ENGThe Changing African Narrative Reconsidered
To vaguely
ask what the biggest development has been in the African continent this past
year would most likely be meaningless, unless if one was to follow Binyavanga
Wainaina’s eloquently satirical argument
on effectively writing about the continent: treat it as if it were a country;
keep the stories ‘simple’ and entirely episodic, be confident with
sweeping generalizations, etc. It is the strategy of domination, of marginalization, of dispossession;
and it has been the way most narratives on and about Africa are being
shaped. Indeed, they are not unlike Karl Marx’s depiction of the masses during the
French Revolution; masses who “are unable to assert their class interests in
their own name… [Who] cannot represent one another, [and who] must… be
represented."
When the National Interest issued an entry
with an inquiring title: “Is Africa’s Narrative Changing?”,
one would expect the possessive to imply an African ‘ownership’, and the
interrogative to allow the continent some space to independently decide the
direction, the tone, the timing, the priorities in shaping its own narratives.
Only that it did not. Indeed, it needed not.
The article
was mainly concerned with security and political dynamics in Africa in the past
year, because “This year, the big story in Africa is less about growth rates,
or big changes for better or worse in conflict dynamics. Instead, the biggest
story is in the realm of politics.” Although it is nowhere close to the omnipresent negation, the traditional negative stereotypes
about the continent, it nevertheless left out
major issues and details that are as crucial. At any rate, if Africa’s
narrative, or if narratives on and about Africa are changing, these issues and
details warrant discussions. Unfortunately, Is Africa's Narrative Changing?
seems to have completely missed that point.
Consider, for instance, the glaring omission of the signing
and entry into force of the African Continental
Free Trade Area (AfCFTA)—the largest free trade area since the establishment
of WTO—that aims to boost intracontinental trade, drive innovation, bring
prosperity, and help fight the hard battle against extreme poverty. Such an omission
is unconscionable, especially given that the article avowedly adopted a utilitarian framework by considering
“the numbers of people affected and the trends that could be created or
reinforced” to justify its choice of the “big six” countries to analyze.
Moreover, one would also expect the ongoing talks on reforming
the African Union (AU) to make it as a ‘big’ story of the year. Indeed, if one
story should deserve the epithet “African,” the perceptible winds of change of
the AU, the push to make the continental body more effective in its activities,
more efficient in its spending, and more self-reliant in sourcing of its
finances should have been on anyone’s short-list. But the cut is hardly
surprising: It is another reminder that writing about Africa fundamentally
entails wiping out anything that does not fit into the set agenda or interests of those telling the story. Africa or
African, here, is more an idea than a palpable reality.
Nonetheless, since the article is primarily concerned with
“security and political dynamics” in the continent in the past year, it is
perhaps warranted to specifically examine a number of omitted developments in
that area.
The piece argues, for instance, that the “trends in
democracy… are OK”, completely ignoring the disconcerting trajectory being
taken by a growing number of countries, erstwhile promising democracies, since
across the continent, and more recently in West
Africa, there are growing concerns about “democratic
decay,”. Benin, once lauded as the laboratory
of democracy and West Africa’s model democracy, and Guinea, whose
Alpha Conde has become a shadow of his old self, morphing from “democratic
savior” to a lethal threat to his country’s democratic aspirations,
are two examples that readily come to mind. This is not necessarily a
subscription to the claims of democratic recession in the region,
but it is to point out that a balanced analysis of the recent political
dynamics in Africa ought to consider such developments. Similarly, the silent revolutions in Algeria and Sudan
warrant a passing mention, if only
because of the trends that could be created or reinforced by these
developments.
Also, it is intriguing that the article failed to consider
the conflict in the Sahel Region, especially in Mali, as a major playing ground
for both regional and continental security. For instance, the Economic
Community of West Africans States (ECOWAS) warned
that the Malian crisis could spill into neighboring countries and destabilize
the region. More striking, however, is the article’s complacent section on DR
Congo. The authors frustratingly failed to elaborate on the country’s worrying
Ebola crisis. The current epidemic in DR Congo is said to be the second-biggest Ebola epidemic
outbreak since that of 2014-2016. In fact, on July 17, the World Health
Organization (WHO) declared it a global health emergency,
and the assessments mentioned fears that it might spread into neighboring
Uganda, Rwanda, and South Sudan. These concerns were echoed by the UNSC, which observed that “the disease could
spread rapidly, including to neighboring countries, possibly having serious
humanitarian consequences and impacting regional stability.”
Thus, rather than simply wondering if Africa’s
narrative has changed, perhaps the real
questions should be: how are narratives on and about Africa changing? Could
there be a room for Africa to claim their ownership? And how to best do that?
The task is not to replace one single story with another. Rather, as da Costa
Peter eloquently
argues, “There is a need to push the boundaries, to find
new ways to communicate about [developments], to represent Africa in all its
complexity and contradiction…” Only then could we have in-depth and informed
analyses; and only then could we offer balanced perspectives about the complex
dynamics unfolding in Africa. The real challenge, in a nutshell, is to provide
balanced and substantiated perspectives, rather than catchy titles with hollow
contents.