In the wake of decolonization, Pan-Africanism emerged as a rallying undercurrent for many patriots in the continent. Depending on the ideological orientation of its political exponents, Pan-Africanism was flagged in a variety of ways ranging from the negritude discourse by Senegal’s, Senghor, to a militant anti-hegemony Pan-Africanism by Ghana’s, Kwame Nkrumah. With the founding of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), Pan-Africanism was expected to peddle along the anti-imperialist path due to the ongoing anti-colonial and anti-Apartheid struggles and when ex-colonial powers and the United States stood with the principal colonial power at the time, Portugal, and apartheid South Africa.
With its decolonization agenda, the OAU literally owned Pan-Africanism, thereby making the concept its sole ‘property’, so to speak, of Africa’s political society. The unborn civil society in Africa could not turn Pan-Africanism as its own agenda except academics here and there reflected and expounded it from different perspectives. In the wake of the formation of the OAU, the historical context to advance pan-Africanism was national liberation as a few African countries were still then under colonial rule.
As a popular notion, Pan-Africanism still continues to be advanced militantly from a few quarters among society and individual writers particularly as a result of criminal incidents committed by colonial powers, such as the murders of Congo’s, Patrice Lumumba, Amilcar Cabral of Guinea Bissau, the Sharpeville massacre in South Africa, the overthrow of Kwame Nkrumah and so on.
With the intensification of the liberation struggle particularly in the Portuguese colonies, Zimbabwe and South Africa, Pan-Africanism took a sharp turn towards anti-imperialism especially among the Ethiopian student movement in the 60s, and student associations in other African countries associated with the international anti-imperialist youth movement (International Union of Students, World Democratic Youth) and among individuals in the Academia.
However, with the prevailing supremacy of Western imperialism in the post-Cold War era characterized mainly by the globalization of the market and unipolarity, pan-Africanism as peddled by the OAU and African politicians sharply declined. The role of African politicians in advancing Pan-Africanism waned as the historical context changed and as more and more involvement by the academia and intellectuals inclined towards social-development, anti-hegemony and anti-imperialism.
This was further aggravated as hegemonic powers (ex-colonial powers and the US) became involved in intervening in a number of African countries ostensibly to “bring peace” in conflict areas. With the OAU and African politicians voluntarily muzzling themselves regarding Pan-Africanism, they in turn muzzled intellectuals, civic actors and any opposition in their own countries as well. Political repression had slowed down the advance of Pan-Africanism along anti-hegemonic lines until very recently.
This also coincided with the active involvement of hegemonic powers, bent to advance their aggressive agenda as of right and uninvited, to ‘solve problems and bring peace’ in countries in conflict. The case in point is Ethiopia. Thus, Pan-Africanism as an undercurrent passed through stages that were characterized by the nature of dominant trends in world politics; first against racism when it was initially conceptualized, then against colonialism in the immediate post-colonial period, and then liberating in the OAU period.
With the metamorphosis of the OAU into the AU, almost all countries were politically independent except Sahrawi and Apartheid was also abolished. But, Pan-Africanism as an undercurrent still lagged behind in the face of drastic changes in world politics, namely, the prevalence of globalization of the market and unipolarity.
Pan-Africanism, crafted under the period of colonization had to adapt with the changed global reality, the reality of globalization. This calls for the revitalization and reconstruction of Pan-Africanism to meet the challenges posed by the globalization of the market and unipolarity to the continent. However, revitalizing and reconstructing pan-Africanism first of all, requires examining its drawbacks.
This compels us to look critically at the historical situation that members of the OAU were in, when they opted for Pan-Africanism. In terms of state and nation formations, most African countries were characterized by the predominance of traditional formations both in the political, economic and cultural sense. In other words, they did not constitute modern states with the dominant modern economic sector.
Africa just began to construct a modern state and a national economy. Instead, corruption went rife, with acquisition of political power used as the vehicle to accumulate wealth over genuine nationalism and Pan-Africanism. The prevalence of corruption turned the sphere of political power as the arena of intense competition, thus series of military coups were launched by power hungry generals. The military’s violent rule in turn provoked ethnic-based movements in a number of countries.
Secondly, the post-independent regime lacked patriotic commitment as it continued to stay loyal to the ex-colonial power, which supported it militarily thereby assuring the continuation of the exploitation of raw materials: neo-colonialism began. At the cultural level, westernization went viral and unchecked, turning Africans into what Frantz Fanon calls, “Black skin, white masks.” Lop-sided westernization continued unabated thereby creating a huge obstacle to the rise of patriotism and Pan-Africanism.
The third drawback of Pan-Africanism is in regards of delinking the concept from social development. The foundation of Pan-Africanism was supposed to include alleviating poverty and under-development. Colonization left Africa shattered with colossal poverty and under-development, but early Pan-Africanism did not include ending poverty and under-development, as the cornerstones of its construct.
The fourth drawback is the fact that Pan-Africanism was “owned”, so to speak, by the political society and did not include the ordinary Africans. Pan-Africanism needs to confront Africa’s woes in the face of globalization thus requiring a new construct. Pan-Africanism has never been a comprehensive outlook having a political, economic, social and ideological components.
Africa on the global stage
Africa has always been marginalised in the world. The world has always been dominated and dictated by big powers, Western powers in the main. The forerunner of the UN, the so called League of Nations, was in actual fact, a club of colonial powers that met in Berlin in 1888 to cannibalize Africa, which gave the green light to Mussolini to invade Ethiopia in 1935.
As a distinct historical situation following the end of World War II, the UN was established with lofty ideals though it is still dominated by those Western powers, save the ex-Soviet Union, that met in Berlin in 1888. African nations all joined the UN and struggled to be heard, particularly, on the liberation of a few countries that were still under colonial rule and under Apartheid rule. With the prevalence of globalization and end of the Cold War, Western powers increasingly pressed African nations to be under their tutelage.
In international trade negotiations, Western powers opted to pull Africa by the nose and vote for them. Africa, which has enjoyed relatively favourable terms under the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) voted for the World Trade Organization (WTO) under Western pressure. Only a few countries such as Zimbabwe resisted Western pressure. The more the process of globalization favoured the market, the more African civic actors were kept silent, the more the option for Pan-Africanism waned.
In actual fact, the UN system and the structures of power within the UN system have glaringly become unequal and undemocratic. The UN, which was in the first place established in a particular historical situation, is still continuing with the same structure that were laid out then. Now, 76 years on and with the world entering a new historical situation, namely the globalization of the market, the UN still continues as if the immediate post-war realities still prevail.
Today, the structures of the UN and the Security Council in particular, must be restructured to give more voices to Africa, Asia and Latin America that represent billions of people amongst them. The UN power structure must be changed to empower the hitherto voiceless and powerless. Such restructuring can give guarantees that the UN agencies function properly, to execute their responsibilities in a humane and responsible manner and in absolute impartiality in conflict situations.
The recent, open, blatant and shameful siding of a few UN agencies stationed in Ethiopia with the rebels in the ongoing war in the northern part of the country can be taken as an example. Such blatant interference occurs because the so called ‘international community’ undermines Africa, and according to them, Africa is a beggar and ignorant and as Ronald Reagan once put it, “Africa is a foot-note” and/or as the “stupid white man” (to use Michael Moore’s metaphor), who just left the White House spoke of African countries as, “shit nations.”
It is in face of such distortions and domination by globalization that Pan-Africanism needs to be redefined and revitalized. As anti-thesis to the prevailing global inequality, the soul of the new pan-Africanism must be patriotism and self-respect, real independence, self-reliance and inter-dependence among African nations.
It is on the basis of such patriotism and self-respect that Africa can be heard internationally and assume its rightful place at the UN Security Council and other UN bodies. Africa is still deprived of the role to solve its own problems. It is still impoverished and its development policies are still dictated directly or indirectly by hegemonic forces. The new Pan-Africanism has to end this inequality and humiliation.
Pan-Africanism must be anti-hegemonic as what happens to one country can be repeated in others. Africa cannot sit idly when hegemonic forces try to reverse the decisions of the people of Sudan for democracy and self-respect, when they devilishly design the break-up of Ethiopia into three ‘republics’ and blatantly interfere elsewhere in the continent. Civil societies must cry foul! In African solidarity, the battle cry must be, “The problems of any African nation are mine, therefore their struggles are also mine.”
Pan-Africanism must be based on self-reliance and reject the so called ’development’ policies and strategies tailored in Washington, Paris or London. Social development for Africa must start from the reality of the social formations that are basically traditional. Hegemonic forces do not have the slightest idea how social development can be generated in social formations such as pastoralism and hunter-gatherers, on which a significant portion of the continent’s population still survive. In addition, the new pan-Africanism must advance interdependence among African nations encouraging creations of common market zones.
In terms of development strategies, pan-Africanism cannot opt for anything else except for sustainable social development that gives strategic priority to the preservation of the environment, gender equality and nurturing of the African child/youth.
“Black Skin, White Masks” (Franz Fanon): Pan-Africanism must liberate the African elite from the white masks it has been wearing as a result of colonial and neo-colonial education that denigrated the African and its identity as well as its culture. The African individual elites are cultivated in the image of the white person, thereby subjecting themselves to self-humiliation. The education system originally crafted by colonial powers, is in most cases, still intact except for a few cosmetic changes. Pan-Africanism must be the anti-thesis of this ideological and cultural self-humiliation.
Melakou Tegegn is a development consultant. He can be reached at [email protected].
Contributed by Melakou Tegegn
