The Brain Death of the Pan-Africanist Ideology
On November 12th, 2020, the world learned of the death of former Ghanaian President Jerry Rawlings. The departure of one of the last leading figures of pan-Africanism leads us to question and analyze the relevance of this ideology with regard to the place and evolution expected by Africa on the international scene. This paper is in no way a sharp criticism of this movement, but rather a questioning in view of the current position of African countries in the world chessboard. For this evaluation, we will examine the obvious impact of certain symbols of pan-Africanism on their respective countries and on the continent, then analyze the state of affairs of the organization that is supposed to perpetuate this political ideology, and finally establish the possibility of a potential alternating current in line with contemporary realities.
As initially thought and in view of its institutional mechanisms, one could affirm that the “raison d’être” of pan-Africanism is in inadequacy with modern evidence, the causalities being protean both endogenous and exogenous. We will first evaluate the case of two pan-Africanist figures, Nelson Mandela and Thomas Sankara, and their respective countries, South Africa and Burkina Faso. Then, we will observe their socio-political impact on the continent and determine the role of the African Union. In conclusion, we will identify and redefine the priority objectives, which we believe should be central for African countries.
Although we can clearly distinguish a shift between the initial objectives and the present ones, the fact remains that the two share undeniable similarities. Without going into the exhaustive genesis of the creation of this ideology, we can affirm that pan-Africanism was aimed at uniting Africans and their descendants outside Africa against racial discrimination and colonization. While pan-Africanism was at the paroxysm of its glory at the time of independence, the emergence of the newly independent states hinted at the end of the unifying utopia of African countries.
Nelson Mandela, one of the figures of the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, certainly had an impact on the social cohesion of his country and the liberation of black South Africans. He is perceived throughout the world as an icon who has been able to restore the image of black men and women not only in his country but also throughout the world. Although this heroic tale is not false, the statistics are not as good. As can be seen in the tables, we can observe South Africa’s place in the world in very few areas of praise.
On October 15, Africa and Pan-Africanists around the world commemorated the 20th anniversary of the death of Thomas Sankara. Although he was only 4 years at the pinnacle of the Haute Volta renamed Burkina Faso, he left an immeasurable imprint that continues to this day. In any case, his exacerbated nationalism, his verbal jousting against Western leaders, or his speeches in African assemblies, he is a proven pan-Africanist. As for Nelson Mandela, it would be good to judge the place that Burkina Faso occupies in the current world chessboard.
Image1: HIV prevalence 2019.
South Africa has the highest HIV prevalence rate among 15-49 year olds after Botswana (20.7%)
Image 2: Crime (blue line) and Security (orange line) rate 2019
South Africa ranks 4th among the country with the highest crime rate. The security rate in this country does not reach the 25% mark. Women are frequently the victims of rape and other assaults.
Image 3: Unemployment rate 2019.
South Africa 23.3 in 2018 / 30.8 in 2019.
Burkina Faso 6.1 in 2018 and 2019.
In both countries, the progressions are still negative: stagnation in Burkina Faso and worsening in South Africa.
The African Union is, in essence, the emblem of the continent’s solidarity, the organization that was supposed to bring together the aspirations of the peoples, given the timidity and sometimes inefficiency of its institutions (Commission, Pan-African Parliament, and Peace and Security Council), seems not to have achieved its objectives. The African Union is very heavily financed by aid from Western countries, about 73%. The building of the African Union was offered by China. Moreover, regional and sub-regional institutions also often struggle to ensure their own security or to implement effective freedom of movement. Given the timidity of exchanges between countries, despite the multitude and sometimes duplication of these organizations, it can be seen that the states are more outward-looking, especially Europe and China.
Moreover, it is time for the continent to adopt a more Cartesian vision of international relations, and to emerge from an outdated ideology that in many respects has shown its limitations. We believe, for example, that the orientation for each country should be to weave bilateral collaboration with other countries either qualified as third world or middle-income countries. The goal is to form a true South-South collaboration, both politically and economically, and even in terms of security. Today’s pan-Africanist vision leads us to believe that it serves more to subjugate the continent than to make it evolve and finally realize this existing potential, but too often managed and enslaved to the interests of the great powers. In our opinion, we should have the courage to be self-critical of an ideology that continues to keep us in the absolute abyss. Although it has a romantic aspect, pan-Africanism no longer allows continents to achieve its objectives, and although we advocate inter-state solidarity, it is time to reorient realistic and sustainable objectives so that Africa can finally emerge and truly be a major player on the international scene.
Pan-Africanism would be, in our opinion, the self-determination of oneself. Each African country should think of its own policy, its own development, that is to say, prove what we are capable of without the others. And in order for this work to be feasible, the states must form small groups with well-defined political and economic agreements. It is the association of these small groups of powerful states that will take Africa out of underdevelopment.
To think of a common development at the continental level with only one ideology, pan-Africanism is already a failure and will be unrealizable
