The Challenge for Africa (15 page)

However, the ship did not turn around to head back to China; instead, it sailed around the Cape of Good Hope, bound for Namibia. At that point, news of the ship's whereabouts became harder to come by. Even though the Chinese government indicated that it would have the ship return to China, in May reports began to emerge that the cargo had not only been brought to land, but indeed had made it to Zimbabwe. Some journalists suggested that the ship had unloaded its lethal cargo at Pointe-Noire in the Republic of the Congo (Congo-Brazzaville), while others claimed that the ship was seen docked at another port along the West African coast.

As I followed this story, I was reminded that this port was the same one where a quarter of a century earlier I had seen the deprivations caused by conflict and the pernicious effects of irresponsible interference with an African state. Peace may have returned to Angola, but the legacy of internal conflicts and arms sales are still plaguing the region. It appears that Zimbabwean officials had flown to Angola to arrange delivery of the shipment, and the port where the cargo came ashore was Luanda.

I FIRMLY BELIEVE
that unless Africans from
all
levels of society recognize and embrace the challenge of leadership, Africa will not move forward. In chapter 2 I discussed the historical, cultural, and economic roots of the failure of African leadership, and how it neglected to give the African people reason to hope. In this chapter I will examine in more detail what good leadership—and its correlative, good governance—might look like.

Leadership is not simply a matter of filling the top positions in a government, institution, or private business. Nor is it a quality restricted to the ambitious, the elite, the politically gifted, or the highly educated. In fact, leadership can be demonstrated by those who are marginalized and poor as much as by those who have had all the privileges that society has been able to bestow on them. Indeed, not every person in a leadership position is truly a leader.

Many aid and development scholars and practitioners have pointed to Africa's leadership deficit and wondered why it has been so hard to overcome. Some have suggested that the issue of poor governance has been overemphasized as a factor in development failures; in this view, poor countries generally produce poor governance, not vice versa. Some scholars have also pointed to Africa's geography—few navigable rivers, many landlocked nations, debilitating diseases like malaria—as inhibiting economic growth. They also note Africa's climate—many arid and semi-arid regions; tropical forests, with fragile soils; too little
or too much rain—which makes agriculture more difficult than it is in temperate regions.

As a biologist, I agree that the environment underlies all human activities. However, I don't believe that Africa's geography and climate have to be permanent obstacles to its development. Switzerland and Austria are both small and landlocked countries; Japan does not possess many natural resources; all three have mountainous landscapes that make farming difficult. Every country has geographical and climatic challenges that require management and adaptation. While some African countries do have a climate and geography that places them at a disadvantage, what deficits they have could be overcome or mitigated through effective leadership that utilizes the resources available—both natural and human—responsibly. However, in the absence of such leadership, development for the common good will be held in check, even in the most fertile and resource-rich countries.

One might ask: What does it take to produce leaders with such values, whose lives become their message and who humble themselves and sacrifice for the common good? It should not be impossible to find leaders in Africa willing to raise the standard of leadership and to nurture them so that they be come beacons for the continent. To be sure, some leaders tried, often at great personal sacrifice, to give that hope to their people and to the African people at large—men such as Nelson Mandela in South Africa, Julius Nyerere in Tanzania, Seretse Khama in Botswana, Léopold Senghor in Senegal, Ahmed Ben Bella in Algeria, and even Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana in his early years. Will their example ever be followed by leaders and would-be leaders in Africa today and in coming decades?

The exercise of good leadership would end government violations of human rights and restrictions on freedoms such as the right to move, assemble, access information, and organize. Good leadership could decide, for instance, not to sell off
Africa's natural resources for such low prices, and then to invest the additional revenue to accelerate human and economic development. Good leadership could curtail corruption, one of the most corrosive aspects of poor leadership that has been rife in postindependence Africa. Good leadership would provide the milieu in which citizens can be creative, productive, and build wealth and opportunity.

It may be true that who the person leading the country is becomes less of a concern when you do not have enough to eat, or money with which to purchase necessities, or a roof over your head. But, despite the poverty that afflicts so many in Africa, I do not believe that Africans are more intrinsically incapable of organizing their lives and asserting their rights, or more willing to accept bad leadership, than peoples from other parts of the world. Furthermore, I am convinced there isn't a single person in Africa who genuinely prefers to live in a corrupt, broken society that has poor infrastructure, stifles innovation and achievement, fails to reward merit and capabilities, cannot provide basic services, and doesn't offer democratic space or ensure peace and security. All people desire a system that works.

The realization of good leadership could start with an African president or prime minister stepping forward and declaring: “We have a problem in our country and as a people. We are cheating and undermining ourselves, and we need to change. For whether it is a policeman bribing a bus driver, or a government minister receiving a kickback in order to license a business, or someone stealing someone else's crops to make a quick penny—we are failing ourselves, our country, those who came before us, and, indeed, future generations. I want us as a country to work on it. And it will start with me, and I will do my best to fight greed and corruption. I will value honesty in whatever I do. I will genuinely put the people first.”

Then it could extend to the people themselves. It is also up
to a critical mass of Africans to recognize that there
is
a problem of leadership, which in itself would be a step away from stasis. They could ask themselves:
Do we feel marginalized? Are we capable of acting in concert to make sure that our resources are used equitably? Do we recognize the value of belonging to a state? When we are entrusted with positions of leadership, are we committed to enhancing the welfare of our fellow citizens?
These are the questions that make a society work, and their answers express themselves through a system of governance, which can evolve and change to meet the needs of the people over time.

The pathology of power only intensifies the longer a leader remains in office, even to the extent that leaders find themselves prisoners of the lieutenants and associates who helped them achieve that office in the first place—whether through patronage, a coup, or solely with the support (armed or otherwise) of their ethnic group. There have been many cases where it is the leader's lieutenants who do not allow the head of state to leave office, because they fear prosecution by a new government for their involvement in gross violations of human rights or crimes against humanity committed by the regime they serve. In a winner-take-all presidential system, which is the case in many African countries, these men and women have a great deal to lose if the head of state relinquishes power. They will no longer have easy access to the wealth and resources of the nation, and those replacing them will have the levers of the state to hold them accountable for the actions they took while in power, if they choose to do so.

As long as African politicians are pressured by their constituencies—parliamentary or ethnic—to remain in the government whether they win elections or not, because the
people believe the politicians will provide them with patronage, and as long as politicians continue to supply these gifts, handouts, and favors, then any system of governance will be broken. When this toxic combination means that leaders cling to power at all costs—when some of the best and brightest Africans demonstrate that it matters more to be a minister, prime minister, or president than it does to promote the welfare of the country or protect its citizens—then neither development nor peace will be sustainable; the three-legged stool will remain unstable.

It is a truism, but it is very difficult to fight a dictator using democratic means, as any pro-democracy campaigner or organization will attest. How, then, do people remove themselves from underneath the boot of those who control them and their resources, who violate their rights and destroy their livelihoods or even take their lives? In Kenya, for instance, civil society and the opposition sought for years to remove a dictatorial regime from power through elections, flawed though they might have been, but they were unable to; even a coup attempt didn't dislodge it. This is not to say that Africans have accepted their fate where tragic failures of leadership have occurred. They have not, and the struggle continues.

In Africa, as elsewhere, democratic space can be created and sustained only when a critical mass of people is aware of the situation and willing to speak out, protest, monitor government actions, and risk harassment, arrest, or even death. That courage, however, also requires a leader (or his backers) who will acknowledge the rights of the people to self-determination and prosperity, and as a result demonstrate leadership that avoids bloodshed or further violence. So although the people of eastern Europe brought down the Berlin Wall, they needed Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev not to send in the tanks. While Nelson Mandela's principled stance led to sanctions against South Africa that brought unbearable pressure upon
the apartheid regime, F. W. de Klerk had to concede that the era of apartheid had to come to an end.

One of the reasons why success in securing democratic space continues to elude the populace in many African countries is that politicians tend to change with the tide. For instance, they become “democrats” when democracy is seen as the route to power. But when another route appears that is shorter, they are often willing to take it, even if it means joining a rival group or faction. Indeed, many of Africa's civil wars have been fought by former colleagues who broke ranks or linked up with opposing camps if doing so would allow them to reach the leadership position they coveted more quickly.

In recognition of the need to develop good leadership in Africa and encourage the peaceful transfer of power, in 2007 the Sudanese telecom billionaire Mo Ibrahim established the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership. (His foundation is dedicated to promoting good governance in Africa.) In creating the prize, which provides the winner with $5 million over ten years and $200,000 each year for the rest of the winner's life, Mr. Ibrahim pointed out that many African leaders are reluctant to leave power because they no longer have access to the perks of office:

The first winner of the prize was Joaquim Chissano, the former president of Mozambique, who stepped down from power at the end of his second term in 2005. In his acceptance speech, Mr. Chissano emphasized two of the three pillars of the African stool:

On the face of it, it may seem scandalous that a leader has to be enticed by a potential award
not
to be corrupt or to cling to power, and a damning indictment of the failure of Africa over the last half century to cultivate genuine leadership on a continental scale. But, curiously, the award reflects a reality for African leaders, which is that, unlike prime ministers, presidents, or senior politicians in the industrialized world—who will receive a sizeable pension from the state once they retire and can earn substantial income from speaking engagements, book deals, consulting fees, lobbying positions, and chairmanships of various boards of directors, and enjoy respect and a place of honor in society—African leaders have many fewer opportunities to live a decent lifestyle and retain respect and honor once out of office. Indeed, many civil servants and MPs in Africa are still struggling to secure a reasonable pension once their government service is over. This naturally makes them even less likely to want to leave their positions, and much less the heads of state they may well support. What is needed are institutions, like those in other regions, that would provide pensions and other support to former heads of state, civil servants, and veterans who have earned them. The lack of such institutions is another facet of the leadership deficit.