“ Tokowa po ya ekolo ”: The Military Body Within the Congolese Army

Opportunity

The army provided opportunities that were otherwise not available. Through military cooperation with Western, Asian, and African academies, as well as the existence of its own military academies and training centers, the Congolese (then Zairean) Army attracted talented young people (Stearns et al., 2013). Between 1960 and 1991, the country received financial, material, and human support from Western and Middle Eastern powers to train Congolese officers. For example, 400 North Korean trainers came to offer their military expertise to Congolese officers (Stearns et al., 2013 p. 46).

Large numbers of Congolese soldiers were recruited, and in the late 80s, military personnel had relatively good benefits, like rations at subsidized rates, shelter, education (for officers and children) and specialized training (Lakika, 2019, p. 98). Important to note, these opportunities have become scarce today—that is, the conditions in the DRC Army have significantly deteriorated (Baaz & Stern, 2009; Mbumba, 2016).

Escape From Abuse and Coercion

The army may also be viewed as a place that procures security to resist external threats which are directed either to soldiers themselves or to their family members. In the context of the DRC, military–civilian relations have always been characterized by hostility and disrespect (Baaz & Stern, 2009, 2010). Faced with meager salaries, state security forces consider civilians as a means to top up their income. The population is frequently harassed and extorted by soldiers, “either on the pretext of some real or fake transgression of the law, or simply by referring to them as soldiers’ cornfield” (Baaz & Stern, 2010, p. 25). Thus, becoming a member of the army offers the guarantee of being safe from these forms of abuse. This protection is extended to soldier’s families.

Nationalism

Nationalism is defined as “collection action designed to render the boundaries of the nation congruent with those of its governance unit” (Hechter, 2000, p. 7). The three pillars on which nationalism is built are “the cumulative bureaucratization of coercion, the centrifugal ideologization and the way these two processes envelop the hubs of micro-solidarity” (Malesevic & Malešević, 2013, p. 7).

McClintock (1993, p. 71) emphasizes that nationalism is “experienced and transmitted primarily through fetishism—precisely the cultural form that the Enlightenment denigrated as the antithesis of ‘Reason.’” In the case of DRC armed forces, the process of inculcating military doctrine implied a series of rituals through which “the personal, the local and even the global are often subsumed into the national” (Malesevic & Malešević, 2013, p. 5). The primary motive in using the concept of nationalism, particularly in the army, is to underscore the way it promotes the spirit of self-sacrifice helping to “generate the individual commitment and the organized cooperation that make for combat power on the battlefield” (Posen, 1993).

After his 1965 coup d’état, Mobutu sought to forge a nationalist ideology, seeking to forge a national identity through natural and cultural resources (Smith, 1996) used to entrench this national ideology. In the context of soldiering, the love of the nation implies shedding blood in order to defend it through.

Mundane practices such as saluting the national colors (flag) which they also enforced among civilians, the wearing of uniform particularly when on duty as well as the use of deictic language such as “we,” “our,” “us,” and “here” (Skey, 2009, p. 332) were visible enforcement of this nationalism.

Herein, we argue that nationalism is sustained by various forms of rewards that reinforce people’s commitment to serving the nation as “contested systems of cultural representation that limit and legitimize peoples’ access to the resources of the nation-state” (McClintock, 1993, p. 61). Failure to respond to the needs of those who have dedicated their lives to defend the nation may lead to the contestation or rejection of the notions of the nation. This is what happened in the case of military involvement in the DRC where soldiers have been hostile to the same nation they were called to defend.

“Makila na biso po ya ekolo”: Dedication of the Soldier’s Body

There is a popular Lingala saying, Okoki kosimba nioka literally translated to “Can you touch a snake?” The adage refers to the rite of passage from childhood to adulthood that in African culture is less about age, but more about being able to take up difficult tasks which can sometimes involve shedding blood of their kinship (Hoffman, 2011). Through this kind of expression, the initiation’s aim is to inculcate in somebody perceptions, attitudes, or habits, which are different from what is socially believed and accepted.

Many participants referred to this axiom to highlight how high-risky a soldier’s life was. It was important for soldiers to break away from fear in order to fulfill one’s duties fearlessly and efficiently. Participants in this study reported that they were prepared to face this tough experience when joining the army. For instance, the prevailing discourses about the sacredness of life changed. This initiation aimed to prepare soldiers “to do things that are otherwise prohibited, or at least governed by different rules” (Haldén & Jackson, 2016, p. 1). For instance, participants were forced to sing “immoral songs” in the army in order to remove shame and fear. Enrolling in the army involved “entering a special behavioral frame that is governed by rules different from those of [civilian’s] everyday life” (Lomsky-Feder et al., 2008, p. 608). This is a form of deterritorialization from an ordinary life to embrace a different world whose values are opposed to those commonly known.

Training and Discipline

Accounts of former Congolese soldiers suggested that service is not what civilians often think it is; soldiers’ bodies and minds were transformed to rationalize abuses and other crimes such as killing and sexual violence. These atrocities could be deliberately perpetrated against anyone considered as enemy of the nation. Participants referred to self-defense to justify their lethal acts; others even went on to explain that there was no feeling for anybody who massacred their colleagues and became a threat to the nation. They argued that even God would tolerate such execution. This preparation started in training in which soldiers were convinced that their bodies were bought by the nation and did not belong to them anymore. One of the interviewees whom we call John recounted how, through the recruitment process, the nation bought them:

Right, in our time, once you enrol in the army, they give you let’s say 6000 Francs Congolais. With that amount, it means that your body doesn’t belong to you anymore; your body belongs to the country. You have no order to give to your body. You blood has been bought. Tokowa po ya ekolo, makila ya biso po ya ekolo (because you were bought, do you understand? We were inculcated this ideology, tokowa po ya ekolo, makila na biso po ya ekolo. (John interview, July 2015—First author’s translation from a mixture of French and Lingala to English)

Speaking along the same lines, another participant added,

When I was recruited by the French paratroopers, ⁶ they wanted to make sure that my parents approved my choice to become a soldier. They took me to our home. They gave me some money that I already put in my pocket. After consulting with my parents, I came to tell them that they agreed and that we could leave. The money they gave me was symbolic. It was a way of saying that I no longer belonged to myself, let alone to my family. Besides, I had given the money to my parents, insisting that I had become the product of the nation. Throughout the training process the moto Tokowa po ya ekolo or makila ya biso po ya ekolo was repeatedly reminded to us. (Mambo interview, July 2015—First author’s translation from a mixture of French and Lingala to English)

Haldén and Jackson (2016, p. 6) support that the creation of warriors is about setting up new roles in a particular “lifeworld or habitus not only through rational instrumental training and education, or ideology and indoctrination, but through symbolic action.”

The act of giving money symbolizes the parameters of capitalism (law of supply and demand). The soldier’s body is bought by the nation to be shaped and transformed to become an asset to be used to manufacture war which is a product available for sale (Hoffman, 2011).

As such, the body of the soldier became increasingly “caught up in a system of constraints and privations, obligations and prohibitions” (Foucault, 1991, p. 11).

Another participant illustrates how by virtue of following seniors’ commands they were trained to break familial ties through the use of violence:

We are in the service commando, for example we used to do milling. They will ask you to go for milling. So, they give you gloves and they ask you to fight. Sometimes the adversary is your own cousin or friend with whom I was recruited the same day. They say for example X hit Y. I slap you there. They say, “Y slap X.” You will slap me to the extent that some of my teeth fall down. It’s like that. They inculcated in us toughness. (John interview, July 2015—First author’s translation from a mixture of French and Lingala to English)

Opining this view, another participant narrated how even close friends were trained to become feelingless toward one another:

You know, soldiering is another interesting experience. There were cases of friends who were recruited in the same area or they became close to each other after meeting in the army. They were good friends. But in the army things work differently. When the chief commander noticed that you are always together as friends, he always found a way to create enmity between you. How? When I made a mistake the person to punish me was my best friend. Sometimes he would be asked to pour cold water on me and would be given a strap to whip me seriously. It was a way of teaching us to break up with that friendly feeling and to treat everyone equally. (Kindu interview, July 2015—First author’s translation from a mixture of French and Lingala to English)

These statements teach us that “the relation between the civil and the military is a relation between two different systems with different codes and symbolic repertoires” (Haldén & Jackson, 2016, p. 6). Cases of getting into altercation with their own kins or friends provided in the above quotes are a clear indication that soldiers were prepared to develop a “lower level of agreeableness.” As Jackson et al. (2012) argue empathy or friendly affection would hamper soldiers’ capacity to deal quickly with deadly situations. Since the aim of the training was to make soldiers oblivious to the suffering of others, they were prone to act aggressively and heartlessly even toward the people who were familiar to them.

Taboos and Rituals

Another example of deterritorialization can be seen through how former soldiers were trained to depart from their familial or religious beliefs considered as taboo. Resources available in the new environment were sufficiently used to modify the body of the soldier. The building of the national bodies of soldiers forced them to engage in martial arts to be able to face the enemy. They also relied on rituals to boost their physical strength and/or as a potential means of defense. Various rituals were performed on the individual body to turn it into a national body.

The aim of many ceremonies conducted was to emphasize the national meaning of the body of a soldier. The rituals aimed to dedicate soldier’s body, to promote team-working spirit and to protect the soldiers against the opponent’s bullets. One of the participants reported that they performed a ritual called Tshizaba ⁷ :

Tshizaba often took place in the army before going to fight. After performing the ritual every soldier had to wash his face, hands and feet with this “magic” water [Tshizaba]. The rituals were sealed by the killing of a rooster of less than a month that one thousand members of the battalion were encouraged to partake of the flesh as a sign of their adherence to the rituals. The rituals concluded by asking each soldier to pass under the commanding officer’s legs. (John interview, July 2015—First author’s translation from a mixture of French and Lingala to English)

This quote teaches us several lessons: first, the rooster symbolizes vigilance and masculinity. Tshizaba’s rituals are not only a source of power, but also foster unity among the troop members. The act of sharing the rooster served “to establish a covenant, or a mystical union, between the god-symbolized by the sacrificial elements consumed- and those participating in the meal” (Kyalo, 2013, p. 43).

Speaking in the same way, another participant narrated that the rituals performed consisted of cooking them in a barrel for 24 hr and when they came out, they were immediately equipped with weapons to go to the battlefield:

. . .They used to keep us in a drum for 24 hours; they cook you for 24 hours. We are in a drum and they light fire. . . This was water inside, water; they heat you in water for 24 hours, can you imagine! You don’t feel pain; you stay there for 24 hours until tomorrow morning. Immediately when you come out of the drum, they give you a firearm for battle. (Makemba interview, December 2015—First author’s translation from mixture of French and Lingala to English)

Ritual actions and myths led to the creation of intersubjective sense around “the existential experience not only of war but also of joining a military organization” (Haldén & Jackson, 2016, p. 6). In this case, the ritual performed portrays a symbolic death of the old self to allow the emergence of a new body that is tough and ready to fearlessly and heartlessly defend the nation.

A feature of the reterritorialization is related to the place where military training took place, usually a remote area afar from the family or the immediate environment of soldiers. These isolated sites were surrounded by trees, mountains, rivers, and cemeteries. These areas were generally regarded as the dwelling places of dead ancestors, who were celebrated for their role as protectors of the land. Entry to these sites was often prohibited to uninitiated people and especially to foreigners. Rituals were often made by the elders entitled to represent the ancestors prior to entering those sacred sites.

Before using the sites for military instruction, the elders representing the ancestors entreated the spirits and introduced the candidates who embraced the legacy of taking over the mission of protecting the nation. Thus, during their indoctrination in those locations, the soldiers communicated directly with the spirits (ancestors) who gave them strength needed to fight the enemies and to watch over the nation. A materialization of this communion is that military uniform underwent some ritual before soldiers put them on. According to some participants, these garments were first kept at the cemeteries before being worn by the soldiers. An important meaning attached to this ritual was that in the national defense mission soldiers could also encounter death and be counted among the ancestors:

A soldier is not afraid of death; a true soldier can’t be afraid of death, I tell you. Because you live with death. You eat with death. You clothe death. Witness, I tell you; I inform you that military uniforms are taken to cemetery where they spend two or three days before you wear them to tell you that you are a dead’s friend; you are brother of those who are dead and you and those who are dead are the same. (Makemba interview, December 2015—First author’s translation from mixture of French and Lingala to English)

In the same vein, another participant merely declared,

You know that there are useless deaths. We were taught it was heroic to die in the frontline for the nation. Such a death was a good death. We used to claim we defended a country that ancestors passed down to us. Since we were doing the right thing, we believed that they were happy. We also believed that should we die for the nation we would join the ancestors and continue to defend the country even in the afterlife. So, death is the least thing we were afraid of. (Kindu interview, December 2015—First author’s translation from mixture of French and Lingala to English)

The message to be drawn from these quotes is that through rituals soldiers’ bodies, strengths and spirits are put at the service of the nation. As protectors, the ancestors oversee them in the fulfillment of their mission. This is a further example of reterritorialization. In safeguarding the nation, military personnel are no longer concerned with their cultures or beliefs, but rather with the national culture. The wearing of military uniform is a further reminder of their national defense mission.

Scholars have stressed the importance of the ritual actions (Haldén & Jackson, 2016; Mahanta, 2012; Obućina, 2011) pointing out their impact on people’s beliefs. In this study, further reinforcing the sacredness of the uniform, soldiers stated that wearing military uniform symbolized great responsibility. Pfanner (2004) states that military uniform is a distinguishing feature of a state’s army reflecting “order and discipline, and calls for subordination by displaying a variety of insignia, including badges that indicate rank and emphasize the hierarchical structure of armies” (p. 94). While it is true that military uniform has a powerful social meaning as part of national identify and recognition of soldiers’ positions in the army, but for participants in this study military uniform also had a powerful cultural and supernatural meaning and that the rituals preceding its wearing symbolized power that controls soldiers’ actions. Military uniform was the embodiment of power from dead people considered as ancestors, forerunners of the mission to protect the land.

Since this uniform was taken to the world of the dead, those who wore it were friends of dead and they were also able to cause death and terror. The discourse about uniform being the embodiment of death had an effect on civilians because in the DRC the first reflex of civilians in viewing soldiers wearing uniform was to escape because soldiers were considered as a danger that was coming. The findings of this study suggest that uniform means more than homogeneity, strength and power as proposed by Pfanner (2004). It could be seen as “a fetish object, sexualised by generations of men and women, representing as it does so many male attributes of disciplined strength and channelled aggression” (Mayes & Hetherington, 2012). Abandoning a uniform may impact the supernatural powers troop members believed they possessed. Although soldiers had undergone different military training to that known in the western world, this case reveals many more traditional practices that governed the beliefs of the members of the armed forces taking part in the hostilities.

Vows

The dedication of soldiers to the nation was accompanied by vows that were not mere slogans but were expected to be practiced in soldiers’ daily life. A participant who was also deployed to back the troops of UNITA (National Union for the Total Independence of Angola) in Angola recalled how they imbibed vows they were taught:

. . . There are vows we were called to make. For instance, in Congo we said, ‘makila na biso po ya ekolo’ (in Lingala meaning our blood for the country); in Angola what were we taught by UNITA? When they said, “Gendelele!” we responded, “keremus na pas de Angola” (in Portuguese meaning until peace in Angola. (Makemba interview, December 2015—First author’s translation from mixture of French and Lingala to English)

In the same way, another participant recalled how they imbibed vows and how remembering these vows forced them to become more resolute in the execution of their duties:

Tokowa po ya ekolo or Makila na biso po ya ekolo is a motto that was instilled in us and became part of us to the extent that it often came back to us even on the battlefield. It was an oath that we made and internalized. On our uniforms and on our berets, this motto was always inscribed. Whenever we remembered it fear left us. We became courageous, fearless, forgetting and being determined in the fulfilment of our national defence mission. (Katona interview, December 2015—First author’s translation from mixture of French and Lingala to English)

The discourse of “bloodshed” for the nation became a shared language through which former soldiers articulated their military commitment. Kraft’s (2014, p. 23) study analyzing testimonies of perpetrators of violence at the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission found two categories of influences that support sustained violence in crimes of allegiance: “(a) an abbreviated ideology that idealizes oneself and vilifies one’s adversary and (b) the use of war to justify any act of illegality.” Tokowa po ya ekolo or Makila na biso po ya ekolo were not mere doctrines, but they became embodied. Importantly, from our interviews, many of them who lived up to this doctrine in their military activities were left with physical deformities which they presented as evidence of how they dedicated their bodies to serve under the national flag.

Military ideology and the wearing of uniform were so binding that those who tried to escape from the battlefield could be exposed to a heavy sentence such as death penalty. Specific to this theme was that soldiers were prepared during their training to be fearless complying with the army’s rules. Part of the rules was the non-disengagement from the battlefield. During the training, it was emphasized to them that dying in the frontline was more heroic rather than escaping from the enemy which was viewed as a serious hindrance and transgression of the vow of “tokowa po ya ekolo” they made on the reception of the military uniform. Disengaging in the battlefield was also seen as an appropriation of civilian status and femininity. Refusing to fight for the country was constructed as a betrayal of the ideals of the army and those soldiers caught in that attitude could be viewed as contesting the national making of a soldier’s body. Those soldiers being caught in the state of disengagement could be depicted as “undisciplined” betrayers for not living up to their vow and duty to protect the nation and could be exposed to heft sentence. Participants stressed that a fearful soldier particularly in the time of war who disengaged from their mission, unless ordered by their superiors, could probably suffer the fate of being “passer par les armes” ⁸ for denying the nation its right over their body:

Ah, it is a very big offense. During war for instance when we went to war, if you run away from the war [you refuse to fight], if they catch you, you will be judged by the martial court. You are judged. If the martial court decides that you must passer par les armes [you must be executed], they make you passer par les armes [they execute you]. They shoot, that’s passer aux armes. (John interview, July 2015—First author’s translation from a mixture of French and Lingala to English)

Running away from the war was seen as betraying the vow made to die for the nation; it was betraying the ideals of the army by which soldiers had to abide; it was betraying the body of the nation. It shows the power that this institution has to force its members to live up to their military vows. Passer par les armes, a French expression, is used to mean death sentence and the shootout as a response to a destructive, blasphemous, treacherous or sacrilegious action of a soldier who has desecrated the moral values or principles of the defense force. Such soldier was regarded as a commoner whose death was viewed as an oppressive death or useless and unworthy of being celebrated. Foucault (1991, p. 8) argues that “the execution itself is like an additional shame that justice is ashamed to impose on the condemned man.” On the other hand, a soldier who fell with a weapon in his hand was regarded as a hero since states “give meaning to individual human death if this death occurs on the battlefield in the service of the state” (Haldén & Jackson, 2016, p. 4). His death was a redemptive death because his blood was not vainly poured out. Of importance to stress here is the complexity of ways in which the “codings of [soldiers’ bodies through military and national] idioms are conjoined to spiritual and ancestral codings” (Wilhelm-Solomon, 2016, p. 388). Military spaces of training are not only conceptualized as physical. They are also spiritual places where soldiers enter into contact with supernatural forces of ancestors believed to be a source of power that they need in the accomplishment of the mission of protecting the nation. Military experiences in these areas “shape intersubjective relations and ways of coding bodies and spaces” (Wilhelm-Solomon, 2016, p. 386).

Dying for one’s country was seen as constructive. It is important to note reports from participants that the distinctive clothing worn by military members was first kept in the cemetery to be presented to the forbearers, who are believed to be the first protectors of the nation, before being put on. The belief surrounding such death was that the deceased joined the forefathers in the continual mission of protecting the land. Death, in this case, was a way of relocating, what Campbell (1992) refers to as “extraterritoriality” (p. 35). Drawing on sacred scriptures, participants compared soldiers’ death in the field of operations with the death of Jesus as reported in the bible. Espousing the meaning of Jesus’ death in the bible viewing it as redemptive for mankind, soldiers were ready to sacrifice themselves in order to save their fellow citizens. With this belief, soldiers were not afraid of death. They were moved by the conviction that “the claim of respect or reverence for the body does not cease automatically upon death but is embedded in common rituals regarding the dead” (Campbell, 1992, p. 35).