Shackled continent: this, indeed, is an apt characterization of Africa. But the description applies more to individual African countries, especially Nigeria. Africa is a continent of paradox: it is at once resource-wise, by far the richest of all continents of our planet. Similarly, Nigeria is by far the richest country in Africa. Yet, Africa is by far the poorest of all the continents and relative to its resources and current conditions, Nigeria should be regarded as the poorest country in Africa. It is a bitter fact that, in development indices, Nigeria is put in the same class as Niger Republic, recently war-torn Liberia and Sierra Leone and Somalia. The statistics cannot be faulted; although Nigerians, especially Nigerian rulers, are always in a state of denial. Nigeria is becoming poorer: it is universally accepted, even by Nigerian rulers, that, in terms of real development, Nigeria is poorer today than it was in 1960. The level of poverty has equally been deepening. It is an undeniable fact that the more Nigeria earns, the poorer it becomes. This is what has happened to the country in the last sixty three years. 

Many intensely patriotic African nationalists, especially some intellectuals, have, for the last fifty or so years, tried hard to work towards finding solutions to Africa’s problems through their writings and activism; all in vain. They have tried to liberate Africa, especially Nigeria, from the unrelenting grips of imperialist powers and their African agents, who pass for leaders. The continent has woefully failed to move forward in all indices of human development-political, institutional, economic, and cultural. Culturally, the continent, as typified by Nigeria, has been sinking deeper into superstitions. Even some of the most “educated” Nigerians, holders of PhDs, scientists, etc, are terribly superstitious. This is also true of religious leaders. It is indeed disturbing that the dominance of superstitious behaviour in the lives of Africans, which the Right Honorable, Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe decried and wrote extensively about in the 1930s, is now, as never before, threatening to envelop the continent, but especially Nigeria. This is in spite of the daily mushrooming of mosques and churches all over the place.

There have been intense debates as to factors responsible for this state of paradox and nauseating stagnation. The debates have been characterised by “blame game”. Some patriotic African nationalists, especially the highly productive, forward-looking and respected scholars, such as Chinua Achebe, tried to explain Africa’s (Nigeria’s) predicament in terms of centuries of domination and exploitation of the continent by Europe and the United States of America. Chinua Achebe emphasized the dehumanization of Africans by centuries of trans-Atlantic slave trade and had argued that no other race in the world had suffered such human degradation. Achebe believed that this dehumanization has continued to cast a long shadow over the behaviour of Africans. Harping on this, Nigerian rulers and intellectuals have continued to blame external forces for Nigeria’s, indeed, Africa’s development problems. They boringly continue to point fingers at western colonialism, neo-colonialism, imperialism and other agencies, notably the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank; mostimes to the exclusion of internal forces. 

Another school of thought, however, prefers to pin the blame for Nigeria’s predicament squarely on Nigerian leaders, who perpetuate themselves in power through blatant and open rigging of elections, through the use of police and the military forces, as well as manipulating ethnic, sectional and religious differences among Nigerians. This school of thought believes that it is high time we stopped blaming external forces for Nigeria’s terrible condition. For purposes of emphasis, it is argued that the blame should be placed at the doorsteps of Nigeria’s incompetent and exceedingly corrupt ruling class; notably the politicians. This belief or view has been given a flip, especially in recent time, by Western leaders and their elites who have been trying to deflect the implications of such blame: for example, the issue of payment of reparations to Africans. The demand for reparations was mooted in the 1980s. It was argued that Africa’s backwardness was the result of centuries of Western exploitation of the continent especially with regard to the impact of Atlantic slave trade, therefore Africans must be compensated. The Western denial of responsibility for Africa’s problems was brought into bold relief recently when the then President Obama of the United States addressed Africans through the Ghanaian Parliament some years back. He made the forceful point that Africans should stop blaming outsiders for their problems. He illustrated his point by citing the example of Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, who he said ruined his country. It was the turn of his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton to tell the Nigerian rulers to their face that Nigeria’s development problem was due squarely to their incompetence and misgovernance. Characteristically, the morally bankrupt Nigerian rulers led by the then Senate President reacted negatively to the Clinton’s assertion. Of course, Clinton knew about the terrible condition of Nigeria more than them.

Both schools of thought have points worth reflecting on in the debate, or the argument. Regarding the view put forward by Achebe and his fellow thinkers, it is worth remembering or noting that history has a lot of elements of continuity in its bowel. History often casts a long shadow over developments for a long time; sometimes, for centuries. It is not easy or possible, for example, to understand the current resurgence of China on the global scene, without going back to its history which stretches back to three or four thousand years. Similarly, the technological breakthroughs experienced by Japan in the 20^th century, can only be meaningfully understood, or situated in its history in the 17^th and 18^th centuries.

On the other hand, it is impossible to comprehend the terrible things which are happening in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Zaire): the mass killings of millions, maiming, raping of women, including girl-children and general anarchy, without knowing the events which culminated in the murder of Patrice Lumumba by the CIA, when that country attained its independence in 1960, and the support given by the West to Mobutu Sese Seko, one of the most brutal and corrupt dictators in history.

It is therefore rather too early to believe that the devastating effects of colonialism on Africa could have withered away or evaporated in a short period of fifty or forty years. In any case, it is important to remember that some African countries attained their independence only about twenty years ago. Besides, the departing colonialists’ ensured that the colonial structures for domination and exploitation that they had put in place earlier were left firmly intact in their former colonies. They also ensured that they selected and appointed only Africans they could trust, with regard to continued exploitation of their former colonies. Most of them became dictators; their loyalty was more to their Western sponsors than their people. The French policy in Africa provides the best example: up to the present time, there are French military bases all over their former colonies to ensure that only the rulers they like are allowed to hold power. The west is also assured of their total control of Africa through the type of education they introduced into the continent. This is the type of education which the late Waziri of Sokoto characterised as “a cultural transplant”, meaning that it was not rooted in African history, tradition and culture. Only a fool would believe that the type of education-currently in place in Nigeria could be useful as an agent of development. It was designed by the colonialist for the exploitation of the resources of their respected colonies, and it remains an agent of exploitation by the African rulers to whom power was handed by the colonialists. This explains the current Nigerian condition. The system of education is turning out a large number of crooks, manipulators of differences between Nigerians, loafers, idlers, etc. The West, as already pointed out, has other tools with which it shackles Africa, for example, the IMF and the World Bank. Where these agencies fail to deliver satisfactorily, there are the Economic Hit Men and the Jackals, to assassinate African leaders who show the slightest signs of independence from the West. For those who would like to understand this phenomenon of overthrowing African leaders who oppose Western exploitation of their countries, or even murder them, they must read John Perkins books, for example: The confessions of an Economic Hit Man and The Secret History of the American Empire.

This is not, of course holding brief for the African (Nigerian) ruling elite and their backward intellectual supporters who have woefully and shamelessly failed to harness and use the vast African resources for the benefit of their people. It is no wonder then that some Africans who lived through the colonial rule are calling for the return of the colonialists to repossess their former colonies. According to these people, Africans fared much better during the colonial rule than in the “independent” Africa.

It may be useful to add that these same countries shed crocodile tears by lamenting about Africa’s problems, the very problems for which they are squarely responsible. They hide money stolen by African leaders in their countries; they have consistently denied Africa a just and fair trade; they have consistently denied Africa’s industrialisation efforts by dumping their subsided goods on the continent and they take Africa’s resources almost for free. One could go on and on.

That is why the West, being threatened by China in Africa has been making noises about the “Chinese peril”. They claim that the Chinese will retard the development of democracy, good governance and accountability in Africa, as if they themselves have shown any interest in these, beyond paying lip service.

There cannot be any doubt that China’s foreign policy with regards to its relationship with the rest of the world has been underlined by crude pursuit of raw materials and market. They are terribly self-centred and, in fact, blind to issues of genuine African interests. Their behaviour in Sudan, Vis-a-vis the Darfur tragedy, and in Burba, as well as elsewhere, so far, show that they do not care about the suffering of the peoples of the countries with which they relate and trade. Their economic relation with Africa, therefore, cannot lead to meaningful development. If anything, their practices, so far, in flooding and dumping their goods in these countries, will definitely stifle Africa’s industrialization efforts. In this regard, it should be noted that one of the factors behind the killing of Nigeria’s textile industries is the flooding of Nigeria’s markets with Chinese textile goods. Are we truly independent economically and politically? The answer to this is an obvious ‘no’, at least not yet. May God help us to be independent indeed, Amen.

By:Countdown