conference of Independent African States held in Addis Ababa in June 1960,
where Ethiopia and Liberia announced that they intended to institute legal proceedings at the
International Court of Justice against South Africa over their illegal occupation of Namibia.
Predictably, South Africa opposed the application, and one of their arguments was that “apartheid
was a necessity to prevent bloodshed …and that African reality demanded that the white bearers of
civilisation treat the natives as their wards and to protect them against exploitation by not allowing
them to own their land and give them the benefit of modern government without the burden, of direct political representation.” In those days, the racism was overt. They said what they felt in their hearts loudly. Imperialism and the racism that fuels it never went away; it just became a little more covert.
Changing societal norms and discourse around human rights didn’t eliminate it; it just required it to be a bit less obvious and quieter. Of late, we are seeing the re-emergence of the loud and overt racism and imperialistic urges of the past.
I digress. In 1966, the International Court threw out the case brought to it by Liberia and Ethiopia,
claiming they lacked the “locus standi,” the right or jurisdiction to bring the case to the court. Many
commentators remain convinced that it was not about jurisdiction as the court claimed; it was about the composition of the judges, their mindsets, and their protection of the geopolitical views of their respective countries. The judgement was delivered on 18 July 1966, the same day SWAPO, the largest liberation movement in Namibia at the time, and current governing party, released a statement saying
that the court’s adverse decision relieved Namibians from any illusion of assistance from internationalinstitutions. Two months later, on 26 August 1966, Swapo launched its armed struggle for the liberation of Namibia.
I tell these stories partly as a reminder to younger generations that our past is intertwined and that
any fight for any liberty relies on institutions. However, like the International Court of Justice of 1966, people run institutions, and the entrenched mindsets of those institutions can deliver unjust
outcomes.
The second reason I tell this story is to connect the past to the present. Namibia was the last of the African colonies. Like all African countries that suffered colonisation or war, we now enjoy political freedom. However, as all post-conflict societies understand, war and oppression have deep-rooted consequences which span generations. We continue to grapple with structural socio-economic challenges like poverty, unemployment, corruption, gender-based violence, conflict, substance abuse, and social sector deficits.
What lessons can the proponents of gender equality draw from liberation struggles against
oppression? Women are beaten, killed, raped, denied economic progression and are expected to
perform unpaid labour by virtue of their gender, so yes, I do regard gender inequality as a form of
oppression.
President Boakai, please permit me to draw the lessons I see:
The first lesson: Apartheid was known for its racism. Few realise that apartheid was as racist as it was misogynistic – while its primary target was black people, who it regarded as inferior, it also discriminated against white women who, for instance, were allowed to study at university but weren’t welcome in the workplace. The misnomer is that white women supported apartheid even though apartheid didn’t fully support them.
This lesson is for us Africans, male and female, that we have to rebuild the socio-economic fabric of our societies, and we can’t afford to be divided on the fault lines of ethnicity or gender because when we do this, the joke is on us. In addition to participating in the subjugation of others in systems that also seek to oppress you, gender inequality also reduces our chances of putting our best brains to our most complex problems.
The second lesson: Nobody is coming to save us. Liberia, Ethiopia, and many friendly countries tried
to help Namibia, but the hearts and minds of international institutions were made of stone.
Fundamentally, the judges in the International Court of Justice of the time did not believe that black people could govern themselves. While we can change laws, it takes longer to change mindsets. This is true for gender equality – more work needs to change mindsets, and allies, particularly male allies, are critical. The irony is that the gains made are insufficient to achieve parity, and there is strong pushback to reverse gains. Just like racism has become loud again, so has misogyny. We must engage in continuous dialogue within our societies to ensure our mindsets are aligned with our aspirations of
freedom, justice and equality.
The third lesson: It’s a fact that structural inequalities in many post-colonial societies are inextricably linked to their past. However, we must admit that the citizens of these countries, particularly the youth, have become impatient. They are not interested in the complexities of the past; they are upset about the present. It’s the same with gender equality. There are young women articulating frustration with an older generation of women who they feel have become protectors of the status quo and position themselves as senior and, therefore, more deserving of inclusion. The intergenerational
solidarity we saw in liberation movements is the answer. Women are not a homogenous group, and we must recognise that achieving gender equality needs to be representative and feature women in their variety.
The fourth lesson: Politics decides who gets what when so political representation of women is key.
As Kwame Nkrumah said, “Seek ye first the political kingdom and all else follows.” He was right – politics first. We also recognise that political freedom is meaningless without economic freedom, as socioeconomic realities can potentially undermine political freedom. If women aren’t involved in the economy and cannot build wealth, who will fund the campaigns of female politicians? How will women win elections if the funding of campaigns primarily comes from wealthy men who may have a bias for male candidates? How will women gain the support of traditional leaders and other powerful interlocutors if these roles are primarily men? While we acknowledge and appreciate male allies, we
can cross reference lesson two of implicit bias to appreciate why we need women’s political, social
and economic capital to grow. Representation of women at all levels matters.
The fifth lesson is a reminder of the South African court filing that claimed apartheid was for the
benefit of black people in Namibia as they were essentially unable to govern themselves due to the intellectual limitations of being black. This was their message to the world, and they reinforced this message in their laws, education system and every interaction. At times, some black people suffer from an inferiority complex due to internalising the racist rhetoric imposed on them. This is similar to some women who believe in and perpetuate patriarchal mindsets. We must believe in ourselves.
The danger is back. You no longer need to listen to the whispers of racist and misogynistic rhetoric. It has dialled up, and we can hear it clearly; the danger is that some among us may believe it. And those who can’t hear it should be able to see it because all you need to do is look at the data. All you need to do is look at the data. The statistics are loudly shouting that the political representation of women is slow, and it will take more than 100 years to reach parity.
The sixth lesson was that Namibian freedom fighters fought on political, military and diplomatic fronts. Ultimately, Namibia gained her independence through political solutions. For gender equality, war is not an option, so adequate political representation becomes key to bringing political solutions to scale.
An example would be how the political representation of Namibian women in parliament leapt from 27% to 43% in 2014. The ruling party, which at the time dominated parliament, decided to implement a 50/50 zebra-style list for its primaries. When it won the national elections, it brought with it a party parliamentary list that was 50% women, and overnight, it changed the face of parliament. Namibia now boasts 50% representation of women in the national assembly. No law was changed, and no
legal redress was sought. The change happened through the power of political solutions.
It is history that brought us to this Women’s Day event in Monrovia. Many of us came from afar to
celebrate Liberia and Liberians for having elected a female President. We came to celebrate the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Center and its founder, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. As the first democratically elected head of state on the African continent, President Johnson Sirleaf is no longer an individual; she is an institution. We are committed to telling her story because in telling her story, we tell the story of possibility for all women. Thank you, Your Excellency, for trusting the Centre Board of Directors with your consequential legacy. It is an honour to serve you as Centre Chairperson and, through you, the progression of African women.
Speaking of democratically elected female Presidents, Namibia will inaugurate the continent’s second elected female President on the African continent two weeks from now! Our soon-to-be inaugurated Namibian President and current Vice-President, Her Excellency Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, shares a common characteristic with President Johnson Sirleaf: she was not elected because she was a woman.
President-Elect Nandi-Ndaitwah won the national elections with a higher margin than the political
party she represented.
It is through Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah that I will offer my last lesson. A young Netumbo was one of many female freedom fighters. In as much as women played crucial roles in liberation movements across the continent, it was primarily men who were appointed into post-independent positions.
These women soon realised that power does not concede without a demand, and establishing
women’s leagues became a feature. In Namibia, women pushed for implementing the 50/50 quota,
which was not a popular policy. While giving credit to former President Hifikepunye Pohamba for presiding over the congress that passed the decision, the truth is that women had to self-advocate or risk being left behind.
This lesson from the past has present application. Many young people across the continent have
grown impatient with youth unemployment and the slow pace of socio-economic and political reform.
We see many youth-led protests where young women stand shoulder-to-shoulder with their male
counterparts during the protests. However, when it comes to the hastily arranged meetings to hash
out political solutions at State Houses, somehow, we see the dominance of young men. I advise young women not to be left behind on the battlefield. As the protests included you, don’t be excluded from the negotiations.
We now live in a world where big powers have become tired of hiding how they feel. Some have
started saying the quiet parts out loud. Those of us who understand how oppression looks and feels are not surprised at what is now being said out loud – we are just surprised that there are sub-
categories of the oppressed who never realised that the abyss seeks to swallow whoever doesn’t
resemble its likeness. As global funding is withdrawn, many who did not think they would be affected are indeed affected. What we know for sure is that oppressive mindsets are hungry beasts that will eventually eat whatever does not look like it. This message is for those who understand oppression but don’t understand why gender equality is important. You are always stronger and safer in an equal society that does not lay the blame for its weaknesses on “others”. We are the “others” and should never participate in othering.
In many ways, the world’s current situation is a blessing. It reminds us that the pushback against
gender equality is real and that the gains made are fragile. To consolidate and accelerate gains, we need to work harder, smarter, and in unison.
These lessons define what the Centre stands for. We support the advancement of all women at all
levels, particularly the intergenerational and inclusive political representation of women. The right woman in the right position can be catalytical. The Centre strives to help derisk difficult leadership journeys to ensure transformative leaders are developed. I want to use this opportunity to recognise the Centre’s talented Amujae leaders who remind us daily of the immense value of a learning network.
The intergenerational transfer of knowledge that defines Amujae’s philosophy provides valuable
instruction. Through these types of programs, we want to see more President Sirleafs, Suluhus, Nandi-Ndaitwahs, and Zewdes. We want to understand their journeys, celebrate their successes, and use their lessons to develop female leadership.
Gender parity drives economic growth. We know that failing to address gender parity results in
significant economic losses. The African Development Bank (AfDB) estimates that gender inequality costs Africa $95 billion annually in lost productivity. Put differently, the lack of gender parity makes us all poorer. Supporting women’s leadership is not charity; it is an investment in governance, economic growth, and regional stability. This is why we at the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Presidential Centre are determined to expand our reach to impact more women across Africa. Let us learn from history, lest we repeat its mistakes. Let us be like Liberia and Ethiopia, which chose to stand on the right side of
history. Let us also be on the right side of history regarding support for gender parity. The future of
female leadership will be determined by what we do now about women’s political representation.
***
Monica Geingos is the former First Lady of the Republic of Namibia and is currently the Chairperson of the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Presidential Centre. She gave this speech on 8 March on the occasion of the fifth-year celebrations of the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Presidential Centre…