Your page title

August, 2006

Democracy, torture and exile: alternative perspectives from Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka

By John D. Thomas

In 1986 Nigerian Wole Soyinka became the first African to win the Nobel Prize in literature. But his life has been about more than words. Soyinka spent nearly two years in solitary confinement and many years in exile for his outspoken political views. In his new memoir, You Must Set Forth at Dawn, the 72-year-old activist recounts his literary life on the run.

PLAYBOY: As a longtime activist for democracy, what do you think of the current U.S. policy of exporting American-style democracy?

SOYINKA: It is exceedingly purblind. Not that there is anything fundamentally wrong with the way democracy is practiced in America. TheAmerican model, the Swedish model, the British model, traditional African models--there's nothing wrong with any of them. But the arrogant notion of thinking yours is the only model and thereby proceeding in a kind of imperialist way--that is what's wrong with American action. And it's not just President Bush. It's not new. It has become mostblatant under the Bush regime, but even some of the most admired past presidents, like John F. Kennedy, were also naive and insular in not recognizing that democracy can operate in a number of ways.

PLAYBOY: What have the Iraq war and the war on terror done to America's reputation in Africa?

SOYINKA: They have had an embarrassingly negative impact. I say "embarrassingly" simply because those who are familiar with the United States know that within the realms of politics and academia, in business and technology, America has some brilliant minds. So one wonders where they all are when the U.S. government commits such egregious crimes as it has in Iraq.

PLAYBOY: A number of Nigerian states have instituted Islamic law. Do you think radical Islam is positioned to have a major influence in Africa?

SOYINKA: Not just in Africa but in the whole world. In 1987 I was at a meeting in Paris of Nobel laureates, and I recognized that with the fall of communism only one force would occupy the vacuum. I said then that religious fundamentalism would be the next potentially tyrannizing force the world would have to contend with. So it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that the aggressive muscle of religious fundamentalism has taken over. There is always a competition for turf among ideologies. One has to deal with it, however. That's our duty as humanists. While I preach tolerance, I am very intolerant of intolerance.

PLAYBOY: You have been a political prisoner. What is your take on the controversies surrounding Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo?

SOYINKA: If you send soldiers to battle without indoctrinating them about why they are going and what they are supposed to achieve--in other words, if you politicize them so they don't think they are going in as an army of occupation--you get horrendous abuses. What else would you expect?

PLAYBOY: You are not opposed to violent struggle, but does torturework as a tool?

SOYINKA: No, for me torture is not part of structured violence. I am not sentimental at all: I know violence will remain part and parcel of social, political and national relationships. It's obvious. People must protect themselves. That is why it is necessary to have a kind of pragmatic philosophy of violence. The limitations and the responsibilities involved in engaging in a violent situation--whether you promote it or merely respond to other violence--need to he clear. Torture can never be part of the instrument of violence--in my philosophy, anyway. Torture is deliberate dehumanization.

PLAYBOY: You have been under surveillance for most of your adult life. Did revelations of government wiretapping in the U.S. shock you?

SOYINKA: Nothing shocks me. Those who are obsessed with power and control over others will always use any opportunity to promote their agenda. I am not downplaying security, I am not downplaying my understanding of the shock of September 11, and I am not trying to trivialize the responsibilities of any government toward the protection of its people. But so many aspects of the Patriot Act are, for me, just part of a general obsession with domination and control of individual lives. Such Orwellian moves have no place in a democratic society.