While
at home for Thanksgiving, I flipped through the newest TIME magazine and
stumbled upon a two-page spread with only the words “Africa Rising”; this
caught my attention. The following page begins with the story of Boniface Mwangi,
a previous photographer turned guerrilla art attack leader in Kenya. He
realized that he was creating his wealth from capturing the corruption and
failed promises of Kenyan leaders, so began to rebel across Nairobi. His
actions directly parallel Paul Collier’s depiction of Africa. He claims there
is bad governance and that the region has succumbed to many curses, and one of
the best things for industrialized nations to do is support the rebels, such as
Mr. Mwangi. Rebels and other African citizens are walking a fine line between
“Africa rising and Africa uprising,” as they endeavor to develop Africa and
escape the abject poverty that many currently live in.
However,
although there is much turmoil in the country, the article points out that in
the past decade, “six of the ten fastest-growing countries in the world were African,”
and that 5 African countries are expected to outgrow China this year. This is
not only startling in relation to the stigma of the African economy, but for my
research paper I have been exploring this very thing. I have found that Africa
lags behind China and Asian success is the exact reason for this. The sources I
am using are predominantly from 2007-2010, possibly exhibiting how quickly and
drastically Africa has been on the rise. On the other hand, this drastic growth
could continue to be from oil and other natural resource revenue, something
that I wouldn’t exactly indicate as sustainable growth.
The
article readily addresses this, specifically by returning to the “predatory
inequality and clownish tyranny” that Collier addresses in his book. The
article claims that rulers are now held less accountable than they were in the
past to good governance because of their material improvements. Because the
numbers show growth, political deterioration is often overlooked. In response
to this, Africa’s best hope may not be through current rebel groups, but from its
extremely young population. “The average African is 19” and because of foreign
aid, 108 million more African school age children are expected to be educated
in the next decade. Because of the current corrupt political regimes, I am
assuming that this aid is conditioned or given in the form of education rather
than purely cash money.
Over
the last few years, aid has surprisingly been outpaced by investment, and in
2012 investment now doubles aid in Africa. While this investment is in the
business sector, there is also a “concurrent interest in Africa’s natural
resources, led by China,” so an unstable economy may still come from all of the
current hype on Africa’s rise. There are a lucky few who have entered the
business world and given Nairobi the nickname of the “Silicon Savanna,” but
most are not so lucky. With the substantial increases in revenue from
investment, mainly in oil and other resource sectors, “governments are failing
to convert growth into jobs” which presents a huge problem for this rising,
young population once they aren’t school age, but working age.
The
article correctly states that “the answer lies less in Africa’s traditional
extractive industries,” as these often feed more corruption and inequality and
discourage investment in education and trades. However, if this is not explored
the “disconnect between government and people” could prove devastating, paving
the way for an uprising destined to happen if nothing is done. Marginalization
is an area I’ve explored in my essay, something Padraig Carmody and Collier both readily address, but mostly from an economic
perspective. The article addresses the inequality it creates, but it also
explores how it aggravates existing “tribal, racial, and religious fault lines,”
thus tying in the social issues with political and economic ones.
The
article then takes a twist, as it shifts towards the entrepreneurial spirit
that Africans exhibit, as well as outside governments looking in. China indeed
taken the lead in Africa, specializing in “infrastructure-for-resource swaps”
while other countries are usually interested only in natural resources.
However, it seems to paint China is too good of a light for my liking. While China
does invest more in infrastructure than many other countries, it still enacts
the marginalization and extraction that the article spoke of earlier. Countries
are predominantly self-interested, and as China continues to be on the global
rise, it attempts to better its own standing, which means exploiting Africa and
its week states.
Carmody
speaks of the scramble for Africa happening again, this time in a scramble for
natural resources. Carmody and other authors are wary of this scramble and the
possible re-colonization it could cause, as Africa is being taken advantage of
once again. However, the article stresses that this scramble “should leave
Africa as the big winner” because Africa has things other countries need.
However true this is, the first scramble for Africa also needed things in
Africa and that didn’t exactly leave the continent prospering. The article
correctly states soon after with the right governments, Africa has opportunity
for success, and this would make their previous statement true. However, little
is currently being done by Africa or other entities to better the governance of
Africa and its countries.
Africa
possibly has the most hope right now of all the continents, with Ghana even
having grown 14.4% in 2011 and Kenya exhibiting a mobile banking boom, but this
alone is not indicative of growth. Africa may have an entrepreneurial spirit
and many possibilities with a young, educated population, but unless countries
start investing in industry and not natural resource extraction and African
states starting putting more emphasis on non-extractive industries, Africa will
be on the path for an uprising and not a rise.
No comments:
Post a Comment