African countries development

Most African countries remain underdeveloped, owing to high rates of unemployment, underemployment, and political insecurity, among other factors. Frindéthié (2010) expands on the concerns that impact Africa as a continent. t. Most African countries continue to rely on former colonial powers for development. t. Neocolonialism continues to plague Africa. m. According to the author, African leaders must rise to the situation and develop a stable economy. y. In the second chapter of the book, Frindéthié discusses the history of Africa, as well as the impact of slave trade during the transatlantic trade. He faults African leaders for failing to heed the lesson that old globalization had a significant impact on the continent, resulting in poor economic growth. Dependency theory seems to be the main theory used by the European government in ensuring neocolonialism in Africa. Most African leaders still rely on European supports not knowing the impacts of such supports. Africa is a continent rich in minerals, oil and all other kinds of natural resources yet it is the poorest continent in the world in terms of various economic indicators. Frindéthié (2010) explicates the manner in which the late President Bongo of Gabon exercised his role as the godfather of Francafrique until his death. Bongo became the most faithful and trusted supporter of French interests in most regions of the West Africa.

Analytically, Francafrique has had terrible effects in most African countries. Their technique of destabilizing peace in various countries and acting as the peacemakers and charitable people providing for the affected people only shows how selfish the French government is in terms of the Francafrique initiative. The Congo-Brazaville carnage, the Tutsi genocide, and the Ivorian massacre were all instigated by Francafrique. Literally, Francafrique does not benefit Africa in any; it however, causes more problems in the continent. It makes Africa become more dependent on the European countries. It paves ways for capitalism, especially in countries like Gabon and Ivory Coast.

According to Maja (2011), Francafrique is a serious problem in Africa, particularly the Western part of Africa. He draws justifies this by discussing a comparison between the African states during the colonial era and the states today. According to him, Africa is not free yet. Africa is still colonized but this time, it is a silent colonization; it is colonization of the mind and ideas. He asserts that African fought for their own freedom only to become dependence on their enemies decades later. He suggests that African leaders have to come up with the ways and means of getting their own freedom. They have to build a strong economy and utilize effectively the available natural resources. Maba’s assertion on the impact of Francafrique is logical based on his articulation of the points as well as the examples he gives. Seemingly, dependency theory is the popular technique that most perpetrators or the enhancers of the dangerous program Francafrique use. They employ the concept of creating unending problems and coming up with solutions. These problems are the hindrance of economic progress especially in countries like Gabon and Ivory Coast. Gabon is one country that has been serious hit by Francafrique. As mentioned earlier, president Bongo was a staunch supporter of the program. He supported it and spread it in other parts of West Africa. This has been a serious problem among African states like Ivory Coast and Gabon. These countries still rely on France for economic, social, political and security enhancement. The reason behind this is that the French government, through Francafrique, creates problems like internal conflicts such as massacres and come up with solutions for them.

Internal conflicts obviously affect economic development and leads to poverty. The same government lends the countries funds to facilitate projects described in their budgets. Literally, this leads to continued dependency of Gabon and Ivory Coast on France. Economic development is discouraged by the Francafrique in an indirect manner and this has always caused troubles and issues in the French government. In addition, after causing internal conflicts, they send their forces to the affected country to calm down the situation. In other words, they make the countries depend on them for security. In particular, most African countries are still far from liberation from European liberation. African countries got independence but the only fruit they gained was making fellow Africans lead them. These leaders adopted the traits and behaviors of the colonialists. They oppressed fellow Africans by collaborating with the colonialists further thus sabotaging economic growth and prosperity. Nkurumah (1963) details and elaborates some of the causes of disunity in Africa. He asserts that some African leaders still collaborate with and support the colonial government even after freedom. Nkurumah discusses how Africa is a rich continent with numerous natural resources unexploited. He talks about the need for unity for a common goal. The unity to attain independence in the countries that had not attained their independence from the Europeans; the unity to build Africa and make it one of the world’s economic powerhouse; and the unity to build companies and enhance the success of various industries in the continent. The author also discusses about the need to have economic freedom, and the fact that prosperity of Africa as a continent lies within the hand of the Africans themselves and not the Europeans.

Analytically, modernization theory resulted in dependency theory. Initially, the only positive thing about colonization was that it spread modernization. It introduced modern education in Africa and made it possible for Africans to learn about sciences, economics among other important fields. Through this, Africans viewed the colonialists optimistically thinking and imagining that they meant good for them. Modernization existed before colonization actually took place in Africa. It existed before Africa was partitioned into countries by the colonial governments. After colonization, Africans still remained dependent on the colonizers. The theory of dependency thus holds in providing explanation to the effects of Francafrique in Africa. Thomas (2012) elaborates on the manner in which Europeans partitioned Africa with the aim of getting resources for their own companies back in Europe. The author terms Francafrique a neocolonial arrangement that should never be allowed in the African continent today. In his article, he has constantly called for a break from the past and tries to urge African leaders to value unity and their own economic progress rather than embracing programs and agreements with European nations that are only meant to undermine them further. Neocolonialism is the main problem dragging development in Africa. As the authors put it, it is the enemy to progress in most of the African nations.

Vallin (2015) elaborates the concept of Francafrique in the French’s former colonial countries. The author describes Francafrique as the sum of informal and formal French networks and lobbies solely related to African countries. Francafrique was coined by the first president of Ivory Coast, Felix Boigny, to describe the permanent relationship France and its former colonies in Africa. The relationship between the two parties, as defined by Boigny, offered mutual advantage to France and sometimes, to its client states whenever the African rulers tried to push. According to Vallin (2015), Francafrique was based on three major pillars namely monetary pillar, presence of French experts at the financial, educational and institutional structures. The third pillar was the military pillar. This involved the presence of French soldiers across the continent in former French colonies including Gabon, Senegal, Ivory Coast, and CAR (Central African Republic). From these pillars, it is derivatively obvious that the French government had no good intentions for the African states when they came up with Francafrique arrangement. It was all meant to increase dependency of the African states on the French government. It was meant to make Africans slaves in their own country. The concept of dependency theory elaborates on the importance of having control over the subject’s economic and military strength to make them unstable and dependent. From this perspective, it is arguably true that arrangement between the French government and its former colonies only meant to destabilize the countries and make them permanently dependent on France. Currently, Francafrique still plays a big role in controlling various important sectors of French former colonies. In Ivory Coast, France always provided its forces to calm chaos and violence especially during the 2010 post-election violence. In addition, France is one of the major lenders to Ivory Coast. As mentioned earlier, Francafrique is mainly meant to create economic and political instability in French colonies. Analyzing the political and tribal conflicts in Ivory Coast, Gabon, CAR, and other French former colonies reveal that French government has a hand in it and the perpetrators of the violence are funded heavily to create insecurity and give the French soldiers assisted by the international community to bring normalcy to such countries.

Francafrique benefits only the French government and not for the African nations. Weinstein (2017) elaborates on some of the instances whereby the French government refused to provide security to some of its colonies faced with intertribal conflicts. The author mentions the conflict in CAF which prompted the country’s president to ask for support of French government to calm the situation. The then French president, Hollande, refused to send troops to the African nation to bring peace. He hesitated and waited for the UN to make the necessary steps. The war conflict continued leading to the death of hundreds of innocent civilians and displacement of thousands of people. According to analysts, Hollande’s decline to send troops to CAF was mainly based on the fact that the French government had no interest in any resources in CAF. When Mali was faced with problems of terrorism earlier the same year, the president sent his troops and the war in Mali ended. From this, it is cogent that Francafrique had the mission to benefit France and not the African countries. As a matter of fact, it is the French government that stayed in CAF for long such that when they left, the country could not pick up easily and maintain a proper security system. Francafrique is making African nations dependent on France. It is destroying the future of Africa and evidently it is not ending soon considering the manner in which most African presidents (of French former colonies) have embraced it. It is the worst agreements of all time and its effect will be felt in several years to come with emerging economies like Brazil and China that are currently independent will be among the world superpowers in terms of economy and military.

Shaw (1979) discusses dependence and underdevelopment in Africa stating the causes of such. The author states that dependence is caused by Africa’s overreliance on the European countries. He makes reference to Francafrique describing it as an intelligent way through which the French government inflicts Africans with poverty and political instability. He talks of capitalism in some states where Francafrique exists. Capitalism is an enemy to economic growth but the French government encourages it through its institutional policies. Francafrique is not declining soon because of weak leadership and underdevelopment in Africa.

References

Frindéthié, M. (2010). Globalization and the seduction of Africa’s ruling class. 1st ed. Jefferson,

N.C.: McFarland.

Ishiyama, J. (2010). Fundamentals of comparative politics. 1st ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Maja Bovcon. 2011. Francafrique and the regime theory . [ONLINE] Available

at: http://www.academicjournals.org/article/article1381858116_Matunhu.pdf.

Nkrumah K. (1963). Africa must unite. 1st ed. London: Heinemann.

Shaw, T. and Grieve, M. (1979). Dependence as an Approach to Understanding Continuing

Inequalities. 1st ed. The Journal of Developing Areas, pp.pp. 229-246’.

Thomas, D. (2012). The Adventures of Sarkozy in Euroafrica. Contemporary French and

Francophone Studies, 16(3), pp.393-404.

Vallin, V. (2015). France as the Gendarme of Africa, 1960-2014. Political Science Quarterly,

130(1), pp.79-101.

Weinstein, K. (2017). Hollande the Hawk. World Affairs Journal.