For Africa, Independence was a Farce
This book reads like a political treatise that
examines the state of affairs of an average sovereign African nation after the
independence. Kasanga is a typical newly independent African nation and
figuratively a baby learning to walk on its own. Like most African states, independence didn’t
come on a silver platter but was hard fought for.
There is a
similarity to George Orwell’s fable, ‘Animal Farm’ with the exception that this
is a political satire whose grim facts anyone can well relate with.
Readers can
easily identify some scenarios and replicate them to local political
occurrences. Kenya, for instance, came close to cusp of violent regime change
through the 1982 abortive coup attempt. Bloody coups then were hallmarks of
independent African nations where power hungry leaders installed themselves to power
through the barrel of the gun.
Reports of
corrupt government functionaries receiving hefty bribes before awarding
contracts without any competitive bidding process taking place keeps surfacing
in the media. This kickback is ostensibly to circumvent state bureaucracy but
usually comes with ramifications to a country’s economic wellbeing.
Africa Union
is satirized as Permanent Association of Free Towns (PAFT). PAFT members were
once European colonies coming together to forge a common ideal and foster
growth of their young nations. Like AU or the defunct OAU, PAFT members are all
bark with their voices hardly registering on the global stage!
As is the
case with many African resources rich nations, Kasanga’s business dealing with
the Western economic powers largely under-develops than benefits it. The balance of
trade favours the foreigners than the Africans themselves. This can be seen by
the large volume of imports compared to exports. Ironically, Africa hardly
benefits from her resources and pays more for processed goods whose raw material
it exports in the first place.
Not all democratically elected leaders have
favourable views from western capitals as they can and are always a thorn in
the flesh to some western governments if they enact policies the latter sees as
against their interests. Reforms like indigenization of foreign owned
corporations or farms to benefit the locals sees the west seething in fury. It
strikes by placing economic sanctions or withholding development aid unless the
poor nation capitulates to a raft of their demands. Zimbabwe stands as a case
study when it appropriated land from white farmers to benefit the indigenous
locals and was slapped with crippling sanctions that saw the value of its
currency on a free fall. This is a mockery of a nation’s sovereignty
(And while at it, swathes of fertile land in central Kenya is still under foreign control but under the guise of wildlife conservancies while dirt poor locals do not benefit from proceeds such conservancies generates. Sadly, they're branded poachers when passing close to these conservancies and can be shot on sight by trigger happy whites or local lackeys employed as game warders with the government of the day looking the other way. And to drive point home, the British have an army outpost which acts as a kind of a police station in providing security to the white aristocrats in their little empires!)
But if such
leaders refuse to capitulate, the west devices ways to remove them from power.
It claims its overseas interests are being threatened and uses its intelligence
working covertly with local militias (if necessary) in overthrowing
democratically elected regimes. Think of Libya for instance. The west only
succeeds in overthrowing democracy while installing dictatorships to cater for its
interests. Ironically, for nations which advocates democracy and the rule of
law, they have looked the other way in imposing their puppet leaders going to
the extent of assassinating some as was in the case when Patrice Lumumba was
eliminated with Mobutu sese Seko installed
in the then Zaire.
African
leaders must also be wary of which economic blocs they align themselves with.
The cold war era pitting East with the West saw any close ties with either Russia
or China having some African leaders branded communists. Yet today, China is a
global economic powerhouse and a communist nation with vast investment
interests across the African continent. The emergence of BRICS nations with an
increasing foothold on the continent had left Washington and London with little
interference options.
However,
being sovereign states hadn’t delinked Africa from her former colonial masters.
The colonizer and the colonized still meets in what the author calls a Blood Brothers Conference. This is the Commonwealth
of Nations in case of former British
colonies. The objective of such meeting is to forge closer ties while
discussing matters affecting these states.
Independence,
or aptly, freedom, didn’t make the continent that independent in any sense. It
is still dependent to some extent on former oppressors. The author says this
dependence if informed by the need of mutual assistance which is a universal
principle bridging the colonizer and the colonized.
Comments
Post a Comment