AT last! the much bally-hood United Nations Special Session on Africa’s economic problems has come and gone with the wind. Africa, however, remains the same impoverished, uncared for and unloved by all including Africans themselves.
Starting with Bob Geldof’s Live Aid Concert through his well-orchestrated Sport Aid and culminating in the UN special session, those who could afford to dream must have believed that Africa was probably nearing the end of its economic woes. I for one did not for a moment delude myself that those who pillaged and pilloried Africa in the first instance would be so magnanimous now to generously donate towards her economic recovery – a step considered suicidal in certain European quarters. The logic in this reasoning is that for the developed world to sustain its high tech economy, Africa must conversely continue to wallow in abject poverty.
Further, it is believed that the luxurious lifestyles of the Northern hemisphere was founded, nurtured and consolidated on the sweat and toils of African slave labour hence any attempt at shoring up Africa’s economy will mean a reduction in the luxuriant living of the developed societies. Can anybody visualize such a situation?
All these points were pondered on before the opening of the UN special sessions and reinforced my deep skepticism about any possible success of the session. To start with, the arrival of the Sports Aid torch in New York on May 25 had added colour and flavour to the UN session.
The event had helped to focus world attention on Africa’s chronic economic problems and it heightened expectations from the UN special session. The hope and expectation however crash-landed as widely suspected by realists.
The very first signal that Africa should not expect undue sympathy or concrete commitment emanated from within America, the seat of the UN special session. As the special session opened up, Americans, including Ronald Reagan, directed their attention to their more pressing domestic problem of hunger. The United States, a nation of over 200 million people and the richest in the world paradoxically has over 30 million hungry people.
It was therefore the clearest demonstration of America’s great insensitivity to Africa’s problem to embark on a nation-wide symbolic gesture of linking hand in sympathy with America’s hungry while the whole world was expected to be seriously involved in evolving lasting solution to Africa’s myriad problems.
Ironically too, most of the hungry in America are blacks. To show their disdain for Africa’s plight, there were ridiculous suggestions in the American local Press that Africans had come with their begging bowls.’ Nevertheless, President Abdou Diouf of Senegal made spirited efforts in presenting the African case to the Assembly. He eloquently enumerated the various economic woes of the continent and summed up by linking Africa’s economic growth to the entire world’s economic development.
Professor Bolaji Akinyemi too was unambiguous in his call for higher targets of Official Developmental Assistance for Africa (ODA). However, after all the rhetorics here and there, Africa, at the end of the day failed to secure any concrete commitment towards converting some of her debts to grants and the improvement of commercial debt re-negotiation. Apart from Canada and the Netherlands that promised token assistance through conversion of all ODA loans of the most impoverished African states into grants, no other developed country committed itself.
The United States did not waiver from its age-long position maintaining that the growth and development of the US economy is the only avenue of promoting economic growth and development of the entire world. Would anyone blame them? George Shultz, Secretary of US State Department stated categorically that Africans are primarily responsible for their own economic recovery. Nothing could be truer.
The African Priority Programme for Economic Recovery (APPER) 1986 – 1990 sought to commit the international community to providing 45 billion dollars, out of the 128 billion dollars required to implement the programme.
African countries indicated their readiness to generate the remaining $82 billion for the programme. But the developed countries were not impressed. Should we be taken aback at this turn of events? No. If anything, the poor outcome of the UN special session showed that self-reliance is the salvation of Africa. It amounts to self-delusion to expect the developed countries, whose economies thrive on our poverty to seriously aid Africa out of it present economic doldrums.
If we are to learn anything from history, it is definitely not to expect any gratuitous aid from our age-long exploiters. In the first instance, these developed countries, aside from their exploitative political paraphernalia, also possess the economic instrumentality (special text: There still exists economic structures built by colonialism and maintained through neocolonialism exemplified by the nefarious activities of the multinational corporations that continue to milk independent African states. Africa’s economic headache is not only the existence of exploitative exchange pattern… ) for further exploitation of Africa. There still exists economic structures built by colonialism and maintained through neocolonialism – exemplified by the nefarious activities of the multinational corporations that continue to mi l k independent African states. Africa’s economic headache is not only the existence of exploitative exchange pattern but the fact that these nations are virtually mere satellites, revolving round the big powers.
Their economies are tied to one hard currency or the other hence they are very vulnerable to outside forces. Having damaged Africa’s economy beyond repair, is it not wishful thinking therefore to turn cap in hand to these same exploiters and expect them to sympathise? They will only sneer at our own folly and naivety.
What Africans fail to perceive is that the developed countries are placed in comfortable positions with the knowledge that we are perpetually tied to their apron strings through debts owed them.
Once we can liquidate our debts, we must have severed one of the thick strings that attach us to the big powers and we expect them to aid us out of their clutches?… Impossible!
Quite apart from the economic manipulations, Western powers also engage in open, blatant and forceful exploitations epitomised by the situation in South Africa. America and Britain specifically refuse to support economic sanctions against Botha’s South Africa on the spurious excuse that sanctions do not work but Reagän was strident in his vociferous call for the same sanctions against Libya.
Still, the Americo-British alliance could not contemplate military action against Pretoria but found the same military raid as the only method of stemming Libya’s alleged terrorism. What more examples of hypocrisy and double speak do Africans require before they see the light? Britain has over N7 billion investments in South Africa and it is estimated that about 250,000 jobs in Britain are dependent on the apartheid enclave. Should we then realistically expect Britain to champion anti-apartheid cause?
Never!
It should now be clear to all and sundry that Africa’s political and economic salvation lies within Africa. Only Africans can change their own destinies with their own hands. The very first place to start is embarking on total self-reliance. To expect our exploiters to help us out of our predicament is to say Jesus was a black man. The lack of commitment, by the developed countries towards salvaging Africa’s economy should be an eye opener to Africans. Charity must begin at home. We have had enough of rhetorics and wishful thinking.
Time for action is now.
Source: ALAKE ON RESCUE MISSION, a publication of the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development, MoSMD.
