Africa Image Live

LATEST:

Grab the widget  Tech Dreams

Showing posts with label evils of colonialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label evils of colonialism. Show all posts

Saturday, 2 May 2009

Multinational Corporations: The New Colonizers in Africa

By Lord Aikins Adusei

Before the end of the first colonialism African nations were properties of their colonial masters who did what they could to rape the continent of whatever resource they deem good for the development of their counties and citizens in Europe. Out of nowhere and without any consultation with the people in the continent the Europeans met and divided the continent amongst themselves in what has been termed the scramble for Africa.

Through the scramble France, Britain, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Germany and Italy all went on a looting spree raping Africa of her resources without putting any of the proceeds back for the development of the continent.

When US President Franklin D. Roosevelt visited Gambia on January 13th 1943 he was so appalled by the conditions of Gambians so much so that he made this lamentation,

“It's the most horrible thing I have ever seen in my life..... The natives are five thousand years back of us....The British have been there for two hundred years - for every dollar that the British have put into Gambia, they have taken out ten. It's just plain exploitation of those people”. “I must tell Churchill what I found out about his British Gambia today”. “This morning, at about eight-thirty, we drove through Bathurst to the airfield.” “The natives were just getting to work. In rags…glum-looking.…They told us the natives would look happier around noontime, when the sun should have burned off the dew and the chill. I was told the prevailing wages for these men was one and nine. One shilling nine pence. Less than fifty cents.” “An hour?” Elliott asked. “A day! Fifty cents a day! Besides which, they’re given a half-cup of rice. Dirt. Disease. Very high mortality rate. I asked. Life expectancy—you’d never guess what it is. Twenty-six years. Those people are treated worse than the livestock. Their cattle live longer!” US President Franklin D. Roosevelt 1943. Source: The American Heritage.

And the exploitation was not peculiar to only Gambia. Gold Coast (now Ghana), Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Zaire (now DRC), Namibia, South Africa, Congo and Angola all suffered from the same colonial exploitation and underinvestment.

For almost three hundred years the Europeans who were supposedly devout Christians and civilised, irresponsibly looted Africa’s resources and made slaves of the natives without developing the colonies. When the local population protested against the exploitation without a reciprocal investment they were brutally crashed as happened in Congo (now DRC) where King Leopold II of Belgium looted the resources, made slaves, and killed close to ten million of the Congolese.

In 1904 to 1907 the Germans led by Gen. Lotha Von Trotha also committed their first genocide of the 20th Century by killing 90% of the Herero and the Namaqua people of South West Africa (now Namibia) when the people protested against the exploitation of their resources. And the sad stories of South Africa, Zimbabwe, Algeria, Namibia, Kenya and Angola where people were denied access to land, citizenship and basic rights and had to take up arms before they were granted independence are in many history books.

We know how Nelson Mandela (now a hero in Europe) and a number of freedom fighters endured long prison sentences, torture, exile and deaths in the hands of their devout Christians and civilised European colonisers. The prevailling idea in Europe was that through the scramble for Africa they had bought Africa and had power to do as they wish hence the rape, torture, genocide and the mass killings. While Europeans became richer Africans became poorer.

For example with the loot of Congo’s resources, enslavement, amputations of hands and 10 million deaths, Brussels which now doubles as the capital of the European Union and Belgium was built. When they were given their ‘freedom’ the independent fathers inherited nothing more than empty treasuries. They realised that after more than 300 hundred years of colonial rule their colonial masters have left them with nothing, no money and no infrastructure. This bad situation and their eagerness to improve the lives of their peoples forced them to turn to the IMF and World Bank for assistance and when they went lo and behold the colonial masters were there waiting for them.

The colonisers used their majority votes to dictate to the Bank and IMF on how these former colonies should be helped. (Of the 185 members that make up the IMF, six colonial masters and their allies made up of the United States, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, France, Italy control 42% of the votes). The colonial masters dictated to the IMF and the Bank that for Africans to be helped, they must open their economies to allow European corporations in. This underscores the numerous conditionalities that are associated with loans from these institutions. The conditionalities are nothing more than a smokescreen designed to ensure that Europeans never loose their grip on the resources of the colonies. Some of the conditionalities include instituting secrets memorandums of agreement, subsidies to foreign corporations and massive tax concessions (such as income tax, usage fees, property tax) -the primary source of revenue for “export-oriented” developing countries.

The sad thing is that Africans thought independence would give them respite to develop but this was never to be as the colonial masters used their corporations and intelligence services to deliver vengeance against the people: encouraging and financing civil wars; unashamedly polluting rivers, wells and the soil through their oil and mineral activities; understating their profits and falsifying profit documents; undervaluing their goods, smuggling and theft; false invoicing and non-payment of taxes; kickback to public officials and bribery; over pricing of projects; providing save havens for the looted funds; promoting the sale of guns; overthrowing African leaders; supporting dictatorships; and assassinating those who disagree with them. We know those who instigated the overthrow of Dr. Nkrumah and the tragic assassination of Patrice Lumumba.And we know the support the West gave Mobutu and other tyrants in Africa.In addition to these, the corporations who were forced onto Africa by IMF the Bank, US and Europe have been implicated in a number of cases for corrupting African leaders and stealing trillions of dollars worth of resources.

Global Financial Integrity says, “$900-billion is secreted each year from underdeveloped economies, with an estimated $11.5 trillion currently stashed in havens. More than one quarter of these hubs belong to the UK, while Switzerland washes one-third of global capital flight”. Out of this $900b that is secreted away yearly $150b comes from Africa.

“The idea that Switzerland has a clean economy is a joke; it is a dirt-driven economy,” says Richard Murphy, director of Tax Research LLP. The Swiss Bankers Association claims that four-fifths of the nation supports banking secrecy, which reveals a society deeply embedded in a culture of impunity and exploitation.

The fact is that those who steal must find a way to hide their loot and Switzerland provide the ideal environment for such crimes to take place. And it is not Switzerland alone that does not have a clean economy. Britain, France, Germany, Luxembourg can all be described as vampires.

In an article by Khadija Sharife entitled Capital Flight: Gingerbread Havens, Cannibalised Economies she wrote: “The IMF and World Bank tax policies towards the developing world is very lethal especially where the poor are now caught in tax brackets, courtesy of the IMF and World Bank’s structural adjustment programmes (SAP), instituting policies ranging from tax holidays to the privatisation of state services, carving out huge slices of natural capital at corporate auctions. Africa has collectively lost more than $600-billion in capital flight, excluding other mechanisms of flight such as ecological debt (globally estimated at a potential $1.8-trillion per annum), the cost of liberalised trade (just under $300-billion)”. Source:http://www.greenleft.au. Thus with the support and collusion of IMF and the Bank these corporations are paying close to nothing for the resources they take from Africa.

Africa has been labelled the world’s most corrupt region because multinational internal mispricing makes up 60% of capital outflow, with corporations declaring profits in tax havens, as opposed to the country of performance. Corporations declare about 40% of their profits in African countries where they operate and siphon the rest into their save havens accounts in order to avoid paying tax which could be used to eradicate poverty. And this is not the end of the corruption and the day light robbery story.

We know how Elf operated as an arm of the French state supporting dictators, looting the resources and establishing flush fund which was used to bribe African leaders so they will look the other way while Elf loot Africa’s oil and gas.

Nicholas Shaxson, author of Poisoned Wells, wrote of the subject: “Magistrates discovered the money from Elf’s African operations supplied bribes to support French commercial, military and diplomatic goals around the world. In exchange, French troops protected compliant African dictators.” This explains why there are so many corrupt dictators in French-Speaking Africa than anywhere in Africa. Omar Bongo, Eyadema, Mobutu, Lansana Conte, Felix Houphouet-Boigny, Blaise Campore, Sassou Nguesso and Iddriss Deby are some of the compliant leaders who were or have been protected by France.

And what happened to the non-compliant African leaders? Your guess is mine. Please find time to read more about Bob Denard, a French who made a career as a mercenary overthrowing African leaders. French author Jean Guisner says: “Denard did nothing that was contrary to French interests - and he allegedly acted in close cooperation with French Intelligence Services”.

In the Elf corruption case Andre Tarallo the real boss of Elf-Afrique' “Told the court in June 2003 that annual cash transfers totalling about £10m were made to Omar Bongo, Gabon's president, while other huge sums were paid to leaders in Angola, Cameroon and Congo-Brazzaville. The multi-million dollar payments were partly paid to ensure the African leaders' continued allegiance to France. In return for protection and sweeteners from Elf's coffers, France used Gabon as a base for military and espionage activities in West Africa”. Source: Guardian, Nov. 2003.

The real deal is that Elf, Shell BP and their counterparts in Europe and America pay bribes to African leaders to induce them to look the other way while they plunder the resources. Ask any Gabonese or Congolese whether they have benefited from the oil and diamonds and the answer will be a big no. What is so tragic is that the people know they have oil, diamonds and see these companies processing them everyday yet do not know where it goes, who buys them and where the proceeds go.

In UK former Prime Minister Tony Blair was accused of selling a device with an ageing technology to Tanzania. “The UK sold a useless air traffic control system to Tanzania in 2001 in a scandalous and squalid deal, the House of Commons was told.” Clare Short an MP said, “The deal was useless and hostile to the interests of Tanzania”. She said, “Barclays Bank had colluded with the government by loaning Tanzania the money, but lying to the World Bank about the type and size of the loan.” Ms Short said “Tanzania could have paid much less for the same equipment which cost them £28m”. Shadow international development secretary Andrew Mitchell said “BAE had used ageing technology and said the system was not adequate and too expensive.” Source: BBCNEWS, Wednesday, 31 January 2007.

And it all happened after they had bought Tanzania officials to look the other way while a device with an ageing technology was sold to the country. BAE colluded with Tony Blair and Barclays Bank to sell a useless commodity at exorbitant price to Tanzania. This is nothing but a continuation of the contempt and impunity in which Europeans have treated Africa before, during and after colonialism. BAE is indirectly saying that Africans do not deserve the latest technology even if they pay cat throat price. It is also a message to Africans that they must develop their own technology and not rely on the generosity of others.

It is no secrete that Shell Oil Company colluded with the corrupt Abacha regime to steal oil, pollute the rivers, wells, creeks and soil and render millions of famers and fishermen in the Niger Delta jobless. Shell “admitted that it inadvertently fed conflict, poverty and corruption through its oil activities in the country. Nigeria contributes to about 10% of Shell's global production and is home to some of its most promising reserves, yet the country is steeped in poverty and conflict”. Source: bbcnews 18 June 2004. So Shell in addition to stealing Nigeria’s oil and polluting rivers, wells and soils also promote corruption, poverty and conflict.

In DRC about five million people have died in a war whose motive is to satisfy the West insatiable appetite for high quality but low price cell phones, laptop computers, play-stations, jewels, diamond and coltan. And who cares about five million deaths in Paris, London, Brussels, Berlin, New York or Washington anyway? Why has the DRC war not ended? Who supplies the rebels their arms and for what and who buys the minerals they mine illegally? Why have Uganda and Rwanda forces crossed several times into DRC? And whose agenda are they pursuing? A report by the UN says it all.

The panel calls for financial restrictions to be levied on 54 individuals and 29 companies it said are involved in the plunder, including four Belgian diamond companies and the Belgian company George Forrest, which is partnered with the U.S.-based OM Group. The individuals named include Rwandan army Chief of Staff James Kabarebe, Congolese Minister of the Presidency Augustin Katumba Mwanke, Ugandan army Chief of Staff James Kazini and Zimbabwean Parliament Speaker Emmerson Mnangagwa, BBC Online reports (Oct. 21, 2002).

The report also accused 85 South African, European and U.S. multinational corporations – including Anglo American, Barclays Bank, Bayer, De Beers and Cabot Corporation of violating the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's ethical guidelines on conflict zones.

The guidelines they were accused of violating relate to arming Rwanda, Uganda and Congolese rebels and profiting from their illegal looting of Congo’s minerals as the following excerpt shows: “Despite the recent withdrawal of most foreign forces, the exploitation of Congo's resources continues, the report says, with elite networks and criminal groups tied to the military forces of Rwanda, Uganda and Zimbabwe benefiting from micro-conflicts in the D.R.C.” "The elite networks derive financial benefit through a variety of criminal activities, including theft, embezzlement, diversion of public funds, undervaluation of goods, smuggling, false invoicing, non-payment of taxes, kickback to public officials and bribery," and added that such pillaging is responsible for much of the death and malnutrition in eastern D.R.C.” Source:http://www.unwire.org.

And so while millions die in Africa with the complicity of the corporations, Europe and North American citizens with all their hypocrisy enjoy lavish holidays. And when Africans try to reach Europe the citizens say rain in on them, Europe is full no more immigrants. Where do the queens and kings in Europe get the diamonds and gold that they use to show off? Is it not from the blood diamonds from Congo, Sierra Leone and conflict zones in Africa that are smuggled out and sold in Brussels, Zurich, London and New York?

And this is not their only crime. We know how Halliburton established $180m flush fund and bought Nigeria officials to secure a $10b oil contract. We know Acre International of Canada paid $260,000 to secure $8b dam contract in Lesotho. We know Swiss, British, German and French economies and banking institutions have made fortunes by providing save havens for funds looted by Sani Abacha, Mobutu, Omar Bongo, Lansana Conte, Arap Moi and the rest of the dictators in Africa. And it is no secrete Belgium is angry with DRC government for inviting China into the country because they are privy to and beneficiary of all the day light robberies going on in the resource rich but economically impoverished country.

Africans know that these corporations are making fortunes but see no benefits from these fortunes. Ghanaians know gold and diamond are being mined at Obuasi and Akwatia but they do not know where it goes, who buys them and where the proceeds go and the same is true of the oil in Nigeria, Gabon, Cameroon, Algeria, Angola and Equatorial Guinea and as for DRC a nation with one-third of world’s natural resources the little I say the better.

This corruption and day light robbery is what has been polished as globalisation which Europe, America, IMF and the Bank want Africa and the third world to join. My question is whose globalisation? Is it the globalisation that only those with blue eyes enjoy or what? If the answer is no then the IMF and the Bank should explain why the world is divided between the “whites haves and the coloured have-nots”. Is this not the second colonialism dressed as globalisation?

Dr. Susan Hawley says it all: “Multinational corporations’ corrupt practices affect the South (i.e. Africa, Asia and Latin America) in many ways. They undermine development and exacerbate inequality and poverty. They disadvantage smaller domestic firms and transfer money that could be put towards poverty eradication into the hands of the rich. They distort decision-making in favour of projects that benefit the few rather than the many. They also increase debt that benefit the company, not the country; bypass local democratic processes; damage the environment; circumvent legislation; and promote weapons sales. Bribes put up the prices of projects. When these projects are paid for with money borrowed internationally, bribery adds to a country's external debt. Ordinary people end up paying this back through cuts in spending on health, education and public services. Often they also have to pay by shouldering the long-term burdens of projects that do not benefit them and which they never requested”. Source: The Corner House, June 2000.

And in all these, the Western media have kept silence. They have not raise a voice against what their governments, intelligence services, corporations and businessmen are doing to Africans. They prefer instead to criticise China for courting the same African leaders Euro-Americans have been protecting for decades. A clear hypocrisy isn’t it? These are the same criticisms King Leopold II levelled against the Arabs who were competing with him for resources and slaves in Congo and we know what Leopold, the 19th century Hitler did in DRC in the name of Christianity and civilisation.

The meaning of their criticism is that with China as a fierce competitor, Africans now have a choice not to go to the World Bank and IMF for conditional loans. They also have a choice to either give their resources to Chinese companies or European and American cartels. It may be the beginning of the end of colonialism, slavery, instabilities, dictatorships, corruption and all the ills that Europeans and Americans have been exporting to Africa. It may be the beginning where Africa’s resources will be bought and payment made to the people and a new chapter that will usher in Africa’s development and close the poverty gap from five thousand years to perhaps one-hundred as observed by Franklin D. Roosevelt.

By Lord Aikins Adusei The Author is a Political Activist and Anti-Corruption Campaigner. He blogs at http://www.iloveafrica2.blogspot.com and can be contacted at politicalthinker1@yahoo.com


Friday, 20 March 2009

Should America and European Nations Pay Reparations to victims of Slavery and Colonialism?


“It’s the most horrible thing I have ever seen in my life….. The natives are five thousand years back of us….The British have been there for two hundred years - for every dollar that the British have put into Gambia, they have taken out ten. It’s just plain exploitation of those people”. President Franklin D. Roosevelt 1943.

The lack of development in Africa and the poverty of millions of African Americans have been blamed on a number of factors but the most serious of all are the evils of slavery and colonialism. There has been a number of voices in America, Europe the Caribbean, Latin America, Australia and Africa that the US and European nations should pay reparations to Africa Americans, Africa and the Caribbean Islands for the sufferings they endured under slavery and colonialism.

Very few will disagree on the negative impact that slavery and colonialism have had on Africa Continent, African Americans and the Caribbean Islands. Centuries of slavery and colonialism deprived the continent of her able human and economic resources. These able men and women (numbering several tens of millions) who were carried away to work in the plantations of the Americas helped to make America and Europe what they are today. Millions of young Africans were forced to abandon the continent of their birth and were shipped several thousands of miles away to lands where they had no historical attachment with. They travelled in very deplorable conditions, often without adequate food, water and air.  While in the New World they were made to work for centuries without pay. They were denied every right enjoyed by humans on the planet. Some even worked till they dropped dead. The slave trade deprived the continent of her energetic men and women a vital resource in any development process and sunk the continent into intellectual wilderness.

Colonialism

About the same time that slavery was being vigorously pursued, plans were hatched by the European powers made up of Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain and others to carve Africa for themselves without consulting the Africans an act that can only be described as robbery. The Scramble for Africa as it is sometimes called gave the Europeans the legal power to do as they pleased in Africa. As a result, the natural resources including timber, gold, diamond, tin ore, ivory, bauxite, rubber and many more were systematically looted in large quantities from the countries they colonised. The irony is that virtually all the incomes from these resources were used to finance the economic, social and the infrastructural development of the European countries with little or nothing at all being used to develop the various countries where these resources came from.

A clear example is the case of Democratic Republic of Congo where King Leopold II of Belgium enslaved the Africans, forced them to work without pay, killed about 10 million and looted the country of her resources and virtually nothing was used to invest in the country except guns which the Belgium army used to terrorise and kill the Africans. Africans who could not meet their daily target of rubber supply had their wives ceased and their hands chopped off by Leopold’s army officers. Leopold even went to the extreme to exhibit Africans in Belgium Zoos. When the DRC was transferred from Leopold II to the Belgium state, the looting and killing continued till DRC gained her ‘independence’ in the 1960s. In fact DRC (Congo Free State) was the main supplier of rubber a vital raw material for the tyre industry and all the money from the sale of the rubber went to Belgium. King Leopold II was able to transform Belgium as one of the poorest countries in Europe into one of the wealthiest, courtesy the enslavement and looting of Africans and their resources.

Belgium was not alone in what she did to the continent. Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Germany and Italy all looted Africa of her gold, diamond, ivory, timber, cobalt, coltan, tin ore, bauxite, manganese and all the minerals you can think of. The Africans who resisted the illegal activities were killed in their millions as happened in South West Africa (now Namibia) where the Germans in 1904 to 1907 committed the first genocide of the 20th Century by killing the Herero and the Namaqua people. While Europe became richer Africa became poorer and the trend continued till the 1950s when the African countries started gaining their ‘independence’ beginning with Libya in 1951, Sudan, Morocco, Tunisia all in 1956 and Ghana in 1957.

With little or no investment in the continent the various post colonial governments inherited countries with practically no infrastructure: roads, rails, harbours, airports, telecommunications, education, health and sanitation. The only areas which saw some few infrastructure investments during the colonial days were those where raw materials were heavily extracted. The attainment of independence did not come on silver PlataAlgeria, Zimbabwe, Angola, Kenya, Namibia and to some extent South Africa all attained their independence from their colonial masters through arm struggles.

This is why the call is growing for America and Europe to pay reparations to these countries for what they did to them.

However there are many who argue that such reparations are not necessary. They contend that African leaders wilfully cooperated with Europeans and also benefited in cash and kind from the slave trade. They argue that the slave trade was a mutual agreement between the buyers and sellers. On colonialism the argument is the same, that the European nations brought civilisation and development to Africa while they also benefited from the exploitation of the rich resources in Africa. So it was also a mutual agreement. They further argue that countries such as Britain, America and Australia have already issued apologies to the victims of slavery and that should be enough to pacify the situation.

I do not agree in any form or shape that slavery and colonialism were based on mutual benefit or agreement. What is so sad is that Africans never invited Europeans to Africa in the first place. Secondly, the artificial boundaries erected by Europeans without any input from Africans have divided tribes, destroyed cultures as well as social and economic cohesions that have existed for centuries. Such partition which was based on greed is partly to blame for the internal conflicts currently going in Africa. Thirdly, the wars, the ethnic divisions, and destructions that accompanied Europeans when they came were foreign to Africa. Africa is still suffering from their contacts with Europeans today. Besides, the abolishment of the slave trade itself is a proof that it was an evil trade perpetrated by Europeans for their own selfish gains. Furthermore, the fact that Europeans reluctantly gave up their political hold on power without relinquishing their economic interests is another proof that they only sought to enrich themselves at the expense of Africans.

If the slave trade and colonialism were based on mutual benefit then why did Europeans decide to abolish it? If the trade was based on mutual agreement between the buyers and sellers then how about those who worked for centuries in the plantations without pay was that a mutual agreement too? What civilisation and development did Europeans bring to Africa? It is the millions of people who could not read or write when Britain left Ghana or the complete lack of infrastructure in Congo when Belgium gave them ‘independence’?

Are apologies alone enough to pacify the forceful deportation of millions against their will? How about the millions who died on the way to the journey of no return? How about the victims of slavery who endured humiliations, rape, torture and death on their way to the New World? Or the humiliations, rape, torture, death and the inhuman treatment of victims of slavery who were ‘lucky’ to get to the New World? How about the millions of children who lost their parents as a result of the forceful deportations and had to endure loneliness and neglect was that a mutual benefit too? How about the single mothers and fathers who were left to bear the hardship of caring for the children when their husbands and wives were taken away? Was that a mutual agreement too?

Evidence of exploitation, racism and extreme discrimination in South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Algeria, Congo Free State (former Zaire) and now DR Congo point to the fact that colonialism was not based on mutual benefit but were rather an attempt by Europe and America to enrich themselves at the expense of Africans and people of colour.

The humiliations, torture, lynching, racism, Jim Crow segregation laws, economic and social discrimination and marginalisation meted out to African Americans even centuries after slavery was abolished is another evidence that Africa and people of African descent were victims of slavery and not beneficiaries. And therefore as victims they must be fully compensated for the unpaid labour as well as all the wrongs meted out to them. Apologies alone are not enough and cannot correct centuries of inhumane treatment of people who were also made in the image of God.

The huge benefits that slavery and colonialism brought to America and Europe, and the denial of such benefits to the very people who worked to bring the wealth is not only against natural law but is also against anything human.

There is no excuse for the inexcusable crime of slavery and colonialism. It is time for America and Europe to own their wrongful treatment of a section of the earth’s citizens and pay reparations to the victims and their families and the countries who suffered directly or indirectly from such evils.

By Lord Aikins Adusei

Robert Mugabe: Victim or Villain?



When sharks smell blood, they go into a feeding frenzy and attack relentlessly. There is feeding frenzy about Zimbabwe preceding the run-off elections scheduled for 27th June. Thwarted in their bid to install their man, Tsvangirai in power, the forces of Western neo-colonialism are ratcheting up media pressure. Some African leaders seem to have bought into this propaganda campaign.

Stories in the Western press about ‘government-sanctioned violence’ in Zimbabwe focus on lurid details quoting one-sided and opinionated anonymous sources without much verifiable data. Remember the gory reports about Saddam’s troops in Kuwait during the first Gulf War bayoneting babies in their incubators? Many of these stories later turned out to be fabrications.The same type of campaign is operating in Zimbabwe now.

Could the violence be orchestrated by external forces attempting to force a crisis of chaos, thereby justifying intervention? Mugabe’s suspension of aid agencies’ involvement is a matter of national survival. The outspoken comments of the US ambassador go well beyond his purview as a resident diplomat and enter the restricted area of direct interference in a sovereign country’s internal affairs. The struggle for control of Zimbabwe has never been about democracy. We need to be absolutely clear about that. The struggle for control of Zimbabwe is about, and has always been about whether Africans will rule themselves or be subordinated to the dictates and whims of Western powers.

When one considers there are at least half a dozen African leaders who actually brutalize their people and have ruled their respective countries without any pretensions about democracy for longer than Mugabe, the question must be asked: why, then Mugabe?

There is a trend across Africa among certain sectors, to dismiss and devalue the ideology and values of the Liberation Struggle, values which encompassed the quest for freedom from foreign rule [which was a thousand times worse than anything any African dictator could dream up today. King Leopold of Belgium, for example, butchered 10 million Congolese during the scramble for Africa at the turn of the last century], the search for an African identity and ultimately, Continental unification. The implication of that struggle has never been lost on Western strategic planners- for a unified Africa, in control of vast human and natural resources, land space three times the size of the United States of America, could evolve into a military and economic giant as has China in recent years.

The implications of this vision, with the psychological consequences for Africans the world over living on the margins of societies they inhabit on sufferance in Europe and America, are world-changing. Thus, buds that sprout must be torn up like weeds before their roots can anchor and spread. Zimbabwe is such a bud.

Whatever his shortcomings, Mugabe has consistently and unequivocally stood for African independence and has demonstrated his Pan-African convictions by intervening on behalf of the government of the late Laurent Kabila in the Democratic Republic of Congo when it was attacked  by forces backed by Western economic interests. Mugabe’s stance vis-à-vis the West has its justification based on sound historical reasons. When the European nations scrambled for Africa’s resources at the turn of the last century, Cecil Rhodes, the quintessential British imperialist [who presumptuously stamped his name on an African country] sent in his mercenaries and freebooters, butchered the Ndebele and Shona, the original owners of the land.

The Africans resisted fiercely inspired by their Nehanda, a divine woman [later hung by the whites for daring to inspire and resist] but were decimated by the Maxim machine gun, a new weapon against which they had no defense. African lands were then apportioned to the invaders and Africans were dispossessed of and driven off their lands.

When Mugabe took back the lands from the whites in 2000, he was acting legitimately and righting a century-old wrong. Talk about the ‘rule of law’ and that he should have followed legal protocol is absolute nonsense- for when Rhodes’ thieves and mercenaries invaded, they exercised no legalities, but simply killed and stole the land just as their contemporaries had done with the indigenous people of America and Australia.

As the so-called Rhodesians, faced defeat by Mugabe’s guerilla armies, Britain which had previously refused to intervene on behalf of the Africans against their ‘kith and kin,’ scrambled to arrange a peace deal before suffering a humiliating defeat. The warring parties were invited to Lancaster House in London where the British bugged the hotel rooms of the Africans and thus checkmated their best moves. The British promised to fund the land reform which was the casus belli for the war, but typically had no intentions of so doing. In 2000, faced with a rising demand for land reform, Mugabe acted. This was unforgivable.

As Cuba remains unforgivable for manifesting independence, so does Zimbabwe remain unforgivable for exercising her right to reclaim land that rightfully belongs to Africans. Behind all the high-flown talk about ‘property rights’ and  the ‘rule of law’ lies white racism, a sense of white entitlement, and that Africans have no right to redress the wrongs perpetrated against them so brutally and for so long.

The West, especially Britain, the US, Australia and other Europeans have no right to lecture Africans about rights and the ‘rule of law’ given the history of their depredations-slavery, theft of lands, extermination of the Tasmanians by the Australians and genocide by the Germans against the Herero. 

Zimbabwe’s problems are African problems and must be solved by Africans. Tsvangirai’s running to Western capitals like a petulant schoolchild complaining about Mugabe is giving the West an excuse to intervene in Zimbabwe’s affairs or perhaps he is truly their puppet and has to report to his masters. It is very curious that the West announced his victory ahead of even exit polls.

Frustrated by the failure of their man to win an outright victory, the West has ratcheted up the pressure in the hopes if precipitating a crisis which would allow them to intervene more directly. Mugabe’s pre-emptive move against the aid agencies [which have the perfect cover for espionage] has taken critical pieces off the board. Africans need to understand that is a test of their sovereignty and independence. If Mugabe’s independent voice can be stilled by Western intervention, propaganda and the collusion of local puppets, then Africa’s independence becomes meaningless.

Africa can solve its own problems and it needs to assertively tell the West this. Mbeki’s quiet diplomacy is an attempt find African solutions and avoid violence and chaos, for ZANU-PF will not ride off into the sunset and give the country to a man who cavorts about Western capitals calling for sanctions and intervention against his own country and seems to speak from a script that echoes the detractors of the government. Zimbabwe’s problems are not intractable and they can be solved by Africans working together, but the region’s leaders need to speak in one voice and unequivocally tell the West to leave them alone to resolve the situation, whether by a unity government or some cession of power.

Unfortunately, Tsvangirai has compromised his credibility by appearing as the West’s man. We need not to be befuddled by talk of ‘democracy’ which the West insists on when it meets their interest. Zimbabwe, we must never, never forget, is really about one defiant black man taking back what was stolen from his people as was his right to do. Africans have no reason to be ashamed of this.

By Amengeo Amengeo 

Specialist in Spanish, Latin American, Caribbean as well as African History. He has also been a journalist, civil servant and graphic artist

Africa-India Partnership Grows from Strength to Strength

The relationship between Africa and India dates back to thousands of years. India and Africa are not discovering each other now. They are bound together by very long traditions of friendship and common historical struggle against the evils of colonialism, apartheid, racism and injustice. This common historical background and a successful achievement of independence is one of the great opportunities for strengthening the India-Africa strategic partnership.

India and Africa are keen to work together for better and greater representation in international forums, so as to have their voice in international decision making. India has launched and successfully implemented a number of initiatives to support various aspects of the continent’s peace, stability and development.

Such efforts have been visible in areas such as the Human Resources Development and Capacity Building. Many Africans are being trained in Indian universities. Other short term courses are being conducted under the ICCR and ITEC scholarship schemes respectively. ITEC has been training more than 1000 beneficiaries per annum from the Sub-Saharan Africa since 1964.  India has also launched many Lines of Credit to Africa to help its process of development. India has announced the e-connectivity programme which will benefit 53 countries of the African Union to boost development in tele-education and tele-medicine. Apart from supporting the Peace keeping process in many countries in Africa, India has provided technical assistance to the continent under the South-South Co-operation. All of Africa acknowledges these important initiatives of India in the context of Indo-Africa partnership.

Although the Indo- Africa relationship faces challenges, the strategic partnership should bring solutions for the various issues which are included in the African Programme namely NEPAD (The New Partnership for Africa’s Development). Some of the  issues include:  Raising the level of investments in human capital development in Africa; Promoting more capacity building, technology acquisitions as well as knowledge generation sharing and applications;  Acceleration of African Industrialization so as to add value to the huge African natural resources and get good, fair and competitive prices for the African goods and acceleration of development of infrastructure which will facilitate intra-Africa trade and economic development in the continent. Other issues include enhancing economic co-operation, trade and improved market access for African products and sharing India’s experience on green revolution for boosting agricultural products so as to combat hunger and disease in Africa. Combating hunger and disease in Africa are key areas of Indo-Africa strategic partnership to meet the first Millennium Development Goal, which aims at reducing the proportion of the hungry people by half by 2015.  

There are huge opportunities of investment in Africa. Determined to raise its share in the world trade, African countries are making significant changes in economic and social development. True transformation in the rural development: all inclusive health care, rapid growth in educational sector, rule of law; good governance as well as the democratic culture, are deepening their roots in African countries. We should try our level best to accelerate these economic and social developments through a strengthened India-Africa Partnership in this 21st Century.

Together we will succeed as together, we were victorious yesterday against colonialism, apartheid, racism and injustice. Let us interact and work together for a flourished, deep and everlasting partnership between Africa and India where African countries would provide opportunities for investment, trade and industrialization of their untapped natural resources and in turn India will share with Africa, its advanced technology and technical expertise, suitable for African countries.

I look forward for a bright future of a strong Indo-Africa Partnership in this 21st Century.

By C. Agostinho Do Rosario 
Dean of African Diplomatic Corps
New Delhi

AllAfrica News: Latest

Pambazuka News :Comment & analysis

AfriGator

AfrigatorAfrigator