Spring 2006, Volume 1
Africa is greatly afflicted by many apocalyptical scourges
– HIV/AIDs, tropical diseases like malaria, global warming and frequent
bouts of drought, and periodic waves of pestilence, especially locust infestations.
It suffers greatly from war: approximately 12 million civilians have lost
their lives in the intrastate battles of the last sixteen years. For all
of these reasons, and others, Africa each year lags farther behind Asia
and Latin America in economic growth attainments; four decades ago Africa
was well ahead of Asia. At the same time, at the beginning of the independence
era, Africa also claimed a number of responsible leaders who sought better
lives for their peoples, not just bountiful rewards for themselves. But
now there are only a few African nations with long traditions of good governance
and effective leadership. What are the reasons and what is a possible remedy?
Compared to the Asian and Caribbean experience, colonial rule in Africa
was brief, with settled foreign-run governments in much of Africa for only
about fifty years. There was little time, especially in the least devolutionary
cases like Congo, to nurture democracy or responsible leadership. Furthermore,
the colonies were inherently non-democratic, even in those few territories
where indirect rule was practiced conscientiously. Moreover, African nationalist
movements date in a few cases from the nineteenth century, but in most cases
they are products of the twentieth century. In India and the British Caribbean,
by contrast, indigenous anti-colonial sentiments were nurtured from the
eighteenth century in settings that affirmed democracy and leadership rectitude.
Sheer size has an effect, too. Most of the members of the African Union
are small, with sparse populations. Thus, human resource capacities are
stretched thin. This generalization cannot explain giant Nigeria’s
leadership deficiencies, or explain why tiny Botswana and Mauritius have
performed so well. But in many of the other countries, the available talent
pool has been limited. Moreover, in most countries secondary and university
educational opportunity is a recent luxury. Many African nations still have
major educational deficits. Early leaders were drawn almost exclusively
from tiny colonial-educated and -socialized elites. Those generations were
in some cases succeeded by military personnel, not always officers, who
had little formal education. When these “jumped up” enlisted
men gained power they gave all-out greed a new name and bizarre methods
of governance a new meaning.
Unlike post-colonial Asia and the Caribbean, too, most of the smaller African
countries, and even Nigeria, still lack a hegemonic bourgeoisie. Governments
control large portions of national GDP and dominate employment opportunity.
Businessmen feed off or depend upon a regime’s patronage and its willingness
to grant licenses and permits. Governments distribute favors rather than
providing platforms for individual entrepreneurship. In such conditions,
graft and other forms of corruption flourish.
One result, after almost five decades of African independence, is a paucity
of good governance and an abundance of deficient leadership. Most African
despots take as much as they can as quickly as they can. Others favor their
relatives or their clansmen, and pay only lip service to leading a whole,
often disparately composed nation.
The positive outliers are Botswana and Mauritius, two small countries that
have developed a tradition of good leadership since the late 1960s, and
today boast Africa’s strongest and most secure democratic political
cultures. Both have always run open economies, created strong rule of law
systems, and tolerated ample free expression, free association, and dissent.
Free and fair elections have been standard. Both governments have consistently
delivered high quality governance to their peoples.
The successful cases of prosperous Botswana and Mauritius, and the much
younger successful good governance examples of Senegal, Ghana, Lesotho,
and South Africa, demonstrate the importance of good leadership. Without
effective, responsible, committed, and honest leaders and leadership, Africa
will hardly thrive. In these successful cases, leaders were insistent on
working for their national citizens, and not primarily for their kinsmen.
Sir Seretse Khama in Botswana and Sir Seewoosegar Ramgoolam in Mauritius
were both explicit about governing for, not against, their peoples. They
demonstrated integrity, and were never overly worried about losing favor.
Devoid of traditional or learned forms of narcissism, they eschewed personality
cults, motorcades, ostentation, and avarice. Alone of the early African
leadership cadres, they succeeded, by force of will, to create democratic
value systems that are sustained within their countries to this day.
Their examples provide helpful models for contemporary Africa. Indeed, the
African Leadership Council, created in 2004 with help from the Kennedy School,
is attempting to build on the exemplary work of Sir Seretse and Sir Seewoosegar
by setting standards for African leadership and by building capacity within
Africa for good leadership. The Council, chaired by Sir Ketumile Masire,
Botswana’s second president, and including General Yakubu Gowon, former
head of state of Nigeria, James Jonah of Sierra Leone and the United Nations,
former Prime Minister Hage Geingob of Namibia, and a host of other distinguished
African leaders of skill and integrity, has developed a Code of African
Leadership. It also has prepared a program of training for the next generation
of African leadership, and hopes this year to begin recruiting the first
of annual intakes of young, elected, political leaders for special training
seminars at the Kennedy School. The Council intends, by this capacity building
mechanism, to alter the continent’s appreciation of and practice of
leadership, and thus to transform African governance from mostly poor to
mostly good over the course of a decade. The lessons of Botswana and Mauritius,
and now of Ghana, Lesotho, Senegal, and South Africa, will be distilled
and offered to a new generation of upcoming leaders from all of Africa.
That could make a major difference. There is no reason why Africans everywhere
should not enjoy beneficent and tolerant rule, the absence of internal conflict,
and the possibility of rising living standards. The Council believes that
by socializing and acculturating the new leaders of Africa, large numbers
of citizens will thus benefit.