Fouéré argued how the idea of 'theatrical nationhood' perpetrated 2011's Nyerere day celebration and acted as a technology of discipline and a technology of the body to coerce a Tanzanian nationality construction in the local level. Adugna (2011) examined how competing nationalist ideologies facilitated local political dispensation. Both accounts discussed nationalist projects in an up-town manner, whereas making on wonder where the participants' agency situates in this complex political matrix. What is interesting to me is to what degree had local communities in both cases agentically used such national-level narratives to achieve local goals by participating or pertaining with various homogenising projects?

An interesting concept, that a person, or in this case, a political icon, can become the foundations of what a national identity is based on. 

 

This reading highlights the divergence between territory and identity. Although state borders are marked along territorial lines, it suggests that different groups within the area dispute the borders. The ‘remapping’ of administrative borders for example, clashes with the pastoral mobility previously available to the Borana and Garri pastoralists. This also reflects the power dynamics at play in representations of space. Why is the more recent idea of fixed boundaries prioritized over traditional representations of space? Is it because mapping increases ‘legibility’ (James Scott 1998) and enables those in power to maintain it?

Fouéré describes for instance, the Uhuru Torch as ‘‘one of Tanzania’s national emblems, introduced by Nyerere and first lit on top of Mt Kilimanjaro on December 9, 1961 as a symbol of freedom, hope and development. Every year, the Uhuru Torch is carried around the country to remind common citizens of its symbolical significance in the history of the nation.’’ (p.2)

The Uhuru Torch reminds Tanzanians their shared values, history and traditions. Moreover, post-1961 values stresses ‘‘Freedom and Unity’’ -Tanzanian Motto- as fundamental principles. Therefore, national symbols are not decorative elements detached from political life, but significant parts of nation-building. Symbols and ceremonies allow a nation to define and differentiate itself from other nations, and to be recognised, especially in a post-colonial context.

Ogunde highlights how ethnic divisions are rooted in the colonial patterns of rule. Like in many African countries, ethnicity was mobilised by colonial administrators to ‘‘divide and rule’’. The article focuses on post-independence Kenya, but I would be interested to know more about the relationship between different ethnic groups before the colonial period. Were there forms of tension? Were these tensions linked to the power held by a centralised authority? Or did the different ethnic groups live independently of each other? 

In many ways, Moyale seems to be a microcosm of the contestation over identity and territoriality across all the region’s borderlands.

I too found this paper an interesting read, as you put it, in its exploration of the unequal power structures “whilst not ignoring those who are ignored”. To expand I found this papers touch on the power and significance of language of particular concern; how people were encouraged directly or indirectly to abandon their mother tongue, in aim to remove such a symbol of ethnic identity. Therefore, like Lyn, I too see the significance of the Oromo political organisations rejecting Amharic. I would like to know more about the interpretation of colonial language as “a blessing in disguise” (p.613) in retrospect to its impact and response on the people, as i am confused on how something implemented can be argued as "neutral"?! 

complex interplay between ethno-nationalists and the state at a regional level, and

pastoralist actors at a local level.’ Alongside examining and detailing the multi-faceted interactions between state patriotism, ethno-nationalism, irredentism and ethno-federalism, the part titled the ‘re-mapping’ of Ethiopia particularly stood out to me, the writer explains how ‘Contestation over territory has its roots…in struggles of the 1960s and 1970s, but the post-1991 politico-administrative structure in Ethiopia has given a new and greater intensity to territorial claims and counter-claims…the ‘‘re-mapping’’ of Ethiopia’s internal, domestic administrative borders has had particularly adverse impacts in those areas where pastoralist mobility has worked against the notion of fixed and permanent boundaries.’