Africa in the Mist of Geopolitical Mayhem

Africa

Introduction

African continent includes lands and continental shelves from the tip of Tunisia to the Cape in South Africa, and from Cape Verde (Islands) to the tip of Somalia. There is no room for imposed sub-Saharan and ‘Middle East’ metageographical nomenclature! The past 2 decades has brought new lease of life to external views of the continent, its usefulness and opportunities in terms of human and non-human resources. 

The geography of the continent placed it is an enviable location making contacts and associations inevitable from anywhere in the world. It is the position of this article that while non-African geopolitical forces have pushed themselves into tight reversible corners for both positive and negative objectives, Africans i.e. elite and the commons are moving forward regardless of quality and organisational depth.

Post-Colonial Respite

From a purely historical perspective one can assert that colonialism in its pure form on the African continent made a final retreat in 1991 following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Before then Africa was perceived and treated as a collective space of nested multidimensional conflicts excusably rooted in the ideological dichotomy between Washington DC and Moscow. It was also clear that actual African policies of the named capitals are mostly nebulous and ambiguous beyond attempting to impose military solutions in every problem. One must equally make clear that Moscow was not an agent of colonialism and didn't flesh out a coherent plan of building client states on the continent. Geostrategically, it is fair to advance Moscow’s naivety on Africa and this position remains unchanged with its proximate successor, Russia, beyond empty rhetoric.

The main thrust of USSR collapse is obtained in the concentration of conflicts as they shrank qualitatively, the big African countries increased in confidence while mineral resources became the new bête noire for emergent non-ideological conflicts especially in West Africa and Zaire-Rwanda axis. Political power in most African capitals started gradual consolidation in the new garb of democracy while (military) client status got many of them to defer to US. Of course the absence of war is never peace, nevertheless economic and social problems became prominent while potential solutions remained trapped in the firmament.

Positive Distraction

Exit of USSR was a form of grand settlement of an era in Africa geopolitics because in similar fashion United States technically left the scene for greater obsession of global hegemony through total domination of the Arab World. This exit from Africa is important for a number of reasons; the new political spaces of African countries were in a binary state of existence with either unrestricted ability to project power internally or contest spaces or contested machinery of state exists.

The other effect is the opportunity of these capitals to reconfigure their position vis-à-vis the emerging global geopolitical configurations and attempt to craft foreign policies to take advantage of potential changes. It must be asserted that the collapse of USSR did not present the world as a unipolar entity from the African perspective.  Only that the relevant forces where dormant for genuine reasons. This can be perceived from the perspective that no African leader hence can be described as socialist or anti-capitalist rather they were lumped together in a spectrum range between the binary of pro-West and not-so pro-West.

EU Neo-colonial Waste

With an economy mostly tied to western economic architecture, the dollar fitted as the sole international reserve currency and compromise of unprocessed natural resources dependence in a restricted global market dominated; African capitals had to devise programmes for raising cash to maintain their grip on power. In the face of US ambivalence which manifest in her subletting Africa to the former colonial powers (compensated losers in WW2) despite destructive austerity measures and odious debt impositions by World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), European Union (EU) became the Pretorian guard of Africa for Western interests.

The myopic geostrategy of restricting market access for African products, restricted access to funds through obtuse conditions, denial of political maturity of the capitals and strategic attention to waste of investments only confirm that EU is a retrogressive force. This could be crystallised in the unfinished Inga Dam in DRC which is more or less a poster project for western corruption.  

One of the most glaring expose of this colonial mentality is EU ignorance of new markets and emerging geopolitical powers around the world who share identical interest in having internal security and stability in their territories. The answers to these questions lie in having viable economies supported by accessible raw materials.  EU is tone deaf in accepting Africa as a place and space of positive potential with mutual benefit to all parties in real not delayed time nevertheless many European firms are heading to Africa to seek opportunities and make investments.

One can perceive the French unreconstructed policy where dependence of erstwhile colonies on Paris is entrenched. Evidence on the contrary displays to these capital that France is finished as a European force and rather depends on Africa for viability and identity unlike United Kingdom. French miscalculation in the EU geopolitical chessboard against Germany and normalisation of confused & inflexible governance (of Mitterrand, Chirac & Sarkozy) has left Paris strategically exposed, weakened and marginalised in global affairs. African capitals took note and continue to do so. Portugal and Spain have accepted their post-greatness marginal status with equaminity.

EU is now consigned to maintaining ill-fated metageographical configurations within Africa such as subservient ‘Sub-Saharan’, stillborn ‘Club Med’ and suppliant ‘Middle East’ which have no substance or reality. EU support and French obsession for the 2011 murder of Col Ghaddafi & Libya respectively is a powerful testament. In addition the well-worn dehumanisation of Africans and Africa as a space of retrogression continues at least with Europeans media representation of recent Ebola outbreak. 

Enter the Dragon

China was never far away from Africa. The conditions that allowed China to ‘rise peacefully’ so far can be narrowed down to a few points. Capital is not interested in states per se rather use states as vehicles to maximise profit. Deliberate de-industrialisation of United States and Europe is calibrated by politicians and investment fund managers to invest in markets where cost is abysmally low like China. It isn’t mostly about Chinese singular ingenuity that their fortune simply rose seamlessly. The story is not so juicy in the land of the Dragon for most Chinese citizens.

As stated earlier US zeal to consolidate her hegemonic power in the Arab World or ‘Middle East’ opened up new spaces and opportunities for emerging powers to deal with Africa with their unique geopolitical and geostrategic interests. Their political cultures and strategic experiences are unique but above all they went to Africa not to do African a favour. Suffice to say that they are purchasers of opportunity and not strippers of civilisation for now.

While and EU deliberately distracted and vacillated; Brazil, India, Malaysia, Japan, South Korea and most of all China have made and taken opportunities to engage with Africa/Africans towards making important diplomatic and economic deals. My focus is on China. This is the first time in almost a century an external power is dealing with Africa on equal terms without immediate military threat and cultural imposition. This is the first time a foreign power is expressing interest in purchasing African products and paying for them on the world market prices. It is obvious that Beijing strategy is tied to her internal security and stability concerns rather than in advancing African interest because sustaining a population of 1 billion people in a tough neighbourhood is challenging.

Africa is one of many Beijing files in her bulging geostrategic suite. One of the vehicles for advancing this policy is the ambivalent policy of non-interference in other countries internal affairs. Stripped of its ornaments, it is simply a strategy for eliminating waste (via obtuse conditions) and impediments in business deals including project implementations. This is a welcome development. It is evident that many African capitals are new in this line of thinking even to question or modify some of the projects executed by the Chinese. However one result of Chinese arrival is the almost gradual irrelevance of Bretton Wood instruments on African funding/investment market.

The success of Chinese entry into Africa cannot be denied as is observed in recent tepid effort of United States doing a copycat of Sino-Africa Summit. While room exist for improvement on these deals and implementations, there is certainty that the relationship will grow by leaps and bound given US ‘renewed’ engagement in Iraq. This is engagement will surely continue beyond the life of the current regime in Washington DC. China is confirming the obvious that Africa is a space of progress, a space of development and a space of positive engagement. It is still surprising that many Europeans and North Americans have negative or ambivalent views of Africa to their loss.

Internal Interaction

To successful address African internal interaction, it is essential to confront the primary misinformation traded across generations of the case against interaction. This is a deterministic conclusion developed in Europe that the physical conditions and the physical environment make long distance travel within Africa almost impossible. Usually an African map like the one above is depicted in a binary mode suggesting that Sahara desert is as impenetrable as the tropical forest in the interior and around the coasts. Heads you lose, tail you lose!

Ancestors of the same groups making these regressive conclusions penetrated these ‘obstacles’ to engage in vile slave trade for generations, later conducted colonial project genocides and are participating in advising various African government to ensure strict border controls despite the flawed nature of Berlin Conference boundaries.

Africa has never been closed to business and has always being a space for dense connection networks and multiscalar spatial interaction. History is abound of large and sophisticated empires with capitals that projected power to all corners of their territories meaning that infrastructure were built and maintained by efficient bureaucracies.  These experiences are not lacking in the current generation. While rail mode has limited international scope, road and air transportation modes are active across Africa especially in the various sub-regions.

A number of African airlines such Royal Air Maroc, Arik Air, Ethiopian and EgyptAir to mention a few run successful regional operations. Tourism, trade, investments, ideas and capital are exchange in large measure in these interactions. The recent cancellation of Air France flights to parts of West Africa on flimsy Ebola charge was successfully taken over by Royal Air Maroc among others. Bureaucratic inefficiencies, denuded infrastructure and poor inter-political coordination continue to inhibit intra-African interaction nevertheless there is a positive trend.

The need for improved utility of a large economic space will be the driver of expanded investments in the transportation sector and relaxation of colonial mentality &perception of various governments. Through these policy markets can be accessed in real time and connections consolidated in the same manner as nascent mobile phone investment showed at its inception a decade or more ago.

Conclusion

The flotsam and jetsam of global geopolitics have repositioned Africa in a positive strategic bearing. Africans are aware and have been making important decisions to progress economic development in their various territories. They are also working with various geopolitical partners mostly from the emerging economies to develop strategic partnerships and strategies for advancing economic relationships.

The plain truth is that North Americans and West European elites have historical distractions, superiority complex and emotional obstacles that not only prevent them from taking Africa/African serious now, it is not in their realities that Africa is fit for purpose beyond rhetoric. Nevertheless it is an ontological fact the Africa/Africans have no right to delay the realisation of their full potential as an expected renewal as manifested in previous cycles of greatness.