Africa's destiny unpacked

SUDAN may have been the first African country to gain independence but Ghana has historically been credited as the first black African country in Africa to gain independence not least because of President Nkrumah but because events that followed Ghana’s independence had far reaching implications on the decolonization of the continent.
To the extent that Ghana was a torch bearer for the anti-colonial struggle, we have no choice but to draw lessons from its experience.
I have been humbled and encouraged by the response I have been getting from the readers of my articles. Ultimately, it is not words that make history but our actions. Can you imagine what would have happened to the history of Africa if Nkrumah had decided to pursue his doctorate at the London School of Economics as he had planned when he left the USA? While we may have different views about Nkrumah’s place in Ghana and Africa’s history, it would be foolhardy for anyone to refuse to recognize that Africa’s destiny was shaped by the actions of the continent’s heroes and heroines.
Many of us have the privilege to look back on the events that have shaped the continent’s history and cannot escape asking why poverty becomes the best friend of post-independent Africa. Even in the case of Ethiopia, a country that was never colonized, has not demonstrated a capacity to escape the poverty that pervades many of the post-colonial African economies. How then do we find it easy to blame colonialism for all the ills of Africa when even the countries that were not colonised have nothing to show for it? One cannot, therefore, avoid asking the question of whether poverty, corruption and bad governance are an integral part of Africa’s destiny. Destiny refers to a predetermined course of events. Are Africans inherently incapable of organizing their affairs or is it a combination of colonialism, neo-colonialism or imperialism that has collectively combined to psychologically damage Africa’s capacity to address its own challenges?
The post-colonial experience of African countries seems to follow the same fixture with seemingly inevitable and unchangeable outcomes. Whether the central player and founding father is Nkrumah, Nujoma, Mandela, Lumumba or Mugabe, the end game is as predicable as the demise of colonialism. The values, norms and traditions that inform post-colonial Africans states seem to have the same text in the rest of the continent. The contagion effect even on the countries that were never colonised is evident to undermine the hypothesis that if Africa was never colonized then poverty may never have visited Africa with such predictability and ferocity.
This article was inspired by someone whose name I will keep confidential who wrote the following email to me: “Greetings boss my name is xxxx, I worked as a producer for Alotta Current Affairs and Entertainment programs for ZTV and MNET but I am now based in the UK where I am a recording artist and TV producer. I hope you find the time to read mine. I fully understand the power of the media from a business point and the social political aspect views such as yours to reach a wider population as you say in your lifetime you love to see Africa shine in its lifetime and I share the same dream and you have sparked an idea maybe we need to start learning from the mistakes our leaders have made just as you question Kwame, I question Nelson Mandela did South Africa and Africa really benefit from his term as president or the dream go sour? Africa aint no better place after all the heroes that we had came and went maybe the better man never wins what if Tongogara had lived to rule what if Steve Biko had lived we just need to address these issues.”
I thought that the observations of the author of the email deserve to be incorporated in the kind of conversations that should inform Africans as they try to change the tide that has condemned the majority of its citizens to a lesser standard of life than what independence promised. On the question of Mandela, some have observed that the ultimate benefactors of South Africa’s independence were not any different from the very parties that were apartheid’s beneficiaries. I have often said that freedom is expensive because you need the means to enjoy it.
Yes, South Africa got independence through a negotiated settlement but the people who were victims of apartheid gained civil rights but not silver, gold, diamond or platinum rights. Some have said cynically that Mandela was only freed when the architects and beneficiaries of apartheid were confident that he would not pose any threat to the status quo ante and even if he did try, his mental and physical state would not permit him to be actively engaged in the transformation process. Mandela’s role like any bridge platform was, therefore, to provide a moral umbrella and compass for the majority South Africans to take ownership of their destiny.
One cannot argue that Mandela symbolised the quest for independence and his place in the history of South Africa has already been cast in stone. Mandela did not behave like many founding fathers who despite economic and social indicators going downwards would want to cling to power. From the outset, Mandela’s national unity government was structured to allow President Mbeki to assume executive responsibilities while Mandela provided the framework for healing a nation that had been torn apart by the disastrous apartheid policies and programs. Unlike Nkrumah, Mandela recognised that the executive administration of the state necessarily required different skills from the tactics and strategies used to fight against apartheid.
While it may be easy to criticise Mandela for not behaving like many African heads of states who when they assume power, then becomes intoxicated with such power that they see in themselves as invincible and irreplaceable, it is important that we carefully and critically examine the legacy of Mandela in a holistic and comprehensive manner. In as much as it is cheap politics to suggest that there can ever be a time when cash can be classified as black or white cash, it does not help the African cause for African leaders to continue to use the race card to explain their failure to make the rights decisions and provide leadership.
The difference between developed and so-called civilised societies and the developing countries, is that in the former citizens elect governments and in between elections interest groups hijack the organs of the state in the pursuit of their interests while in the latter the poor elect governments and the people they elect become the interest groups that crowd them out of the process.
In the final analysis, it does not take Africa any further to complain about colonialism. Nothing will change to the better just because we choose to use our words as the raw materials for progress. If after 50 years of independence, Sub-Saharan Africa’s oldest child has nothing to show for it in terms of the covenant that informed the independence struggle, should we lay the blame on colonialism or on our inability to take ownership of our destinies.
Many would agree that heroes like Mandela were only meant to open doors for Africans who hitherto were not allowed to participate in nation building because they did not have the right pigmentation. The resolution of the political question in Africa, if anything, must inform the assessment of the benefits attributed to Africa’s founding fathers. As an African businessman, I am acutely aware that were it not for the selfless struggles of people like Mandela and others to fight against a race based society that denied the majority the right to determine their destiny, I would not have been a businessman of the stature that I enjoy in the continent.
The real challenge for Africa lies in the transformation of the civil rights movement into a platinum rights struggle. The heroes and heroines of the economic struggle in Africa do not necessarily have to be the same players who informed the political struggle. What have happened in Africa is that with the exception of Mandela, Chissano, Nujoma, Nyerere, and others, many of Africa’s leaders who many never have seen a profit and loss statement, cash flow statement and a balance sheet prior to their assumption of office are then expected to become the best custodians of enterprise Africa. I submit that even if Steve Biko and Tongogara were still alive the African condition may not change for the better. We are all to aware that the red card given to Nkrumah did not leave Ghana any better than what it was under Nkrumah.
The platinum rights struggle that African leaders have consistently failed to appreciate and locate their roles in the battle formation still has to be prosecuted with vigor. In as much as black Africans carry the same heritage with the stigma it confers to them, the need for them to appreciate the economic staying power of the minority white and Asian tribes of Africa even when they cease to control the organs of the state, cannot be overstated.
Why is it that whites despite the numerical presence in Africa have managed to retain economic power under black regimes with such efficiency and efficacy while the people elected to run the affairs of the state continue to complain that they are not in power? How would you explain that Africans are in charge and yet free themselves from the responsibility to govern and end up blaming the spectators for losing a game? Africa will have limited capacity to rise to the challenge for as long as its citizens take the easy road to blame someone for their own inadequacies.
It is a truism that people get the governments they deserve. Even if Africa’s despots were removed from office there is no evidence that Africa’s fortune will dramatically change for the better. It is common cause that most of the post-colonial governments have been very good to the former colonizers particularly in the economic arena. The platinum struggle requires planning and an ideology that respects the rule of law, human and property rights. On the ingredients required for Africa to be a winning continent, lessons are many from the experiences of other newly industrialised countries.