ISLAMIC MOVEMENTS AND THE POLITICAL
ECONOMY IN AFRICA: AN OVERVIEW OF
SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA - 8

[The Concept ]    [The Context ]   [Contemporary Islamic Movement ]   [African Political Economy ]   [Further Evidence ]   [Description to Prescription ]   [The Human Factor ]          [Role of Movements ]   [Conclusion ]  The Role of the Movements It is clear that African economy has been in persistent trouble not so much for want of ideas or solutions like for want of implementation of these solutions. The economic decisions that need to be made and implemented are in fact political decisions. To do this the leadership require freedom, courage and commitment. Unfortunately Contemporary African political leadership, with one or two exceptions, has neither the freedom nor the courage nor certainly the commitment. A great majority of them are in power at the instance or by leave of one Western patron or the other. Far from being independent governments, they are in fact mercenary regimes hired and maintained to promote and protect the glutinous interest of the West. Algeria, Zaire and Egypt are some brilliant examples. If the West should withdraw their support, many of these regimes will collapse within hours and some can be taken over by as much as a fax. Since the collapse of communism, Islam is the only force yet that remains to challenge the hegemony of the West in Africa as indeed elsewhere. And herein lies the role or better still, the duty of Islamic movements in Africa. But herein also lies the worry or better still the fear of the West. The West, to be sure, understands Islam more than some of us are prepared to believe. It would have preferred to deal with communism than Islam. For communism is a western product, well engrossed in western ethos and values, speaking the same language, sharing the same morality with capitalism, the two are indeed faces of the same coin. Islam on the other hand is born of a different worldview, speaks different language and lives different morality. It will not be content with production until it knows how it will be distributed, the end cannot justify the means, every move has to be fair and equitable. But the West had parted company with fairness and equity since the renaissance. It rose to power precisely because it had redefined morality and thrown away its conscience and has since known no other way to greatness except through what many with conscience and sense of morality would consider unjust and unfair. For the avoidance of doubt, Lord Lugard, the British colonial governor, first in Sudan and later in Nigeria, made it amply clear, if in subtle tones, in his The Dual Mandate, that Britain was not in Africa for reasons of pure philanthropy.[32] Joseph Chamberlain, the British colonial secretary, writing in 1897, was a little more blunt, "We ought" he wrote, "- even at the cost of war - to keep the hinterland of the Gold Coast, Lagos and the Niger territories... I do not think we ought to yield a jot of threat."[33] When it later became clear to Lord Lugard that they could not stay in Africa forever or even as long as they wished, he had occasion to remark, in his characteristic sarcasm and subtlety, that "For two or three generations we can show the Negro what we are: then we shall be asked to go away. Then we shall leave the land to those it belongs to, with the feeling that they have better business friends in us than any other white men."[34] This link between trade and war appear to be rooted long before colonization, for a Dutch conqueror was reported to have said, in 1614, that "Trade cannot be maintained without war nor war without trade". The Economist of October 1994 appear to be echoing these words when it captioned its cover story, a survey of the global economy, "War of the Worlds".[35] The salvation of the African economy, from all that can be seen, cannot lie in the bloody and cruel hands of those who have sought to conquer, exploit and dominate Africa for the last five centuries or so. The meetings of the G-8 seem to be only distinguishable from the Berlin conference of 1884 in its sophistication, subtlety and efficacy. Nor can the future of Africa lie in the feeble and soiled hands of mercenary regimes, whose primary concern has never been the interest of their people, but the elusive game of self-perpetuation which is pursued vigorously and recklessly until the expiry of either the leader or the state that he heads. "This inordinate ambition to stay in power at all costs", observes Kumo, " (or what Du Bois calls "the childish desire to live for ever"), ensures, quite inescapably, a massive wave of institutional corruption and the plunder of public resources leaving the rest of society to wallow in neglect and despair."[36] African Socialists have come and gone leaving us more impoverished than ever. The capitalists have never laid any claims to equity, much less, philanthropy. Africa's only hope seem to lie with an inward looking, independent, confident, committed and courageous leadership, which so far only the Islamic movements seem capable of providing. We can no longer ignore the fact that the problem with African Political economy is not only economic but also and more fundamentally moral.