It begins with this quotation;
“We will never recognize or accept this claim: we will never agree to the aggression or proposal. The lake has always belonged to Malawi…Everyone new Nyer
ere as a coward and communist inspired jellyfish: We know while pretending to be a staunch supporter of the OAU, Nyerere is the worst agitator and betrayer of the cause for which the organization was formulated. History, geography or even ethnical knowledge will convince Nyerere that four districts to the south of Tanganyika belong to us by nature. It is only that we respect the feasible unification of mother Africa that we do not claim these districts. All that we are doing is setting historical truth.”
That is the statement of the then Malawi president Hasting Kamuzu Banda as a response to the claim by Tanzania on part of Lake Malawi.(FS Msafiri 5). In essence I do agree with the position that on the border line between Tanzania and Malawi, the lake is on the side of Malawi and not shared by both countries. However, I distance myself from the strong language used by the former president which is not quite diplomatic and Nyerere is one of a few African leaders I admire. My view is that the Tanzanian claim is based on wrong understanding of the origin of the boundaries between the two countries.
The main basis of argument by Tanzanians is that some of the old maps, for instance the 1937 map showing the British East Africa rail line depicts the border line between the two countries on the middle of the lake.( Msafiri). Additionally, they recognize that the origin of the boarders is the Anglo-German Treaty of 1890 also referred to as Helgoland-Zanzibar Treaty. This is an agreement reached between the British and the Germans which resulted in creating the boundaries of what constitutes Tanzania today.
The starting point is that the position of Tanzania is self defeating and unattainable. The treaty they are relying on did not create the boundary in the middle of the lake but on the shores of the east and northern side of the lake. The relevant provision of the treaty creating the boundaries of Tanzania, then Germany East Africa, Article 1 clause 2 states;
‘To the south by the line that starts on the coast of the northern border of Mozambique Province and follows the course of the Ruvuma River to the point where the Messinge flows into the Ruvuma. From there the line runs westwards on the parallel of latitude to the shore of Lake Nyasa. Turning north, it continues along the eastern, northern and western shores of the lake until it reaches the northern bank of the mouth of Songwe River…….”
The key word here is the shore. The treaty clearly provides that border runs to the shore and runs upwards towards the north along the shore. Now everyone knows that the meaning of the word shore in English is the line between land and water of water bodies such as lakes, sea and ocean. What the treaty is providing is not a border in the middle of the lake, but in the shores of the lake on the Tanzanian side. If the origins of the Tanzania national boundaries are from this treaty, where is the claim for part of the lake coming from? That is a mistaken belief in my view.
On the issue of the map, that is not an authority of which part belongs where. A map is just an attempt to depict what is on the ground and the same can be mistaken. The main basis of the boundary is the treaty not the map. I have difficulties in understang the inability of the Tanzanian claimers to see this simple fact. My considered view: Lake Malawi has never been a part of Tanzania and is not.
References
• Msafiri FS Post Graduate Thesis 2011http://edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/theses/2011/June/11Jun_Msafiri.pdf
• The Anglo-German Treaty 1890. http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/606_Anglo-German%20Treaty_110.pdf
That is the statement of the then Malawi president Hasting Kamuzu Banda as a response to the claim by Tanzania on part of Lake Malawi.(FS Msafiri 5). In essence I do agree with the position that on the border line between Tanzania and Malawi, the lake is on the side of Malawi and not shared by both countries. However, I distance myself from the strong language used by the former president which is not quite diplomatic and Nyerere is one of a few African leaders I admire. My view is that the Tanzanian claim is based on wrong understanding of the origin of the boundaries between the two countries.
The main basis of argument by Tanzanians is that some of the old maps, for instance the 1937 map showing the British East Africa rail line depicts the border line between the two countries on the middle of the lake.( Msafiri). Additionally, they recognize that the origin of the boarders is the Anglo-German Treaty of 1890 also referred to as Helgoland-Zanzibar Treaty. This is an agreement reached between the British and the Germans which resulted in creating the boundaries of what constitutes Tanzania today.
The starting point is that the position of Tanzania is self defeating and unattainable. The treaty they are relying on did not create the boundary in the middle of the lake but on the shores of the east and northern side of the lake. The relevant provision of the treaty creating the boundaries of Tanzania, then Germany East Africa, Article 1 clause 2 states;
‘To the south by the line that starts on the coast of the northern border of Mozambique Province and follows the course of the Ruvuma River to the point where the Messinge flows into the Ruvuma. From there the line runs westwards on the parallel of latitude to the shore of Lake Nyasa. Turning north, it continues along the eastern, northern and western shores of the lake until it reaches the northern bank of the mouth of Songwe River…….”
The key word here is the shore. The treaty clearly provides that border runs to the shore and runs upwards towards the north along the shore. Now everyone knows that the meaning of the word shore in English is the line between land and water of water bodies such as lakes, sea and ocean. What the treaty is providing is not a border in the middle of the lake, but in the shores of the lake on the Tanzanian side. If the origins of the Tanzania national boundaries are from this treaty, where is the claim for part of the lake coming from? That is a mistaken belief in my view.
On the issue of the map, that is not an authority of which part belongs where. A map is just an attempt to depict what is on the ground and the same can be mistaken. The main basis of the boundary is the treaty not the map. I have difficulties in understang the inability of the Tanzanian claimers to see this simple fact. My considered view: Lake Malawi has never been a part of Tanzania and is not.
References
• Msafiri FS Post Graduate Thesis 2011http://edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/theses/2011/June/11Jun_Msafiri.pdf
• The Anglo-German Treaty 1890. http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/606_Anglo-German%20Treaty_110.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment