Skip to content
Click on cover to enlarge
Paintings by Cheri Samba

The Conspiracy Against Africa

«  page 1 of 6  »

Africa is a mess and it’s not going to get better any time soon.

by Gerald Caplan

Paintings by Cheri Samba

Published in the November 2006 issue.  » BUY ISSUE     

          Facebook         Stumble      Get The Walrus on your Blackberry or Windows Mobile        RSS


Africa is a mess and it’s not going to get better any time soon. That’s the awful truth that’s so hard to face — or to state publicly — for those of us who have had a long, intimate relationship with the continent. Mine has lasted for almost forty-five years. But from the very start, my experiences in Africa began conflicting with my hopes, indicating trouble afoot, foretelling that our utopian dreams were going to lead to crushing disappointments. Of course, we should have known what the entire twentieth century taught: that all utopian dreams fail, not least those wrapped in progressive rhetoric. Still, the reality in so much of Africa has been infinitely more appalling than anything we might have feared.

The regret, disappointment, even the cynicism runs deep, but alongside the many wonderful, committed, and dedicated Africans I know from one end of Africa to the other,1 the struggle for a more just and equitable continent must continue. All too often it feels like a Sisyphean task.

Besides the fear of spreading hopelessness, there’s a genuine risk in publicly facing Africa’s mess. Reasonably enough, Westerners of goodwill want to know how to account for Africa’s apparently endless list of problems. But behind the question often lurks the unspoken implication that the answer has to do with race: are Africans really incapable of governing themselves?

Most people are aware of the African condition: corruption, conflict, famine, aids, wretched governance, grinding poverty. At the time of its independence in 1957, Ghana — the second sub- Saharan African country to free itself of colonial rule and the white hope (as it were) of the emerging continent — was in development terms on a par with South Korea, near the bottom of the scale. Today, the United Nations’ Human Development Index ranks South Korea twenty-eighth among 177 nations, Ghana 138th. For many, this is a vivid and fair symbol of the African record in the past half-century.

I ran into troubling omens from my first immersion in Africa as a graduate student in London in the early 1960s. When I was working on my doctorate at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies, one of my friends was Gilchrist Olympio, from Togo, a tiny former French colony in West Africa. Gil failed to appear one day, and on the following day we read in the Times that his father, the first president of independent Togo, had been ousted in the first coup of post-colonial Africa. No one had foreseen the military threat to the new Africa, yet soon enough military governments became as commonplace as the heat.

In white-ruled Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), where I was based for part of my doctoral work, a few of us used to unwind at a dance hall in one of the segregated African townships. After two years of teaching, researching, and regularly demonstrating against the government, I was arrested. Later, I learned that the racist security service knew every rocking Congo jive number I ever danced to and that African informers had been paid to keep an eye on us white liberal troublemakers. In Zambia, living by the Upper Zambezi River, the traditional elite of an anachronistic kingdom struck an alliance with South African apartheid leaders against the new nationalist government of Kenneth Kaunda — another shocking lesson to a nice ignorant boy from Toronto. In 1968, back in Canada, I hosted a zapu “freedom fighter” from Rhodesia, only to listen to him viciously badmouth the competing liberation movement, zanu, composed mainly of members of Rhodesia’s other major ethnic group. He could not have detested his white oppressors more. Much later still, I marvelled at another bitter irony — that I had gone to prison in old Rhodesia to help Robert Mugabe become president of Zimbabwe.

From the relative comfort of Toronto, I became deeply involved in a Canadian advocacy group supporting the right of the Igbo people of eastern Nigeria to secede. Soon after independence Nigeria was already in chaos, having undergone murderous coups and internecine conflict among its three main peoples, and now the majority were prepared to starve the entire Igbo “nation” to death rather than allow it to secede. I soon realized that the Igbo never had a chance, and that the leadership, with our blind support, was prepared to see its people starve to death for a wholly chimerical cause.

Ten years on, I was the director of the cuso volunteer program in Nigeria, where more than 200 Canadians served as low-paid teachers, nurses, physiotherapists, and the like. Then, as now, Nigeria’s reputation on the continent was unique, and overwhelmingly awful. Despite many marvellous Nigerians, collectively the country is belligerent, fractious, and always on the verge of erupting into violence. I feared that many of my young wards would return home as confirmed racists. The problem was convincingly explaining to them why Nigeria is the way it is.

Now the task is explaining why almost all of Africa is the way it is. Finding myself plunged into a study of the 1994 Rwandan genocide and its aftermath, the calamitous wars of the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo, does not make the task any easier. Not much does. I was frequently in Addis Ababa early in this new century as two of the world’s poorest countries, Ethiopia and Eritrea, former allies led by promising new leaders, slaughtered each other’s young soldiers over an economic disagreement. Rural Ethiopia faced a desperate famine, and the government appealed to the world for relief; at the same time, the markets of Addis sold a gorgeous abundance of fresh fruits and vegetables, and in luxury hotels the sumptuous buffets never ran out. During most African famines, people starve because of a lack of money, not a lack of food. In December 2005, I spoke at a series of conferences and marches across Canada about the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda, the quasi-genocide in Darfur, and the instability still threatening the Great Lakes region of Africa. It seems as if the horror stories never stop.

Writing in 2001, bbc correspondent George Alagiah noted that since independence there have been over eighty violent or unconstitutional changes of government, and in twenty countries such eruptions have been repeat occurrences. In A Passage to Africa, Alagiah concludes that it is in the nature of African politics that by the time any such statistics are published they are likely to be out of date. Indeed, over the years African leaders have become synonymous with monstrous tyranny — Mobutu, Idi Amin, Abacha, Bokassa, Sam Doe, Charles Taylor, Mugabe, Habre, Mengistu, Moi, Bashir. The list is very long. It is not possible to calculate the millions of people murdered by these men, or the amount of suffering they caused, or the amount of money they stole: Africans slaughtering Africans, Africans immiserating other Africans, Africans brutally exploiting other Africans. None of this is in dispute.

Comments (8 comments)

: Utterly vapid; devoid of any shread of new insight. Masquerading, unsucessfully I might add, as important, urgent and interesting. Gerald Caplan's earnest failure is his lack of insight (and bloviatory prose), the result of whch deadens even the most stomping vibrations of truth. October 30, 2006 11:22 EST

: Utterly vapid; devoid of any shread of new insight. Masquerading, unsucessfully I might add, as important, urgent and interesting. Gerald Caplan's earnest failure is his lack of insight (and bloviatory prose), the result of whch deadens even the most stomping vibrations of truth. October 30, 2006 11:22 EST

: Personally, the article was fantastic, well written, and thought provoking. With an equal amount of money going in as goes out of Africa it makes one wonder if western charity is the newest form of indirect taxation.

To the first commenter: Did you really just use the word "bloviatory" to describe someone else's verbose writing style? October 30, 2006 14:59 EST

sdovan: To the first poster: Perhaps written to enlighten the average Canadian rather than the latest PHD in African studies? November 01, 2006 10:07 EST

dwkidd: As one who has spent a number of years in Anglophone West, and East and Southern Africa, and guilty of being a high priced consultant, I think the article is generally spot on. I do believe we need to pay more attention to the inherent capability of Africans and to the integration and functionality of their communities. (We pay attention to their capabilities by raiding their best trained) At one time I was convinced that the solution was to shut the gates. Keep talented Africans (there are plenty) at home and keep consultants and exploitative corporations and our war machines out. November 02, 2006 17:02 EST

ipamanning: Africa is not about race, it is about community culture no longer able to serve its original purpose, about clans as islands, clans interlocking, clans witchbound, clans jealous; and about 'donors' and carpetbaggers from all over who sustain the corruption, the waPajero amidst the shanty lines. There is as yet no notion of a nation state here in Africa, of something lying beyond self and the clan; and the waZungu have gone; no critical mass of western liberal democrats able to help Africa to achieve Fanon's assertion that "it is the destiny of the black man to be white." Only the Chinese now, squatting at the airport, awaiting their bus. April 18, 2007 21:36 EST

Anonymous: Being from South Africa I'm pretty sure there is a conspiracy against Africa. The end of Apartheid was orchastrated to collapse the South African economy so that vital minerals could be bought cheaply. It had nothing to do with human rights. Both the South African and Zimbabwean currencies were stronger than the US dollar during parts of the 70's. Look at them now. The fact is that black Africans cannot rule. Democracy is not part of their culture. Unfortunately the author is too naive to see this. South Africa will fall next, Zimbabwe has been ruined by Mugabe. No one lifted a finger to intervene, but during Apartheid, the whole world was swept up into ending it. You must ask yourself why? South Africa would have become a superpower if the Americans and it's western allies did not conspire to stop it. August 23, 2007 18:55 EST

Anonymous: Personally, as a student in high school, I found the article incredibly effective. Why? Because it was accessible and written with more than a bit of heart. Teenagers today are becoming too superficial and part of the reason why is because information is not being communicated to us in a way that makes us say,'hey, this is important.'
Information is delivered to us only after it has been morphed into a huge jargon. Too many authors try to impress with the eloquence of their language ,the sophistication of their prose. The result: issues like genocide, gender inequality, and racial discrimination, in short issues of great important, become lost in the mind of teenagers. Basically: we don't understand January 29, 2008 16:21 EST

Comment on this article


Will not be displayed on the site

Submit a comment online

Submit a letter to the Editor


    Cancel

The Walrus E-Newsletter

Online exclusives, events, offers:
get news of everything Walrus.


ADVERTISE WITH US