Can Africa be saved?

I had a rather discouraging conversation the other night with a former Peace Corps volunteer in sub-Saharan Africa. I don’t want to give away too many details, as I’m afraid, given the relatively small number of Peace Corps members recently back from that region, she could be identified. Suffice to say her job was to educate people in rural areas about AIDS/HIV, and to keeps general tabs on various “at risk” individuals, in an attempt to insure they were getting proper health care for themselves and their children.

She said she started out loving the place, developed a love/hate sentiment, and ended up being utterly sapped of hope for the people volunteered to assist. She felt a deep sense of shame about her lost optimism, but could not escape the strong suspicion that most of the folks in her charge were “beyond help”. “Africa nearly destroyed me,” she said, “and I’m just so glad to be back here, and not there anymore.”

She’s a very attractive woman, which got her no end of unwanted attention. That was her first and most personally threatening trouble, and she confessed to never feeling physically safe on her own. She said the level of misogyny she encountered on a regular basis strained belief, and achieved horrifying proportions when juxtoposed with the issue of sexual health. All the terrible things you may have heard, stories of infant rape (a supposed cure for HIV infection), refusal to use condoms, battery and ostracision of female AIDS sufferers (while men continued to infect with impunity), the traffic of child slaves/prostitutes…all are troubles she said she encountered first-hand. She was terribly disappointed also with female complicity in the deadly misogyny; what women there lacked in physical menace, they more than made up in emotional terrorism of those women who were branded promiscuous “AIDS whores” (or something to that effect).

She said medicines for the sick were routinely pilfered by govt. authorities to be sold or given to those with favor. She estimated 10% or less of the money, food, and drugs meant for the masses actually made it to them; the bulk was coopted and sold on the black market, or simply destroyed to settle tribal disputes. She described the behavior of some petty chieftains towards the members of other tribes as nothing short of genocide; instead of Rawandan-style machete maiming and murdering, the “chieftains” in her region used the slower and subtler starvation and disease (most of the time). Guerilla groups would enter from across the border to rape and pilliage, stealing much needed medical supplies and food to give to their soldiers. Occasionally domestic soldiers would do the same.

I could go on and on, but you get the idea. Her final analysis: She wasn’t sure if sending aid to Africa was a good use of resources. If she had only one bag of grain to send either to Africa or someplace else, she would send it someplace else, for the simple reason that elsewhere it would not be wasted. She described a region on a path towards willful self-destruction, and claimed she could no longer see how the developed world bore further responsibility for sub-Saharan societal pathology. With an air of almost palpalble self-reproach, she admitted she had to wonder of “colonialism didn’t help Africa more than it hurt it.” If you knew her, you would understand what a remarkable thing it was to hear this coming from her mouth.

It made me wonder. It made me wonder a lot. What to do about Africa? Should we do anything any longer?

So you’re suggesting that we should just give up and walk away?
Of course no one can blame you’re friend from despairing and wanting to walk away from what she saw. The fact that she volunteered and went in the first place is much more than most of us would ever do, however much we may voice concern and suggest solutions.
But for the whole of the more developed world to just throw it’s hands up in despair and focus on helping others- that just can’t be right. It’s precisely because the situation in Africa looks so hopeless that they must be given the most help. Particularly with regards to HIV- the tragedy of that situation is that it is ignorance is literally killing these people.
From what your friend says it seems that many are not heeding the the advice they are given- but that does not mean we should stop giving it. Perhaps it may take several generations for the truth to be understood- and no doubt many terrible things will continue to happen in the meantime, but to just walk away and allow it to happen would be unconscionable.

I understand the feelings of your friend. I heard the same “its no use” from several people. Even relatively better off african oil countries suffer rampant poverty and corruption.

Some things that might help spur their economies include less agricultural subsidies in Europe and the States… more overview of multinational companies activities in these countries and charities that offer education, clean water or charity help. Not to help and get those 10% there might make a world of difference.

Overall I do agree that Africa is mostly beyond hope… it might get better… but it will take 100-200 years.

I’m not really suggesting anything, just pondering. I donate to a few international aid organizations, some working exclucively in Africa, some worldwide. It’s not encouraging to hear that due to government corruption and lack of social reform, much of the money, food, and drugs sent to Africa are squandered.

I knew the magnitude of the problem was large, but, if my friend’s accounts are accurate (and I have no reason to doubt her), it is staggeringly large. I feel uneasy about sending donations to a place where, it appears, that asssistance would be abused or destroyed.

Here’s something I didn’t know: Women in this region, once married, essentially can’t be “raped” by their husbands. Once a woman is married, she cannot refuse sex to her spouse. To demand he use a condom (actually, even to timidly request he use a condom), is tantamount to an accusation of infidelity, which can literally bring about bloody reprisal. Never mind that, in all likelihood, if he has been to a city recently, he has used the services of a prostitute, and thus may well have been exposed to HIV. So, man goes to city to work, frequents prostitutes, comes back, has sex with his wife (which she is powerless to prevent), gets her pregnant, infects her with HIV, she gets AIDS, births a child with AIDS, and in about ten years both parents are dead, leaving behind a deathly ill orphan. Antiviral drugs which were supposed to get to the mother so that the odds of infecting the child during birth could be reduced have been stolen en route and sold; or, they’ve simply been destroyed because a local colonel or whoever wants to put the squeeze on the peasantry in that region.

So, some women get the message, but can’t do anything about it. Most men don’t, and they are the major vectors for AIDS spreading from urban to rural areas. Infrastructure is virtually non-existant, and local government is horribly corrupt; a huge amount of food and drugs rot on the dock because they can’t or won’t be transported where they need to go.

Sometimes aid workers are forced to flee a particular region because of guerrilla incursions from a neighboring country, which is in a state of civil war. When they return, what facilities and supplies they had may have been ransacked. Children may have been carted off to serve as soldiers, or as sex slaves, or both. The sense of anger and despair caused by these attacks breeds suspicion of outsiders, further endangering the foreign aid workers.

Again, the list of troubles goes on and on.

Short of invading the region and imposing order, what can be done to improve this picture? And if that doesn’t happen, what should?

Short of direct and massive military intervention by the ENTIRE first world I don’t really think there IS a reasonable solution. Basically their entire (current fucked up) social structure would need to, in essence, be destroyed and rebuilt from scratch…and believe me, this would be unimaginably unpopular over there. ANY intervention would be truely and fundamentally unpopular and make Iraq look like a dispute amongst friends, in comparison. Without direct and massive military intervention though, there is no chance to GET the aid to the folks that need it IMO. Not in our lifetimes anyway.

And there is about zero chance of the US, Europe, Japan, etc directly interviening militarily in Africa IMO. Sending aid is a ‘feel good’ proposition. I’ve been to parts of Africa through my job and the levels of corruption have to be seen to be believed. I was never in the parts where your friend was, but I can well imagine how it is there having experienced the more ‘civilized’ parts.

Over all, unless the great powers are willing to truely commit (and be VERY unpopular over there doing it) we’ll probably have to write off large portions of Africa for years to come. If AIDS doesn’t kill them (I’ve heard mortality rates ranging from 60% to 80% in some areas, though that was anacdotal from folks like your friend that have been to the REALLY bad areas) tribal warfare will.

Its truely sad that so much human misery and suffering goes on there and there is seemingly nothing we can do about it. :frowning:

-XT

I’ve spent some time in sub-saharan Africa, and I can certainly understand the OP’s friend’s despair, although her reason for being there was there was far more noble than mine (split between working on oil rigs offshore Angola and visiting my Zimbabwean GF’s family). People want to believe that they can make a clear, measurable difference. The problem is, the length of time needed to find a measureable difference, especially in locations where there is corrupt, stupid and brutal leadership from the family level on up, will inevitably be longer than the person trying to effect the change can stand. This doesn’t, however, mean nothing has been accomplished, nor that the continent as a whole is beyond help.

Talk is cheap, I guess, but if I were to give advice I might suggest to the friend that even if only ten percent of the aid got through to the people that needed it, it was still better than nothing, and that if only one person out of ten actually heeded her advice about HIV, that it still helped someone. If in the end she couldn’t stomach the depressing reality of NGO work there, there’s no particular shame in that, but she shouldn’t go away thinking bitterly that it was all for nothing.

Ach, I’m sure she’s heard all these platitudes already, but they happen to be correct, IMO.

Oh, and re: the OP’s main question. No, there is no short-term possibility of sub-saharan Africa being saved from its own corruption, war and ignorance purely through outside intervention. One way or another, African people will need to make a better effort to develop fair, equitable and educated societies. While the developed nations can be of some help, the only mechanism for large-scale, drastic change they currently can offer is a military one, and IMO that won’t work.

The 1/17 issue of the Economist had an enlightening 10-page (or so) survey of Sub-Saharan Africa, it’s problems and possible solutions. The main theme of the survey was that in order for Africa to solve its problems it needs competent, responsible government and leaders (as well as needing its people/armies to refrain from toppling such governments once they are in place.) Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like that’s going to happen anytime soon, and I’m not sure if there’s anything we can do to help. I don’t think that many Africans would welcome American/Western intervention/involvement in their affairs (remember the negative African response when the Commonwealth tried to pressure Mugabe?) unless there were improvements both instant and significant.

Instead of focusing on the worst-case situations, what about the possibility of starting from ‘the top’?

What if a few more-developed countries such as Egypt and South Africa were to start an “AU – Africa Union” along the model of the USA or the EU? Then they could slowly bring other countries into the Union as they met the requirements for open government, economic stability, and social reforms. The carrot would be access to economic aid, free trade, military cooperation, etc. provided by the AU.

I’m trying to analogize this to the EU admitting a few countries every so often, with those like Turkey on the ‘waiting list’ for the next round, and given notice as to what shortcomings they must correct. Would a system like this provide both an example of the benefits, and an achievable goal for the other countries of Africa to work toward improvement?
BCE

Considering many of Africa’s problems started during colonial times, the idea that what it needs now is for the Western world to wade back in with the big guns and sort things out is kind of amusing. In a unfunny, ironic way. Where do you think the guns already there are coming from? Why didn’t Europe sort this all out the first time they were there?

And the idea that we are helpless in the face of Africa’s problems, and maybe should give on them, is equally bizarre. A large percentage of Africa’s problems are our problems. If we are to be justified in washing our hands of Africa we need first start wiping the crippling national debts we hold over it, and tearing up the trade agreements we have with it. In fact, if we were to really leave it the hell alone, totally, it wouldn’t be such a mess.

Unfortunately, this isn’t a possibility. A content can’t live in isolation from the rest of the world and its influences. So perhaps the western world would be better looking at the whole picture that is of its own making, rather than fretting about the relatively minor side-show of aid-pilferring. Africa cannot trade itself out of this situation, Economic Unions are not the solution because the rest of the world won’t let it.

Only then, once we have addressed the big issues and tackled the poverty, will things like ignorance, sexism, and petty war-lords have any hope of being successfully resolved.

The OP’s friend should also know better to assume that the problems she witnessed personally in one part of Africa are uniform across the whole. It’s a big continent.

That’s a pretty wide brush you’re tarring more than half a continent with there!!! Over 35 different countries, each with an independant government and varying levels of problems, 0.7 billion people in hundreds of different tribal groups, each with it’s own cultural heritage and history, not to mention several different religious affiliations across the continent!!! I am not denying that the problems you mention exist or that they present a tremendous challange to all of us, but to write off all things African as a result seems rather overly dramatic.

To me, education and employment/poverty relief are key - uneducated people who exist below the poverty line live “like savages”, and we shouldn’t be too surprised when they act that way as well. The western world wasn’t that different all that long ago… speaking of which, the western world has a debt to Africa that can’t be measured in monetary terms - much of the progress they made was made been on the back of African slavery or raw materials. Until that debt is paid, we (as a society, not the OPs friend as an indivdual) need to remain involved in Africa.

Grim

There was, or is, an Organization of African Unity or something similar a few years back.

They elected Idi Amin as the president. :rolleyes:

I am sorry to say that the attitude of the OP’s friend is not rare among returned would-be African benefactors. My church is sister congregation with a congregation in Tanzania, and we had major issues a year or so back when more than half of the aid we were sending was being stolen or misused. I can’t remember the name of the book or the writer, but an NGO employee who worked in Africa for years told the story of a batch of vaccine that was being delivered somewhere that was spoiled when it arrived, because the truck drivers took the vaccine out of the refrigerator provided and put their beer in it instead.

The problems of Africa are so overwhelming that it is difficult to know where to begin. No education, no infrastructure, huge linguistic and cultural differences, and businesses can’t get going because once they generate a profit, they are swarmed by corrupt officials eager to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Or even before that.

Then you drop the HIV virus into the mix, and the future darkens radically. There is no cure for AIDS, the treatments are prohibitively expensive, and even if the drug companies give it away for free there is no delivery system to get the treatment to anyone. And if global warming is real, the desertification of the continent is going to continue and increase.

I believe there is going to be a massive and unavoidable die-off in Africa. And I don’t think efforts to minimize the impact are going to make any discernable difference, because the difference between 25% of the population dying and 30% is not significant.

Sorry.

Regards,
Shodan

My parents have been in Eastern Africa for most of the last 11 years. They have been working with an African group to start a new university. Even working on a small scale, and over a relatively short time, they HAVE seens positive signs (both as a result of the new school, and in general).

What is being done in this case is providing the resources to let the African’s do what they want and need to do. This is not an American school in Africa, it’s an African school with friends. They have been accepting students for about 9 years now, and have graduted several classes.

Positive signs they have seen

  1. A wider acceptance of women in the classes and in professional jobs after graduation. This includes traditionally male dominated professional like law and banking.

  2. An increased awareness of AIDS, or at least an increased willingness to talk about it. Their students have put together a number of presentations/skits/educational events aimed at education and destigmatizing HIV/AIDS. These have been used both on campus and in neighboring villages.

  3. A growing support of college/university level education for the children not of the elite classes.

  4. A sense that Africans must help Africans. Although the people my parents have been working with a poor by western standards, they feel that they have a duty to provide what help they can in even poorer areas of Africa.

This is a small school in 1 country on a large continent. They are not going to make huge, visible improvements overnight. But hopefully, ongoing programs such as this can make lots of small differences that will multiply.

Well, dropping the debt, for starters. Africa pays far more in debt servicing than it recieves in foreign aid, so any currency that it does manage to get is immediately shipped out of the country, instead of being reinvested in African industries or people or infrastructure.

Cite

It’s irresponsible to talk about Africa’s problems as if the rest of the world didn’t have anything to do with causing them. Colonialism put most of the land and resources into the hands of foreigners, ‘independence’ didn’t change this at all.

Why do poor people have no food? One reason is because the land is all taken up growing exports. I won’t suggest that it can just be ‘returned’ to the people (obviously that’s an enormous oversimplification) but people working all day, on someone else’s field, to grow stuff that will be sent away, and getting paid a pittance with which they must buy food that is shipped in from elsewhere, seems more than a bit backwards to me. If we are using their land so we can have coffee and bananas and sugar and peanuts, we are not in a position to blame them for not having land to grow their own food.

Structural Adjustment Policies were imposed by the World Bank and IMF during the 80s and 90s. Countries recieving loans (which went largely to debt repayment and emergency supports) were required to impose these ‘austerity measures,’ like selling off natural resources and industries to private interests and opening up the economy to foreign investment. This is great for foreign investors but not so much for people who can no longer afford to pay for water or electricity.

They were hailed as revolutionary and as ‘Africa’s Future’ when they were brought in, but are now widely criticized for increasing poverty rather than relieving it. (It must be noted that the conditions required by these SAPs are absolutely unheard of in any ‘developed’ country.) The link above has lots of interesting information, also this one.

All these trade issues that have been talked about so much these days are also critical. The US provides agricultural subsidies and forbids Africa from doing the same. The result of this is that African farmers cannot compete with subsidized American imports. Dropping these subsidies (or at least allowing African farmers to compete) would go some way towards relieving their poverty.

A lot of Africa’s problems feed off each other. For example, if a mother gets AIDS, she can’t work to feed the family, and her kids may have to stay home from school to take care of her, and work to make up for the lost income. Not only does the family income decrease but the kids lose out on their education.

If half your countryside has AIDS, the channels which distribute food will break down, since you don’t have any workers. Thus AIDS contributes to famine.

I hope you are all familiar with Stephen Lewis, the former UN envoy for HIV in Africa. He is dedicated and passionate and has many interesting insights into the situation.

So, in sum, what do we do?

  • drop the debt, or at least hugely reconsider it
  • stop unfair agricultural subsidies
  • stop austerity policies that would never be acceptable in an industrialized society
  • encourage grassroots programs (of which there are zillions), who have many good ideas as to ‘what to do.’ I believe that by and large Africans living in Africa (whose interests are things like food, water and peace) have better ideas than Americans and Europeans (whose interests are profits).
  • allow them affordable drugs to control AIDS, in order to mitigate the effects of disease on poverty and famine

I had a conversation with a friend of mine from Kenya about this just a few weeks ago. He blames the Africa problem on colonization. He contends that prior to Europeans showing up in Africa, Africans had never heard of “Mine”. Everything was ours. Since the introduction of personal pro-nouns he says Africa has suffered. He is convinced that until Africans see Africa as “ours” that nothing any outsider can do will fix the problems.

I am no expert on African history so his claim may have some validity to it for all I know.

I guess I should specify my friend was in sub-Saharan Africa, near the West coast. That seems to be the most troubled region, though problems of this type are hardly isolated to that region.

North Africa has its own set of difficulties, but they seem relatively tractable in comparison.

I’m not advocating anything. I’m saying the view “on the ground” looks hopeless, and my friend is not the only person who has this sentiment.

There is the argument about “blaming the victims” of colonialism for the abuses of colonial powers, but to reduce the current state of affairs in sub-Saharan Africa to a side-effect of colonial exploitation is, sadly, a gross oversimplification of the historical facts of ethnic strife and cultural mores in the region. The roots of Tutsi and Hutu strife, for instance, date back to around the 16th century, and are associates with Tutsi migrations that themselves were a result of tribal warfare that had little to do with European incursions. Well before that, if I remember correctly, the Hutus pretty much wiped out a tribe called the Tua (few of them remain to this day), which still causes hard feelings in some circles. Frankly, the situation reminds me, so some extent, of the Balkans, where ethnic grudges that date back literally hundreds (or even thousands) of years occasional explode into widespread, even genocidal violence. The fact is, despite the depradations of the colonial powers (which I am in no way defending), the warring between tribes was reduced considerably during that period, for the purely practical needs of imperialism. Sort of like the collapse of communism in the Balkans, once people didn’t have the gun to their heads forcing them to get along, they went back to slaughtering each other, only now with far more deadly weapons.

The idea that Africa was somehow this peaceful paradise that Europe raped, ruined, and then abandoned, is one I think those who wish to make a real difference in the region need to disabuse themselves of. Colonialism did horrible damage, no question, but present efforts to address that damage seem to be stymied by what appear to be uniquely African difficulties. That’s what I can gather from what I hear, anyway. At this point, what are people trying to save sub-Saharan Africa from…itself? Maybe that’s a gross oversimplification, I don’t know. But the weapons genie is out of the bottle and won’t be put back in. The ethnic hatred is real, vicious, and old as the hills. The cultural mores, especially in the realm of gender politics, seem to put the average person from this region at an enormous risk for contracting HIV, and given how truly easy it is to prevent the spread of HIV with the proper precautions, the scale of the AIDS pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa staggers the imagination. We’re talking whole villiages being literally wiped out by AIDS, and all the condoms you can dump on them won’t make it stop, because a large percentage of the population simply refuses to use them.

And then there’s the corruption. Some others here have stated that you have to see it to believe it. My friend did, and she said it was nausiating. She simply could not understand how these scum kept rising to the top, but once in place, they rule with impunity and total self-interest. The plight of the poor rural villiagers is of no more concern to the warlords than ants, and their actions demonstrate this amply. These are Africans destroying Africans, for no discernable reasons other than personal enrichment and bigotry.

Again, I wonder, is dumping more aid on the problem like trying to fill an abyss at this point? Forgiving debts is, I agree, a necessary step. But many of these nations are in complete default anyway, and the demands of bodies like the IMF to restructure economies have, thus far, made zero difference (some would argue they’ve made things far worse). Essentially, what we seem to see is that money doesn’t work. Aid gets squandered. Change is resisted. Old grudges don’t die.

So, what works then?

Cite?
You can prove that the tribal warfare, the massacres, the slavery, the starvation & the disease didn’t appear before Europeans came? I call BS on this without multiple cites from impartial sources. You made a hellava sweeping gemneralization he, fella. Put your facts where your mouth is.

Which as been done again and again, to no avail.

Which. I suspect, is what the OP was, indirectly, driving at.

Depends How you define living like savages. African culture existed in the tribal state with local monarchies for the vast majority of it’s history until the colonial period. There was far less poverty and problems because of the small, sometimes nomadic nature of the tribes and villages. In addition, the weaponry was limited to small arms at best. The problem I see is the forced westernization of a culture that wasn’t NEARLY ready to adapt to city life, and so called “first world” standards and practices. It’s only natural that a culture that’s given unreasonable demands to change a long established tradition, and powerful weapons will quickly go to all hell. Further, the African enviroment, much like parts of South America, are not hospitable to certain staple crops that large populations need. Though a return to the small tribal ways is probably impossible, an isolationist policy MAY do more good than harm.

I’m not advocating the obvious suffering that will occur from such a policy, but it may FORCE the governments to find a solution that may be more appropriate for their cultural systems, and available resources.

You fail to follow the point. Of course these things happened. Just as they happened in every part of the planet at one time or another. But why are they still happening in Africa?

My point is that these things, although distressing and unwelcome, are merely symptons and not the cause of Africa’s current problems. Africa’s problems must first be addressed on a economic level, and this dates back to the time where African countries were colony economies, run for the benefit of the colonial power.

Hence my derision at the idea that what’s needed is effectively a return to this, where the Western world takes over as the Africans just can’t sort things out for themselves. Africa has never had the opportunity to sort itself out because it remains under the thumb of the developed world’s trade rules and economy, while simultaneously still trying to resolve internal disputes dating back to colonial empire building.

[ol]
[li]Do not make condecending remarks about what I do and do not understand![/li][li]I asked for a cite, smart guy. Does this look like a cite to you?[/li][li]All you have provided to date is a lot of Euro-Chest beating (BOO-HOO-HOO! I am English, & because somebody had a colonial empire before I was born, that makes me wicked!), and a load of unsupported statements.[/li][li]Neither you, nor anybody else alive today, is responsible for the colonial conquest of Africa. The people who ordered & committed those deeds died, decades ago.[/li][li]There is no such thing as a collective moral obligation (in reference to a nation), any more than there is collective sin, or collective virtue. All of these are purely individual concepts, applied incorrectly in your case.[/li][li]Every nation on Earth is under the same trade rules & economy. Why can’t Africa sort things out, when everybody else has? Because the is no desire to “sort things out” among the general population of Africa. They’re settling things among themselves, & yes, it is cruel & stupid. But that’s what human beings are. The winners in the tribal wars think things are great! The losers would do the exact same thing to the winners, given the opportunity.[/li][li]Hobbs asserted that Humans are so greedy, & so cruel, & so short-sighted, that they’d destroy themselves without government to keep them from one another’s throats. Isn’t that what the Colonial Governments accomplished? Even though they had other intentions? (I admit Belgium was a complete failure in this. The Belgian Congo was a nightmare, & cannot be condemned too much.)[/li][li]Sadly, you all assume too much about the “merits” of “leaving Africa alone”. Given the current mindsets that seem to be the basis of postmodern political thinking in Africa, I suspect that somebody will try to “solve” Africa’s problems by “unifying” the continent under a “strongly-led government”. A dictatorship or Totalitarian State. Imposed by a war of conquest, against Africa, carried out by Africans.[/li][li] Futile Gesture–you are not a Little Tin Angel, waiting for a kiss on the head from God, before going out to solve the World’s problems. (And if you keep polishing your halo so much, you’ll go blind! :smiley: ) Similarly, neither you nor I nor anybody in the World is a Devil impaling a baby on his pitchfork (this is a metaphor, I need to remember to point this out to you, Futile Gesture.) We are Apes. We are, at best, Apes that have learned to wear hats–at worst, apes with blood on our paws. This is out only collective legacy. We will never be the semi-Divine creatures you seem to want us to be. We are only Apes. Europe, Africa, America, Asia. All merely Apes. [/li]
So, Africa won’t change, until they are forced to from outside, or until they do it themselves. And since History suggests that unification of such diverse groups is usually done by the sword, we may see in our lifetimes an African Napoleon. Or worse–an African Hitler.

So there shall be War. The 1st World does it without Death Camps, or our hypothetical African Alexander The Great does it, & may think Death Camps match his decore.

But, there shall be War.
[/ol]