ANB-BIA SUPPLEMENT

ISSUE/EDITION Nr 345 - 01/05/1998

CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE

Towards the new millennium - PART 1/6

by ANB-BIA, Brussels, March 1998

THEME = ANALYSIS

A shortened version of this analysis appeared in the May 1998 issue of "RELATIONS",
published in Montreal, Canada (25, rue Jarry ouest, Montreal H2P 1S6, Canada),
by the Justice and Faith Centre.
"RELATIONS" is the responsibility of the Society of Jesus who publish it
together with a group of Christians
involved in spreading justice.

1. The winds of change

Many African countries began their post-colonial life as some kind of democracy, the main features of that political system being the existence both within and outside the legislature, of an organised opposition. Reflecting this reality, there was, in many countries, a vibrant opposition, or at least an independent Press that would ideally keep a government on its toes. As well as this, there was a judiciary which saw itself as independent of the Executive, and hence able to act as guarantor of peoples' basic rights.

These arrangements did not last long; by the beginning of the 1970s, one-party or military governments were the dominant form of governance on the continent. This pattern gained ascendancy in the next two decades. Five years ago, sub-Saharan Africa was largely ruled by dictators, some autocratic, some benign, who allowed no voice to be raised in criticism. They had inherited their states from their colonial masters and in the name of freedom, gathered into their hands the powers of the colonial administration.

For three decades, African rulers perpetuated great myths, saying that one-man, one-party rule and the repression of political opponents and free speech was necessary to ensure national unity, to overcome tribalism, and to channel the efforts of the masses into economic development. Dissidence, even criticism was a luxury that new African states could not afford.

But by the end of the 1980s and in the early 1990s, there were calls for constitutional and political changes. To such an extent that a political earthquake was rocking the continent of Africa, reverberating with the slogans of democracy and freedom. Not since the End of Empire had Africa felt such upheaval.

The process of change

By 1990, the idealism that heralded the independence movement thirty years ago, was returning to Africa. Each of the countries was changing rapidly. Multi-party democracy, or just democracy, was widely talked about. The process of change was going forward, but in a different way and at a different pace in each country. In a few, it was hardly being felt - yet.

The political upheavals in Africa were set in motion during the course of the 1980s. What had happened?

• 1. In simple terms, the scandalous manner in which aid was wasted or misdirected in many African countries, became too obvious to ignore. State interference distorted economic development. Centralised governments had become parasitic, in some cases, almost murderous. Agencies, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund realised that drastic economic reforms were essential - and that these were not possible without political reforms. So they began to apply pressure for moves towards democracy, while prescribing often draconian measures for economic reform.

• 2. Africa's political upheavals were greatly accelerated by the demise of communism in eastern Europe. Europe's leaders had been thick with people such as the Ceausescus, the Honeckers and other proponents of the single-party socialist state. And what about the great USSR? If they could be toppled, why not...?
  The Cold War had turned Africa into a background of ideologies and surrogates, defining the continent's politics and stunting its development. Leonid Brezhnev poured troops, advisors and billions into the Soviet "client states" - Ethiopia, Mozambique and Angola. The United States was not far behind with arms and aid to Liberia, Somalia, Sudan and Zaire.
  The end of the Cold War meant that capitalist and communist countries were no longer in competition for the Third World. The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe said "goodbye" to their erstwhile allies and left them to the West. Some African leaders, such as Eduardo dos Santos of Angola and Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique, were quick to abandon Marxism and to learn the language of Western democracy and free market economics.
  
• 3. Internal pressure for change came from a new generation of Africans who came after the anti-colonial struggle. There was deep scepticism about ideology, one-party states or saviours. The age of the "father of the nation" who led his country to independence and ruled over it as a personal kingdom, was over. Those of the younger generation, saw their countries ruled by older men, many of whom were known to be corrupt and who ruled through their family or tribe. The younger generation were no longer prepared to put up with this situation. The arguments in favour of one-party rule in Africa had now worn thin. According to its supporters, ethnic and tribal divisions would tear the poor new countries apart, unless there was national unity with a centrally directed economy under a centralised government.

Such was no longer the thinking of Africa's new generations.

National Conferences

The most common response by leaders in Francophone African countries to the demand for more democracy, was to set up a "National Conference". These gatherings of the forces vives (living forces) of the nation, came to be the focal point of political change. Some attributed the prevalence of the idea in francophone Africa, to the French revolutionary tradition, and the way the Etats Generaux, the three estates of the land, took powers on itself, setting in train the overthrow of the ancien régime.

Now, the National Conferences sought to acquire full sovereign powers, thus causing the downfall of autocratic governmental authority. This was the undoing of President Kérékou in Benin (who described the issue of sovereignty as a "civilian coup") and President Sassou Nguesso in Congo-Brazzaville, who after seeing the "sovereignty" card played, had to submit to more than three months of lambasting of his 12 year-old regime, as well as to face serious charges, including that of implication in the murder of President Ngouabi in 1997.

Alternative solutions

Some Heads of State (mainly in Anglophone countries) accepted some kind of constitutional framework without going through the process of a National Conference. They accepted to submit themselves to election, or hand over to a democratically elected successor. Such was the case in Zambia, where after 27 years in office, Kenneth Kaunda was replaced in a fully democratic election by Frederick Chiluba. Nigeria adopted a novel solution. The military government of Ibrahim Babangida set up two parties, wrote their constitution and funded them, in the hope that democracy in Nigeria would be channelled into these moderate movements. In Tanzania, after years of moderate single-party government, Mwinyi set up a Commission to see if change was needed!

Other Heads of State, such as Museveni in Uganda and Rawlings in Ghana worked towards alternative formulae to multi-party government. They thought they had discovered an African way of "no-party" democracy, based on localised elections.

Even the most moderate of the old despots was in danger of being swept aside by Africa's "winds of change". A new wave of technocratic presidents and prime ministers took over everywhere, particularly in Lusophone and Francophone Africa. Many were not professional politicians, but bankers (Allasane Ouattara in Côte d'Ivoire), university lecturers (Amos Sawyer in Liberia), lawyers (Carlos Viega in Cape Verde), ambassadors (Eduard Franck in the Central African Republic). They had a specific vocation and skill to contribute to the whole process of national reconstruction.

Other countries' experiences

Among African countries, South Africa was seen as a particular case, in which President F.W. de Klerk was committed to ending constitutional one-race rule.

Some countries, such as Liberia and Somalia simply exploded. Their leaders hung on and the result was disaster. Their capitals lay in ruins, their countries divided. Zaire seemed to be going the same way and Sudan remained a disaster area with civil war still raging in the south.

In other countries, there was a notice hung up: "No democracy allowed". Hastings Banda in Malawi said: "The people don't want any change to the present political system". Daniel arap Moi in Kenya warned of disintegration and disaster if he allowed democracy in Kenya. There were more than forty tribes in Kenya, said Moi, and if elections were opened to them all, there would surely be unrest and bloodshed.

In North Africa, the winds of change were felt - to a certain extent. Algeria's decision to hold free national elections in 1991 was a "first" in North Africa and was praised as a potential model for its neighbours. But before the second round could take place, President Chadli resigned, the electoral process was suspended and the country plunged into political turmoil. The High Council of State then declared that there would be no more elections until 1994.

END of 1/6

2.Democracy in Africa - Reality or Myth? || 3. Africa and the World Community
4. Manifestations of Democracy: An independent Press and a free Judiciary
5. The realities of Globalisation || 6. Towards the news Millennium Whither Africa?