Tanzaphilia: Is Tanzania exploiting ‘spell’ to brand itself?

In mid-1967 Prof Ali Mazrui wrote an article in the magazine Transition, entitled Tanzaphilia. In that article he defines ‘Tanzaphilia’ as “the romantic spell which Tanzania casts on so many of those who have been closely associated with it.”

He goes on to elaborate that “perhaps no African country has commanded greater affection outside its borders than has Tanzania”. Tanzania was then only seven years old since Tanganyika’s independence and three years old after the Union of Tanganyika and Zanzibar. So much water has since gone under Tanzania’s bridge.

Nyerere’s leadership-the brand

One of the striking features of Tanzaphilia as played out by Mazrui is Mwalimu Julius Nyerere – his competitive intellectualism, candour and ethical and principled leadership; a leadership that underpinned Tanzania’s bold experimentation with a unique brand of democracy and socialism within an environment of unity, equality, human dignity and respect, equal opportunity, social and religious harmony, peace and stability.

It is important to recognise that the ‘romantic spell’ that Tanzania cast on non-Tanzanians, across the breadth of the universe, was not as much driven by its natural beauty, splendour and serenity, so well and vividly captured in Mount Kilimanjaro, the Serengeti that ‘shall never die’, Ngorongoro Crater ‘the cradle of humankind’ and the ‘exotic mystique of the spice islands’ of Zanzibar as by the values that held the country together.

Indeed, under the leadership of Mwalimu Nyerere Tanzania possessed what Prof Jeffrey Sachs describes in his book, The Price of Civilisation: Economics and Ethics after the Fall as the “interplay of politics, economics and a society’s values;” an interplay that gave rise to “lasting economic solutions”. Tanzania may not have prospered economically during Nyerere’s era of leadership. However, it had a clear sense of national identity, citizen engagement and commitment.

It had shared values. And, generally, Tanzanians displayed visible confidence in the ethics and competency of their leaders and policies. Social trust constituted Tanzania’s compelling social capital. Such trust is captured in the narrative contained in Future Brand’s Country Brand Index for 2011-2012 where it is postulated that “the power of a country brand is directly proportional to the power of its people, its leadership and its sense of purpose in the global economy.”

National identity and brand

In the book, New Ideas on Development After the Financial Crisis, American social scientists Nancy Birdsall and Francis Fukuyama postulate that “unless a society has a clear sense of national identity and public interest, individual actors will not show greater loyalty to it than to their ethnic group, tribe or patronage network.

Nation building is the deliberate creation of national identity based on common language, history, culture and symbols; it is not something that outsiders to a society can typically promote, nor is it in something that many national leaders are capable of undertaking.”

Mwalimu Nyerere succeeded in developing such an identity which fostered Tanzania’s peace and stability; that identity became the country’s defining brand.

What Mazrui described as Tanzaphilia was, unwittingly, the Tanzania Brand itself. Unwittingly because Nyerere’s Tanzania did not need to go into the typical elaborate efforts to brand itself.

There is a powerful Kiswahili adage that says, ‘kibaya chajitembeza, kizuri chajiuza’, which loosely translates into a ‘good product sells out of choice; a poor one has to market itself’! Tanzania was a ‘product’ that sold out of choice in the global marketplace as well as in corridors of political and economic power.

Every country has a brand

And this is the starting point of the discourse about ‘Nation Brand’ and ‘Nation Branding’. A country brand is a reflection of the country’s image and reputation; of the reasons why people- nationals and foreigners- appreciate and admire a particular country. And invariably countries get the reputation they deserve.

In this context, it would seem a sheer waste of resources for a country to embark in an effort to change its poor image by branding.

Harvard professor Elizabeth Moss Kanter takes up this very issue in her article, The Downsides of Branding. She notes, in reference to Nigeria, in 2009, that “efforts to put a brand on Nigeria to attract tourists remind me of how easy it is to slap a label on something and hope that its uglier characteristics will go away; the problem with putting lipstick on a bulldog is that it is hard to wrestle the bulldog to the ground long enough to do it and then doesn’t change the nature of the beast”.

The triggering factor for the Nation Branding craze is the confusion that exists about what actually constitutes a Nation Brand. Many countries have been forced to embrace the idea due to pressures of globalisation and competition; how do countries best compete for flows of investments and equity funds. The emerging driving ethos seems to be that a country can actually “sexy” its image and identity in such effort.

A country that is serious in branding itself should, fundamentally, determine what its brand is. Of course, a brand is not static; it is dynamic in the sense that it is susceptible to reform and improvement. However, the dynamic character of a Nation Brand would always be informed by the preparedness of a country to take radical decisions for change.

A quick good example is Myanmar or Burma where the military junta, in releasing Aung San Su Kyi and unleashing quasi political reforms and democratic elections, has been able to change its nation’s brand with positive results.

What is Tanzania’s brand to-day?

Does Tanzania today have a brand that reflects the shared values and the identity which pervaded the Tanzanian social structure and psyche during Nyerere’s leadership?

This is a question which Tanzanians must seriously reflect on. Efforts directed at branding Tanzania in recent years, notably by the Tanzania Tourism Board, lack the basic fundamentals of what a Nation Brand is or should be.

Tanzania’s brand is clearly not about the Kilimanjaro, Serengeti or the Spice Islands of Zanzibar.

Landmarks and natural resources do not make a Nation Brand. They merely support a nation brand. Tourists did not visit Myanmar during its bad days even when it has some of the most tantalising natural ecology and beautiful landmarks like Buddhist Temples. Zimbabwe’s tourism suffered significantly when human and political rights were severely undermined. Post elections violence in Kenya in 2007-2008 cost it dearly on the tourism front.

Building the Tanzania brand

At the centre of the challenge facing Tanzania in branding itself is to define the Nation Brand beyond the traditionally assumed unifying factors of Kiswahili and Tanzania being an island of peace and stability even when it is clear that the country is increasingly exposed to the politics of violence and violence of politics; tribal cleavages and religious bigotry. In other words, what is Tanzania’s brand equity that can be promoted to leverage investments, portfolio equity funds and tourists?

No doubt, the strategic imperatives to be addressed in nation brand building are influenced by external forces. However, it is countries themselves that shape their brands.

As Prof Ying Fan, in his brilliant article, ‘Branding the nation: what is being branded’ posits, where capital formation is scarce, infrastructure is poor and there is inadequate skilled workforce, “the nation brand cannot assert itself, as the tangible sources from which its value is accrued are not in place. It is not sufficient for the country to promote its image enthusiastically to other nations if the economic basis for the nation brand is not there.

For a nation brand to have credibility and integrity the country must create the macroeconomic climate required to nurture successful business, otherwise attempts for business to exploit nation branding will seem sadly quixotic.”

In summing up what he thinks nation branding is all about, Professor Fan posits, “If economic development in a country is like completing a gigantic jigsaw, nation branding is probably the last piece.”

Conclusion

Let me conclude by stating that Tanzania cannot successfully brand itself until it is clear about what underlies and underpins its identity and image today.

What is it that currently defines the Tanzania Nation Brand in same way in which France, for example, conjures in the mind a country of romanticism, cultural richness and sophistication?

A country that is “unbranded,” as Peter van Ham writes in his article The Rise of the Brand State, “has a difficult time attracting economic and political attention.

Image and reputation are essential parts of the state’s strategic equity”. Yet, branding Tanzania is yet to be seriously undertaken.

At a time when President Jakaya Kikwete, kudos to him, is able to make Tanzania a place where, within a spell of three months, the President of China, Xi and the US President, Obama not only visit but also make profound policy statements addressed to the whole of Africa, Tanzanians and the government in particular, as they celebrate such huge recognition of their country, should seriously interrogate what is it that makes Tanzania attractive. Why such recognition? In other words, what is our new ‘Tanzaphilia’? What is the ‘Tanzania Brand’?

The author is the immediate secretary general of the East African Community.