"History books will tell you about momentous events and complex politics. Memoirs and travel books give you the feel of a place from personal experiences. In this book I have tried to combine the broad history with the local and personal, telling stories of incidents, actions, characters that hopefully give something of the feel of Africa, demonstrate its huge diversity of peoples and places, and go some way to illuminating why Africa is the way it is, both positive and negative." - page 8
 |
| Africa: Altered States, Ordinary Miracles by Richard Dowden |
I was immediately drawn to this book when wandering around Waterstones trailing my fingers along the spines of books, given the completely archetypal, conventional message it connotes. It is the classic worldview of Africa: a young, thin, black child, lacking enough food and clothes, looking sad, and clutching a football (the latter is obviously less conventional...). It screams 'help me'. It echoes the socio-political view that, as Tony Blair once said, 'the state of Africa is a scar on the conscience of the world'. But what has such a degrading, condescending view had upon Africa itself, from the view of Africans?
Explicit, frank, challengingly evaluative and analytical, Dowden paints a vivid picture of Africa the way it is; a view not romantically tainted as by Aid workers vying to obtain the greatest funding for this 'war-torn, helpless' place, a view not clouded by the removed perception of it as a place politically stormy and best left to sort its own tangles out, a view that is not external. As the Director of the Royal African Society with over 30 years of experience in Africa, his view is an internal one - an African one.
Dividing the novel concisely (yes, it is 576 pages long. But for the breadth and depth of the subject covered, its expression is concise in its ability to cover everything it does in so detailed a way) into sections ranging from 'The End of Colonialism; New States, Old Societies' to 'Phones, Asians and the Professionals; The New Africa', Dowden utilizes his experiences as a teacher and journalist based in Africa as well as those of his African friends and correspondents to illustrate what Michael Buerk brilliantly deems 'the real Africa'. As is unavoidable when Africa is concerned, he explores the history of colonialism and subsequent independence, the turmoil of African politics and its relationship with the West and Asia both historically, presently and futuristically (let's pretend the latter word makes grammatical sense - it adds a nice onomatopoeic rhythm to the sentence...), and the infamous wars and genocides, be they social, tribal or political. But what stands this exploration of Africa apart from others, is that he addresses the world identity of Africa given to it by the West and by Asia - to us, it is a problem to be solved by our aid, to Asia, it is a future gold mine worth economic investment but not a socio-politically complex relationship. But what of the African view of themselves? Has this too been tainted by the influence of the West/Asia?
Unfortunately, I believe it has. And in turn, I think that this has had subsequent implications upon Africa's ability to develop.
One of the largest areas that Dowden explores the impact of such views upon Africa is within its politics; from the presidency (arguably dictatorship) of Mugabe over Zimbabwe to that of General Idi Amin Dada over Uganda, African politics has become synonymous with brutality and corruption. In essence, both the historical colonialism of these areas by countries such as Britain, Portugal and France, and their relationships in the late 20th and early 21st centuries have played influential roles in the birth of this synonymy. Under the occupation of their imperialist rulers, many African countries were allowed to develop in some areas but not in others; centrally, and ironically, not politically. The populations watched the behaviour of their British/French/Portuguese etc. leaders who did not engage with the African way of life, but often exploited it for their own benefit and the benefit of the imperialist nation. Unsurprisingly, come independence in the mid 20th century, African countries who had lacked development politically found themselves without a stable leadership structure, and so, lo and behold, militancy came into control through social conflict, often leading to men who led such military parties coming to power. Large numbers hence did as they had watched; they used their power to gain more power, exploiting the state wealth for themselves, using complex economical scams to pocket funds, and leading a biased, egotistic, materialistic presidential career. During the latter quarter of the 20th century, during the Cold War, both the West and the Soviet Union were guilty of blindly supporting such leaders merely to keep them on their side, rather than risking the loss of a country's support to the rival side. Thus, corrupt leaders were kept in control by external interference and economic funding.
"The imperial powers took down their flags and left. But it was one thing to say that the British should stop ruling the Gold Coast, quite another to create a country called Ghana. Hoisting a new flag did not create a new nation state. What did Africans feel about suddenly being Nigerian or Ghanaian or Senegalese? Or indeed about being African? What did it mean? Europeans had claimed racial superiority to justify slavery and then imperialism. African culture, knowledge and values were despised, African dignity and self-worth eroded. Africans were not allowed to develop their own political and social systems to engage with the modern industrial world. They were forced to abandon their own beliefs, identities and values and become imitation white men. In the end, the greatest impact of European imperialism in Africa may have been neither political nor economic. It may have been psychological: the destruction of African self-belief." - page 62
In the 21st century, the influence upon African politics is segregated between Asian (predominantly Chinese) and Western actions; China has taken a strictly non-interference socio-political view, investing heavily in Africa's natural gold mine through its abundance of natural minerals and keeping up its relationship with Africa through generously writing off debts owed, moreover providing aid that contrasts that of the West by building infrastructure such as roads and railways in African countries with Chinese labour. The Western role is less explicitly involved, largely focused on economic aid. Dowden notes the two juxtaposing views of where China's arguably 'preferable' relationship with Africa will lead Africa's future - will it lead inevitably to a new imperialist power, or will it aid in Africa's independent development?
I personally think that there are two fundamental areas blocking the latter path; both matters of sustainability. With its non-interference government-to-government policy, China allows African politicians to run their country by themselves, viewing it as an internal matter. In some cases, such blind support could enhance the strength of corrupt politicians in their manipulative rule over the country, socio-politically hindering development. Equally, with their attitude of, as Dowden writes, 'just get[ting] on with it' (see page 501), the environment has dramatically suffered. In 2007, 'severe damage to Gabon's Loango National Park' was caused as they built a pipeline; in the same year it was reported that '531 containers full of illegally mined logs worth $5 million were seized by authorities at Nacala port, but the authorities let the Chinese get away with it'; and, after the retirement of Ben Mkapa from presidency over Tanzania, the Chinese government built him a 'magnificent new road to his village near the southern border and a bridge across the river into Mozambique - it went straight through a national park'. This, coupled with the exploitation of local wealth as much of Africa's potential is claimed externally (not merely blameable on the Chinese), is not only environmentally unsustainable, but a huge hindrance to development.
"So when people say, 'African solutions to African problems,' or 'Let the Africans sort it out for themselves,' or 'You must help Africans', I reply: 'Which Africans? Those inside or outside the house?'" - page 70
What relationship are we meant to have with Africa then? The quote above is one that stuck with me as I read the book, largely due to its direct challenge of my own ideas. Throughout the book, Dowden explores such an idea of exactly how to help Africa, and through whom; conclusively, I think that it is right to provide the tools for development, be they economic (explicit aid), social (health care, education etc.) or physical (infrastructure), and allow the Africans themselves to play the central role in their own development, but that one of the pivotal points Dowden stresses is who exactly receives these tools. Fall into the wrong hands, and they will be wasted, exploited for personal materialistic gain, or neglected. You could pour billions of pounds worth of aid into a single country, provide them with enough tools to bring adult literacy rates to 99% and sustainably produce enough food to feed the population, but if they are given to a corrupt or biased leader, such aid will never reach the people. It will never be used for development.
Examples of wasted/exploited aid are explored in both Somalia and Rwanda; in Somalia, Dowden writes of aid workers inevitably feeding the perpetrators and militants of the civil wars, leaving the population starving - 'there is no such thing as neutrality. Intervention is interference. Whatever aid workers' motives, their intervention has military and political effects. {...} Here, they even provided surplus food aid which was grabbed by the killer militants who sold it and brought new weapons with the profits' (page 109). Indirectly, aid can feed and prolong the corruption. Similar exemplifications of aid exploitation and misuse were highlighted in the Rwandan genocide, where Dowden writes of 'the aid agencies ignor[ing] the survivors of the genocide across the border inside Rwanda. Instead, they swamped the camps with so much food that the defeated genocidal army encamped nearby was able to gather it up, sell it and buy guns and ammunition. The aid industry contributed to the continuation of the genocide' (page 248). Although obviously this was an unforeseen consequence of the aid, such explicitly illustrates the problems underlying aid.
Dowden's exploration of another type of aid was equally fascinating and inspiring (not as in 'Yay! This is awesome!' but as in 'wow. I really want to do something about that'): AIDS. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Linking with the aforementioned theme of aid/help within Africa not being aimed at Africans but at the attitude of outsiders (i.e. American companies come up with campaigns to run in Africa, but inevitabely their perception of Africa socially is based upon American society), was Dowden's investigation into the failure of the ABC campaign - Abstinence, Be Faithful or reduce the number of partners, and always use a condom. Dowden suggests that one facet leading to the failure of this campaign is that it is not concurrent with African culture; he suggests that it is not something they are socially comfortable with talking about, that it undermines the machismo of males and it is drilled into students such that, although they can recite it, it holds no meaning for them. In several communities, the reality of AIDS and its transition is implemented only after the experience of someone within said community suffering from the disease. More listening, less talking, for future campaign structures?
"The causes of Africa's failure are hotly debated. Is it caused by the rest of the world; the unfair trading systems, international capitalism and its agents, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund? Is Africa the victim of a neo-colonialist conspiracy to keep it poor, a continuation of imperialism and exploitation that dates back to the slave trade? Or did Africa's leaders cause Africa to fail? Aid agencies, the elite themselves and Africans outside the continent tend to blame external factors, mainly the IMF and the international trade rules. Africa's poor and middle class - at least those who are not part of the ruling elites - tend to blame internal factors, mainly their leaders. So do most people who do business in Africa. The external factors begin with bad geography and bad history. Africa is endowed with natural resources, minerals, forests and, parts of it, water in abundance. It is a rich continent with a lot of poor people. But economic development in Africa was designed to benefit outsiders, not Africans." - page 266
Altered States, Ordinary Miracles. It is undeniable that the socio-political world views of Africa have had implications for its development, altering the state of countries socially, politically, economically and environmentally. Perhaps in equal light, the key to unlocking its developmental potential lies in shedding the complications of external advice and allowing an ordinary miracle to take place; unbiased cooperation with Africans, sustainable schemes implemented with their involvement to encourage development, and transparent communications. An ordinary African miracle.
I 100% recommend 'Africa' as a read. It challenges some of the most relevant questions facing our generation in the relationship with Africa.
To end with: a thought-provoking poem written from a mother to her daughter, performed at the UN Climate Summit -
see here for the video.
C
