Charles de Gaulle's statement, "No country without an atom bomb could properly consider itself independent," resonates with me. I see its relevance, especially in the context of African countries. How can an African nation claim true independence without possessing nuclear power? While South Africa may have the Koeberg Plant, many others lack the means for substantial defense.
It extends beyond defense forces. Industrial businesses in some African countries focus on commodities like cotton, coffee, tea, natural gas, as well as everyday items like matchboxes, razorblades, body lotion, soaps, and beer. However, the absence of major technological advancements, such as airplanes and rockets, limits the perception of African nations as significant players on the global stage.
The tendency to admire inventions in movies and label white people as geniuses perpetuates a damaging mindset. Why should Africans believe they are incapable of achieving the same feats, and even more? We must challenge this perception and foster a belief in Africa's potential for greatness. While this is a complex issue, let's continue our discussion on African independence.
There are remarkable African heroes like Nkwame Nkrumah, Nelson Mandela, Patrice Lumumba, Prince Rwagasore, Steve Biko, and others. They are celebrated not only for resisting European dominance and oppression on African soil but also for recognizing the ignorance within African ancestors, including our great, great, great grandfathers. I refer to the African kings who, between the 14th and 19th centuries, sometimes traded their own people into slavery for beads, clothes, or guns—a painful chapter in our history.
During this period, Africans knew little beyond the wisdom of their cultural practices: art, music, dance, tribalism (which, frankly, I despise). The absence of schools, firearms, and high-speed trains in Africa during this era stands in stark contrast to Europe's progress. While some might mention the University in Timbuktu, mathematics in Egypt, and the Pyramids, their impact on Africa's development is debatable.
Timbuktu, once a center of Islamic scholarship, primarily served to spread Islam rather than contribute significantly to Africa's advancement. The Pyramids in Egypt and Sudan, while awe-inspiring, were primarily places of worship and royal tombs, offering little to modern human civilization. Even Egyptian mathematics, like the solution to a second-degree quadratic equation found in Berlin Papyrus fragments, was published by Hans Shack Schackenburg, a Danish nobleman.
Unfortunately, these achievements did not propel Africa forward, leaving the continent lagging behind Europe, Asia, and America in development by a considerable margin.
Let's revisit history. Europe's awareness of Africa only began in the 15th century when European explorers ventured into the continent, exploring its rivers, forests, lakes, mountains, and more. Upon their return, they painted a picture of a vast, resource-rich land inhabited by people in extreme poverty. However, poverty, it seemed, was not just about the pocket but also about the mind—a notion encapsulated in the saying that Congo, despite its wealth, is the poorest due to a lack of prosperity in the minds of its people.
In 1884-1885, European kings convened in Berlin, Germany, where they gathered around a table with a map of Africa. This map, crucially, had no borders between countries. Armed with reports from explorers, the French, English, and Germans each used a pencil to delineate territories they claimed. They essentially divided Africa as if slicing a loaf of bread. When diplomats, soldiers, and missionaries from Europe subsequently arrived in Africa, they realized their lack of understanding about African culture, languages, and more. Their primary interest lay in exploiting natural resources, and the hastily drawn lines on the map did not align with the realities of Africa.
Despite the mismatch between their divisions and the actual landscape, the decisions made in Berlin were final. The borders, often arbitrary, separated people who found themselves in different countries. These lines, etched on the map, were imposed without regard for the existing African realities. Even when troubles arose in Europe in the mid-20th century, leading to African independence movements, the borders established in Berlin remained untouched. These borders persist today, contributing to tensions and conflicts among African nations, underscoring the enduring impact of decisions made in a distant European meeting room.
Today, if a Nigerian wishes to travel to Kenya, or a Ugandan to South Africa, they must apply for a visa, a mere stamp in a thin book called a passport—a system imposed by Europeans that African leaders are hesitant to alter, revealing a dependence rather than true independence.
Where is the independence in Africa when European wishes dictate African leaders' actions?
Where is the independence when Africa's justice system and codes are mere replicas of those in Europe and America?
Where is the independence if, in African courtrooms, judges or lawyers still don George Washington wigs, a symbol that seems out of place?
Where is the independence if African political refugees are seemingly traded like commodities, a form of modern slavery orchestrated through the United Nations?
Where is the independence when our political system, religion, economics, international affairs, and even our culture are carbon copies of Europe?
Numerous factors indicate that Africa is not truly independent, questioning the validity of celebrating Independence Day. Since the first European set foot in Africa, we've been tethered to a legacy of dependency.
True independence in Africa seems elusive until the continent unites. Without that unity, no individual African country can claim genuine independence.
Comments