KEY POINTS
- African countries face two choices for growth: compliance or protest.
- Compliance preserves colonial economic systems but limits independence.
- Protesting for economic independence can lead to sanctions but fosters long-term growth.
For a very long time, the continent of Africa has been trapped in the struggle for economic development. The effect of colonialism is still seen in the continent’s political and economic systems, leaving African nations with two tough choices: accept the economic structures laid down by former colonial masters, or go against those rules and take the dangerous and uncertain path of building independent economies.
This debate has been on for a while now. It weighs heavily on the hearts of the leaders and people of various African nations. Complying with the existing structures would make us more stable, have easier access to financial support, and ease the pressure we feel. But it does not come without its own disadvantage, which is sustaining the system that was built to benefit the former colonial masters, keeping us bound economically.
Compliance: A Safe but Limiting Choice
Countries that have chosen the path of compliance tend to have a more comfortable journey —or at least, it appears so on the surface. For instance, Zimbabwe in 1980s and 1990s. The country was considered one of the economic giants of Africa because it maintained the colonial imposed economic arrangements after the political independence. But it was a fragile and false comfort, and quickly crumbled when Zimbabwe made a decision to carry out land reforms. As soon as the leadership attempted to exercise sovereignty over the economy, the colonial system quickly responded fiercely. The economy greatly declined because of the penalties that followed. Till this day, the country continues to struggle to have a stable economy.
Likewise, South Africa largely maintained its colonial economic structure. Although the country currently has the most performing economy in Africa, it does not change the fact that the system is designed to serve foreign interests. “We have preserved the economy,” South African analysts argue, attributing slow transformation to the faulty system. The country may look calm and stable, but when one goes beneath the surface, one sees that inequality and economic disparity have created cracks in the walls.
Resistance: The Difficult Road to Economic Independence
For most African nations, the path to freedom and prosperity is to be totally emancipated from the colonial era. However, this path is not for the faint-hearted. The consequences are often harsh: international embargo, ostracism and allegations of human rights violations. These happened to nations like China and Russia when they chose to build economies that would advance their collective prosperity. They went on to establish successful local industries hence emerging as powerful players in the world market. Their success did not come cheaply. It took many years of struggle for China to become the world’s manufacturing powerhouse and the second-largest economy.
For African countries, resistance means developing an ‘Afrocentric’ economic model. It is a concept of erecting structures that would enable the development of local communities and not the interest of foreign powers. Nevertheless, the cost of freedom can be heavy; the process, harsh. Leaders who choose to do this are likely to experience pressure both internally and externally. However, the long-term benefits of success can transform the economic landscape generations.
The Choice for Africa’s Future
As reported by Newsday, the choices Africa has to make to attain true freedom are clear but not easy. Continuing on the current path provides more stability and international support. But there is much more long-term reward on the path of resistance, no matter how challenging taking that path would be. The nations would enjoy economic independence, be free from the shadows of their colonial masters, and build a system that can truly prosper their people.
