In this interview, Professor Pape Chérif Bertrand Bassène, historian and lecturer at Cheikh Anta Diop University, sheds light on the issues linked to the work The Idea of the Autonomous Casamance by Séverine Awenengo Dalberto. Between political recovery and quest for truth, he explains to us how this research can serve as a lever for reconciliation in Casamance and regional development, while calling for greater academic freedom and better accessibility of archives for younger generations.
Professor Bassène, thank you for granting us this interview to explore the ideas raised by the book ”The idea of the autonomous Casamance…” by Séverine Awenango d’Alberto. You mentioned a political recovery of this scientific work. Can you clarify what you mean by that?
Indeed, the work of Séverine Awenengo Dalberto, which focuses on “the idea of an autonomous Casamance” in a colonial context, is sometimes diverted to serve contemporary political agendas. We are in the middle of an electoral campaign and certain charismatic figures like Ousmane Sonko are seen as symbols of resistance or Casamance identity. What concerns me is that this political exploitation can harm the perception of academic research and historical truth, which aims to ease and not rekindle tensions.
You actually talk about the importance of truth in healing historical trauma. How do you think the truth can contribute to peace in Casamance?
Truth is a primordial value in Casamance culture and in our quest for peace. Reconciliation, whether individual or collective, always involves the truth. Traumas heal when the truth is told and accepted.
In Casamance, for example, this quest for truth about regional history motivates young people. They feel invested with the mission of protecting this truth to avoid external manipulation. This is why authors like Salif Sadio are committed to producing works that tell this story, in order to contribute to a better understanding and, hopefully, a peaceful resolution of tensions.
You seem to be saying that intellectual research can play a pacifying role. How does this translate into regional development policies, particularly for Casamance?
Absolutely. Economic development policies must be based on local realities, as the settlers already thought when they spoke of autonomy. The idea of developing an international port in Casamance, for example, could have transformed Ziguinchor into an economic hub for the sub-region. Presidents Senghor and Abdou Diouf understood that this region had a unique economic potential and the development of such a port could have made it a sub-regional commercial hub. We must think about decentralization not only in administrative terms, but in economic and social terms to respect the specificities of each region.
You mention decentralization. How do the policies of Senghor, Abdou Diouf and other Senegalese leaders address this issue within the framework of Casamance?
Each president has had a different vision, but with a certain consistency in terms of decentralization: the desire to see Casamance play an “autonomous”, “regional” role… in national development. Under Senghor, there was talk of making Nikin a deep-water port to promote the sub-regional economy. With Abdou Diouf, the emphasis was on the creation of an international airport. Today, Cap Skirring airport is internationalized, but its impact remains to be maximized. In fact, it is essential to give Casamance and its infrastructures the same status as those of Dakar to promote healthy and functional territorial polarization, because this would stimulate the local economy while alleviating excessive centralization.
Let’s return to the work of Séverine Awenango d’Alberto. Some criticize this work for dealing with sensitive subjects such as autonomy. What, in your opinion, is the nature of this work and its contribution to historical research?
This work is above all scientific research based on historical archives. It is not a question of promoting any agenda of contemporary autonomy, but rather of presenting how the settlers and later a local elite envisaged ways of administering this region within the colonial framework. What the author offers is insight into the way in which Casamance was perceived, administered and even integrated into the economic and political thinking of the time. It is not a question of evoking modern struggles for autonomy, but of contextualizing a region at the heart of various power dynamics.
You also mention local elites and their role in these colonial administration policies. Can you give us some examples?
Quite. Casamance has always been a region where the question of “autonomy”, of decentralization, arose, even if it took different forms over the periods. For example, in the 1960s, Senghor planned to make Casamance an economically independent region, so that it could benefit from its resources without having to depend on Dakar. Likewise, the governor-mayor Maubert had asked Blaise Diagne, our first African deputy in the French Assembly, to defend the importance of a certain autonomy consistent with the reality of Casamance since the colonial period. This is a question that comes up repeatedly in Senegalese political history.
In your opinion, what is still missing so that the Senegalese can really take ownership of this history and use it as a lever for development?
So that the Senegalese can take ownership of their history, it is crucial to make the archives accessible, particularly those on Casamance. Too many documents remain inaccessible and this limits our understanding and our ability to learn lessons from our past. It is also important that the state encourages and protects university research. Researchers like Séverine Awenango Dalberto or other historians must be able to work in complete freedom and present their results without fear of reprisals. History is a field of continuous discovery and it is essential that we continually enrich our understanding, as this can help us build a peaceful and prosperous future.
You mentioned that today’s generation is searching for truth. In your opinion, how can this quest influence future policies in Casamance and Senegal in general?
This quest for truth, which we observe among young Senegalese people, brings hope. It shows that the new generation is ready to tackle previously taboo subjects, such as the conflict in Casamance. She wants to understand, learn lessons from the past and move forward. This dynamic is positive, because it pushes policies to take into account local realities and regional aspirations. I am convinced that this quest will influence future policies, because we cannot build a united country by obscuring part of its history or by leaving certain peoples on the margins of national development.
What do you think of the critical reactions to the work of Séverine Awenango d’Alberto and the accusation that it could ”stir up trouble”?
This accusation reflects a misunderstanding of the purpose of academic research. Séverine’s work is above all academic and based on reliable sources, archives and rigorous analysis. Criticizing this work without having read it, being satisfied with a title to draw conclusions from it, is not an intellectual approach, but political exploitation. The debate on Casamance must be conducted in a calm and informed manner. The role of the historian is to provide elements of understanding. It is up to politicians to translate this into actions for the good of society.
In conclusion, what message would you like to send to young Senegalese researchers and politicians on the question of Casamance and regional history?
My message would be simple: let’s respect and support academic freedom. Encouraging research on Casamance means investing in our future peace. Young researchers must have the audacity to ask questions, dig into the archives and present their findings, even if they are disturbing. As for politicians, I call on them to integrate this work into their thinking and to promote solutions adapted to the realities of each region. Casamance is a wealth for Senegal and it is time to recognize this wealth as an asset for our national development.
