ASC-075287668-2887-01

MALI’S MISSION CIVILISATRICE 143Fear and rumours in Kidal: The buildup to rebellionSo far, this chapter has discussed the relation between the Keita Regime and theKel Tamasheq in a more general way, looking at policies toward all nomads andtheir impact, albeit with much evidence coming from the Cercle of Kidal. Here,I would like to deal with the Adagh in particular in the years prior to Alfellaga,the rebellion of 1963. After independence, relations between state officials andthe local elite in the Adagh were strained almost from the start. The Malianadministrators, on the one hand, had a fearful perception of the Kel Adagh as apeople under the sway of French neo-colonialism, unhappy with their inclusionin the Malian state, and therefore liable to rebel. On the other hand, the KelAdagh loathed the Malian administration which to them represented a governmentwhich broke its promises on the form Kel Adagh inclusion in Mali wouldtake, which consisted of infidels and mere slaves, and which had been unwantedfrom the start. I will argue that, again, the lack of communication and misunderstandingwere based on deep-seated mutual negative stereotypes, this time leadingto, and enhanced by, rumours spreading on both sides.Rumour is not so much about its subject as it is about trust and distrust,about familiarity and distance. Rumour is not necessarily a misinterpretation ofthings not well understood, nor is it necessarily fed by the absence of information.It is an interpretation within the realities of the interpreter, and an appreciationof the trustworthiness of the information and the trustworthiness of itssource. There is a marked difference between the well-known African radiotrottoir, which shares a number of the qualities of rumour, and rumour itself.Radio trottoir is essentially regarded as news. That is to say: A rendering ofactual reality conveyed through, and emanating from, trustworthy sources. Rumourconveys an inherent message of uncertainty and lack of trustworthiness.Rumour is perforce about tension, excitement in the case of positive rumour,and anxiety in the case of negative rumour. Rumours are telling about socialand political relations and power structures. As a very off-hand rule of thumb,one could say that the intensity and persistence of rumours rise and fall inproportion with the level of power relations and the acceptance of its structures,while they react in a manner inversely proportional to the level of intensity ofthe social and political contact that is at the basis of the subject of rumour.Rumours can be about good or bad things, and in both cases the rule of thumbapplies. Also, the wilder the rumour, the further one is removed from the organisation.Rumours are not untrustworthy sources; they are just tricky to interpretcorrectly. As Luise White put it: ‘The imaginary makes the real, just as itmakes more imaginings: It is the inclusion of both that gives depth to historical