Compared to George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, President Barack Obama’s interaction with African leaders has been below par. Ironic for America’s first African-Americ president. And there has been no landmark initiatives such as Clinton’s Africa Growth and Opportunities Act (AGAO).
Cynics see last week’s summit in Washington D.C as just another jamboree. The usual scenario was certainly enacted. We had some 46 or so overdressed African Heads of State accompanied by an embarrassingly large retinue of “aides,” freeloaders, supplicants and cronies.
President Obama’s Africa Initiative is motivated by America’s self-interest. This is what he was elected to do. He also has to counterbalance China’s advance on the continent. A resource hungry China had stolen a march in the continent and now has to be checkmated. In spite of the prospect of a real or imagined infusion of additional $50 billion worth of investments from the U.S. there is nothing to be elated about after this summit.
Fifty billion dollars is hardly going to make a dent on the infrastructural needs of Nigeria’s Lagos, Rivers or Kano state. It will help but it sidesteps the issue. For, to unlock the door of the continent’s underachievement, African leaders themselves must face the inconvenient truth. For the umpteenth time, President Obama has pointed out that the continent must fight corruption, improve human rights and strengthen the rule of law.
Unfortunately, it is unlikely that Obama’s audience largely composed of those running ‘semi-democracies’ (courtesy of the Economist) or worse were impressed. The relationship with the U.S. is unequal and embarrassingly paternalistic because Africa does not have strong institutions. This is why the continent itself is a contradiction in terms. Paradoxically, a high ‘growth’ rate has not led to sustainable development let alone a determined assault on poverty. Furthermore, a youthful population has not led to a demographic dividend.
Any new infusion of funds will only temporarily mask Africa’s debilitation. The post-colonial state has failed in Africa because unlike in South Asia, home grown solutions have not been tailored to tackle the problems. This is in large part because of the inability to resolve the question of the nationalities. Artificially drawn boundaries by the colonial masters have inhibited the development of a strong sense of nationhood.
In this connection, it behoves African leaders to understand the import of what Garibaldi, the leader of Risorgimento said after Italian re-unification. As Garibaldi had the intellectual honesty to observe, “We have created here, a geographical entity which we call Italy. However, the more difficult task is how to create the Italians”.
The sooner the leadership of Africa has the courage to accept this mindset and tackle their problems from this perspective, the better. Otherwise summit or not, it will be business as usual. This means the continuation of the destructive mentality captured so well by the enterprising journalist Micheala Wrong as, “It is our turn to eat”. This policy thrust has stripped the cupboard bare.
As in South-Asia, Africa must build strong, independent, technically enabled institutions. Such institutions will enable the countries to deal with corruption and evolve an electoral system that is accountable. In addition, Africa must evolve a model as in South-Asia which moves away from the short-termism of cowboy style financialism. For example, Brazil’s widely admired development institution, BNDES has the capacity to lend for between 5-50 years. Where are the equivalent African institutions?
Africa must evolve its own model. This will require fiscally disciplined elite who see macro-economic stability and innovative development oriented infrastructure enhancing policies as the means to eradicate poverty and achieve social justice. The summit itself ought to have been held in Africa. That it was not, speaks volumes. Africa’s salvation lies at home and not in summits which are incapable of confronting inconvenient truths.
