Will the winds of change that are sweeping over the Middle East track down to Sub-Saharan Africa, where the number of dictators, autocrats and ruthless self-appointed leaders is rife?
Could it be Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni next, who’s clocked 25 years in power or Ethiopia’s Meles Zenawi, trailing just behind with 20 years at the helm? Or Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, who’s clung to power for 31 years? Then there is Omar Al-Bashir – with 22 years in charge in Sudan, where angry and frustrated voices were heard on the streets of his capital Khartoum, on January 30, 2011. The youth in his country clearly stated their desire for the winds of change, blowing over Tunisia and Egypt, to caress their country as well.
Despite the positive news on Africa, in the aftermath of the economic crisis, from bodies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the continent of Africa continues to be inhabited by the highest percentage of its population, and the largest number of such people, living on less than $1.25 a day.
Poverty, corruption, unemployment, underemployment, lack of freedom are battering the people of Sub-Saharan Africa as badly as their brothers along the continent’s northern edge. Economic and political power in many African countries is concentrated in the hands of people who hold power minority, based on their political, tribal or ethnical affiliation.
Street protests in 2008 in Cameroon, Ivory Coast and Senegal; and in Mozambique in 2010 aired grievances similar to those of Egypt and Tunisia. The anger stemmed from the high cost of living, unemployment and poor governance. The uprisings in these countries lost momentum and failed to bring about change. Some blame the failure on insufficient organizational capacity and poor technological connectivity to the world, unlike the better connected urban societies of Tunisia and Egypt. But then again, Cameroon, Ivory Coast Senegal and Mozambique are insignificant in the international arena compared to Egypt or other Middle Eastern countries, which now have western powers scrambling to find solutions to bring about stability and security to the region, even if this meant betraying governments that they themselves propped up for decades.
Though western governments are known for prolonging the political lives of unpopular, repressive and undemocratic regimes in all corners of the world, the fate of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Tunisia’s, Zine el Abidine Ben Ali who were fed to the wolves by their long time western allies, surely sends cold shivers down the spine of the likes of Zenawi of Ethiopia and Museveni of Uganda.
Zenawi and Museveni came to power through armed struggle, condemning their predecessors and promising fundamental changes. Both leaders, who were applauded in the 1990s by the West as part of a “new generation of African leaders,” have clung to power for more than two decades through sham electoral democracy, ruthless security apparatus and draconian laws that have literally killed the free press in their respective countries. Zenawi and Museveni, playing the ethnic and tribal cards, a sensitive and potentially explosive issue, have submitted their people to the constant fear of internal conflict.
They both govern their countries with handouts from rich countries and yet boast of economic growth, which is not accompanied with good governance. Their governments are ridden with corruption. In the view of many, the foreign aid money fosters corruption. Aid funds give the unaccountable leaders of Africa monetary power to trample the rule of law, foster economic cronyism and hampers the practice of transparency by public institutions. Aid for many Africans means the power of their leaders to decide who eats and who starves to death. Who other than Sir Edward Clay, the British Envoy to Kenya in 2004 captured the magnitude of corruption in Africa when he said that Kenya’s corrupt minister were “eating like gluttons” and “vomiting on the shoes” of donors. When asked to apologize Sir Clay said he was sorry for “the moderation” of his language, for underestimating the scale of the looting and for failing to speak out earlier.
Museveni and Zenawi saw a window of opportunity when dissatisfaction with their governance coincided with escalating terrorism in their respective regions. They declared their steadfastness in fighting terrorism alongside the West. To appease western leaders they sent troops after Somali terrorists and still are playing their parts in prolonging the life of the shaky transitional government in Somalia.
In return for their valuable services, they were given the free rein by the West to stage farcical elections to cling to power and continue with their unmitigated violation of human rights. The world watched in silence and to the astonishment of their citizens, aid continued to pour in.
Macroeconomic indicators in their countries show economic stability. (But we keep forgetting that wealth is monopolized by a handful of people loyal to the regimes)
The World Bank and the IMF are forecasting unprecedented economic growth for Sub Saharan Africa in 2011. We do not need economists to tell us that annual GDP growth rates do not reflect how well this income is distributed. The growth of their economies will only accelerate the already existing staggering income gaps in their societies.
The disparity, as seen in North African countries, leads to instability and political strife. Economic progress that benefits the few is meaningless to the masses. Despite the West’s double standard and duplicity in supporting these discredited leaders, the noose has begun tightening around the dictators who hide their embezzled wealth in secured bank accounts abroad, waiting for them after they are ousted by popular uprising.
The revolts in the two North African countries should teach new African leaders to shape up and sharply improve the way they govern their peoples, and the old leaders that are clinging to power have now had a wake-up call that they are not indispensable. Hosni Mubarak, whose country receives around US 2 billion annually from the U.S. to police the Middle East and was the West’s closest ally in that unstable region, must be feeling like an island in the Nile.
While many Sub-Sahara African dictators are now having sleepless nights imagining themselves in Mubarak’s shoes, millions of Africans have now begun dreaming about how to kickstart their own revolution. After witnessing the uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, the people hungering for change have learned they don’t need to rely on opposition political parties or a charismatic leader to appear at the head of their march for their voices to be heard.
Would the West stand by the millions of Africans and demand that the un-elected or dubiously-elected African leaders listen to their peoples’ grievances? If Africans took their grievances to the streets like their Tunisian and Egyptian brothers and sisters in protest over decades of misrule, would the West stand aside and watch as in previous times?
The message that has been sent out from Tunisia and Egypt to dictatorial leaders in other parts of the world is clear – their rule can vanish on them over night – so they best shape up before they are forced to ship out.
