Once more Africa is in the news for varied reasons. The news is either bad or good depending how one evaluates the resurgence of military coups in Western and Central Africa. Over the last three years, Africa has witnessed eight military coups – with the more recent ones being Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso, Niger and Gabon. The military leaders of these coups have given various reasons for their interventions: ranging from the inability of existing governments to quell rebel insurgence, as in Mali and Burkina Faso, to the attempts to breach constitutional terms limits, as in Guinea and Gabon.
Whatever the reasons, the resurgence of military coups often correlates with a decline of democratic governance. In the last three decades Africa made inroads in democratic governance – with Ghana, Benin, Senegal, Nigeria, Mali, Botswana and Mauritius among others being the torchbearers. During those days, Africa’s western partners touted liberal democracy as the ideal form of governance. In fact, while no one can dispute the inherent virtues of liberal democracy through free and fair elections, there is growing disenchantment among many Africans that democratic institutions are not serving the public interest. In many countries of the sub-region, the executive, legislative and judicial arms of government are perceived to be weapons for western powers to use in sustaining their interests in Africa.
Political change
In western theory, democracy is described as a political change moving from less accountable to more accountable governance; from less competitive to free elections; from severely restricted to better protected civil and political rights; from weak autonomies to numerous associations. But how relevant are political rights if they do not create opportunities for jobs and enhanced livelihoods? Ideally, democracy involves choices, actions and initiatives that are expected to cause positive change in the people’s lives. Anything short of these expectations amounts to window-dressing. Quite expectedly, there should be positive correlations between a democratic system and socio-economic development of a country – which should positively transform the living standards of ordinary people who vote governments into power.
However, some schools of thought argue that, rather than restoring hope, democracy is causing more economic and political crises. In many democracies of Africa, political powers rather empower political office-holders and their cronies to live opulent lifestyles at the expense of ordinary people. Thus, the notion of western theorists that democracy naturally stimulates inclusive economic development can no longer hold water in the face of a widening equity gap. While this by no means justifies military takeovers, it is the stark reality confronting Africa as governments are failing to meet the aspirations of their people.
Good governance and colonialism
In the 1990s, Africa’s development partners shifted attention from democracy to good governance; perhaps after noticing that merely electing leaders was not enough to meet the aspirations of many people. In this regard, the World Bank’s definition of ‘good governance’ is worth analysing. The Bank defined good governance as how power is exercised in the sound management of a country’s economic and social resources for development. However, to what extent can a country be exercising sound resource management when foreign powers have monopoly over the same resources? A clear case is the dominant role of France in controlling the minds and resources of its 14 former colonies in Africa.
During a hastened independent arrangement, the former French colonies signed a pact that compels them – to date – to contribute more than US$500billion into the French Treasury every year. Under the pact, the 14 Francophone countries were compelled to relinquish management of their economies to the French Minister of Finance. Since the 1960s, these 14 countries have been depositing 85 percent of their bank reserves into the French Treasury. The French government then invests the billions of dollars into the French Stock Market to boost the French economy and for huge returns. In all, France makes a cumulative US$500billion from the resources of its 14 former African colonies annually.
What’s more, any colony that intends to access some of its funds must first submit a budget to the French Minister of Finance before the budget can approved as a loan – with an interest rate of 20 percent. Besides, all the oil and other mineral resources either discovered or yet to be discovered must be mined by French companies as a matter of right; leaving the colonies with little, if any, to explore locally. This explains why Niger’s uranium is monopolised by France and used to generate electricity for the whole of France, while more than half the population of Niger sleeps in darkness.
Furthermore, as part of the pact, former colonies can only use the French Franc created and solely printed by France. The 14 countries have been using this currency since 1958. Political analysts say any country in the Francophone zone that fails to comply with tenets of the pact are punished by France refusing to print their currency.
What’s worse is that under the pact, France will have a military presence in each of the 14 countries – whose soldiers can only be trained by the French military. In other words, France detests any of the 14 countries having any military connection with another country – including their neighbours. This means that Burkina Faso, Togo and Cote d’Ivoire cannot have any military agreement with Ghana, though there may be a pressing need for such joint training.
Also, in the event of war, the 14 countries’ first allegiance is to France. In fact, French military resident in those countries can intervene and overthrow their government if they have sufficient reason to believe French interests are being threatened. Statistics indicate that since 1960, 26 African countries have experienced 66 military coups: with 16 of them being Francophone countries. Since it is a pact, any francophone leader who attempts to breach it is either killed or overthrown through a military coup at the behest of France. Thomas Sankara is a notable example of a leader who was overthrown because of his opposition to imperialism. On the contrary, leaders who abide by the pact are rewarded and sustained. Examples are Gnassingbe Eyadema, Blaise Campaore, Paul Biya and Omar Bongo among others.
Justification for coups
As indicated earlier, the various military rulers have given various reasons for their interventions. In Mali and Burkina Faso, it was the failure of past governments to counter the rebel groups and restore peace and stability. For Guinea and Niger, it was the perceived failure of democratic institutions to address the social and economic problems in their countries. Another reason assigned by the Guinean military was what they called ‘constitutional coups’; that is, a breach of the term-limits to continue in power. Alpha Conde was an example of such a leader. Sadly, Allasane Qattara of Cote d’Ivoire recently amended the constitution to give himself another two terms.
In Gabon, the military cited institutional weakness that worked in favour of Umar Bongo and his son Ali Bongo who together held power for 60 years – during which they stifled divergent views. It was clear that an ailing Ali Bongo had no sound mind to continue as a leader. Yet he hung on to power as a divine right. Some political analysts argue that if Ali Bongo had died on the throne, it would have created a power vacuum – hence, the military’s intervention was timely. Interestingly, a common trend in the recent coups is the involvement of presidential guards in overthrowing the presidents they were guarding and protecting. A possible reason for their actions could be that they witnessed the opulent displays of wealth and corruption by their civilian masters.
Generally, military rulers are contesting the use of state institutions to serve western interests. However, no one should rejoice over the decline of democratic governance in West and Central Africa. The fact is that a volatile and unstable sub-region will create more internal/external migration and complex humanitarian emergencies, which will make headlines in western media once more.
Divine right
In the 1960s, the divine right to rule permeated Africa’s political systems. Most of the leaders who led their countries to independence held the view that they needed more time to shed their colonial shackles. Kwame Nkrumah, Julius Nyerere, Kamuzu Banda and Gnassingbe Eyadema were notable examples. According to some historians in Ghana, the enactment and use of laws such as ‘The avoidance of Discrimination Act, Preventive Detention Act and Alien Compliance Act’ closed every avenue to free expression and political participation.
A similar agenda of early African leaders to rule forever occurred in many African countries. In 1963, Gnassingbe Eyadema ousted Silvanus Olympio through a military coup. This action of Togo spread into Ghana, where the military overthrew Kwame Nkrumah in 1966. The coups in Togo and Ghana further triggered a wave of military coups across Africa during the 1980s and 1990s. Some examples of these were Jerry Rawlings of Ghana, Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso, Samuel Doe of Liberia, and Valentine Strasser of Sierra Leone among others.
Whether or not those military coups brought any positive change is still debatable. This is because some political analysts argue that military coups often offer false hopes of fighting corruption and boosting economic development. With time, the military governments began to commit the very infractions for which they overthrew civilian governments. Furthermore, those leaders easily transitioned from military leaders to civilian presidents through allegedly faulty electoral processes. Jerry Rawlings of Ghana, Blaise Campaore of Bukina Faso, and Yahya Jammeh of Gambia are notable examples.
Wind of change
In the late 1990s, a wind of change sponsored by western countries ushered a wave of democratic transitions starting from Benin, Mali, Ghana, Nigeria, Guinea among others. During this period, Africa became the focus of the world, as democratic governance gave a signal of political stability and economic development. At this point, civil society organisations (CSOs) and think-tanks were empowered by western donors to question and contest political decisions; and ‘to promote transparency and accountability in the governance process’. In 2007, when the eminent Kofi Annan ended his tenure as UN Secretary-General, he held a forum in Accra during which he challenged CSOs to play a critical role in sustaining Africa’s democratic and economic gains. He declared that “civil society is the future of Africa”.
Perhaps this is the time for Africa’s development partners, the Africa Union and ECOWAS to invest additional resources into building the capacity of political actors and key stakeholders to promote peace and security in Africa. The Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping and Training Centre (KAIPTC) is one institution that needs to be empowered with financial and human resources to attain its vision and mission of training and educating the military, police and civilian actors to promote peace and stability in Africa. Perhaps in the future KAIPTC could consider introducing courses in media and human rights, and development and conflict reporting in West Africa.
