By WORKU ABERRA, Freelance, Montreal Gazette.
The successful uprising in Egypt is reverberating beyond the borders of that country, but will it affect sub-Saharan Africa, where the regimes have been even more corrupt, oppressive, and despotic than Hosni Mubarak's?
The lesson of the uprising in Egypt is clear: A coordinated, sustained and broad-based revolt can topple a dictator peacefully. In sub-Saharan Africa, the social, economic, and political conditions are ripe for a peaceful rebellion against the despots, yet organizational challenges remain immense. The high level of poverty, the small proportion of educated people, restricted access to the Internet, ethnic diversity, and the presence of mercenary armies in most countries pose major obstacles for a successful upheaval. But these hurdles are not insurmountable.
The level of poverty in sub-Saharan countries is higher than it is in Egypt. In the face of abject poverty, where the struggle for survival supersedes everything else, the struggle for individual rights, civil liberties and freedoms might look like a luxury that the poor can ill afford. The regimes have also exploited the poverty they have created to stay in power by attempting to buy political support from the poor. In Ethiopia, Human Rights Watch reports, the regime systematically uses the food aid it receives from the West to recruit political supporters. But poverty is not anathema to the struggle for democracy. The poverty-stricken African masses have fought for their rights since the colonial period.
The proportion of educated people in most of the sub-Saharan countries is lower than that of Egypt. As a result, on the surface it would appear that the African masses may not be politically conscious enough to fight for their rights and freedoms. But though they may not be well-educated, they can read quite well the intentions, motivations, and ambitions of politicians. Whenever they have been given the chance, they have proven that they are as politically savvy as their educated counterparts. Every time free and fair elections have been held, the masses
have voted to change oppressive regimes. In 2005 in Ethiopia, the majority of the peasants voted against the regime, but it refused to acknowledge the results and is still in power. The recent events in Ivory Coast also indicate that Africans are keenly aware of their countries' politics.
The Internet was a catalyst in the uprising in Egypt, but in black Africa, with the exception of South Africa and a few others, only a small minority, usually members of the ruling elite, have access to the Internet. For example, in Ethiopia, with a population close to that of Egypt, it is estimated that only 0.1% of the population has Internet access.
Facebook and Twitter will not provide the means for organizing the population of sub-Saharan Africa.
Ethnic diversity is a major hindrance to a successful uprising in the region. Egypt is mostly an ethnically homogeneous country. Most countries in sub-Saharan Africa have different ethnic groups, often numbering in the hundreds. The regimes have skilfully exploited Africa's ethnic diversity to their advantage by bestowing economic, political, and employment benefits along ethnic lines. The beneficiaries are mostly from one ethnic group -the ethnic base of the rulers. Along with showing ethnic favouritism, to stay in power
some of the regimes have accentuated ethnic differences at the expense of shared values, cultures, history, and national unity. The regime in Ethiopia is perhaps the most ethnically divisive one in Africa. It has created or sponsored the creation of ethnic civil-society organizations, ethnic political parties, ethnic companies, and ethnic administrative states. It has even enshrined in its constitution the right of each ethnic administrative state to secede. Any popular uprising against the regime in Ethiopia -or elsewhere in Africa -is very likely to engender ethnic tension and conflict.
The challenge for activists is therefore to avoid this ethnic trap and to rally the populace around a common goal that includes the aspirations of all ethnic groups.
The African armies are perhaps the biggest obstacle against a popular uprising. The Egyptian army, a respected national institution, eventually sided with the people when the revolt continued. But most of the armies in black Africa, whose high-ranking officers come from the same ethnic group as the rulers, are loyal to the dictators. Zimbabwe's army is loyal only to Robert Mugabe. The army in Ethiopia, one of the largest in black Africa, is a private one, an ethnic army that was created by the political party that came to power in 1991. Its loyalty lies with Meles Zenawi, the despotic prime minister, not with the Ethiopian people. For a successful upheaval to take place, military officers will have to be persuaded to abandon their allegiance to the dictators.
Despite these enormous challenges, the question is not whether a popular uprising will ensue in sub-Saharan Africa; it will. The question is when. For that to happen, Africans need a broad-minded civilian leadership that includes all ethnic groups and inspires the populace to struggle for the common good: for a united, democratic and prosperous nation. And then the military leadership may be persuaded to abandon its allegiance to the autocrats and to stand with people.
Worku Aberra is head of the Department of Economics at Dawson College.
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/
The successful uprising in Egypt is reverberating beyond the borders of that country, but will it affect sub-Saharan Africa, where the regimes have been even more corrupt, oppressive, and despotic than Hosni Mubarak's?
 |
Repressive regimes like that of Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi (centre, after elections in 2010) have skilfully exploited ethnic diversity to their advantage by bestowing economic, political and employment benefits along ethnic lines. Photograph by: THOMAS MUKOYA REUTERS FILE PHOTO, Freelance |
The lesson of the uprising in Egypt is clear: A coordinated, sustained and broad-based revolt can topple a dictator peacefully. In sub-Saharan Africa, the social, economic, and political conditions are ripe for a peaceful rebellion against the despots, yet organizational challenges remain immense. The high level of poverty, the small proportion of educated people, restricted access to the Internet, ethnic diversity, and the presence of mercenary armies in most countries pose major obstacles for a successful upheaval. But these hurdles are not insurmountable.
The level of poverty in sub-Saharan countries is higher than it is in Egypt. In the face of abject poverty, where the struggle for survival supersedes everything else, the struggle for individual rights, civil liberties and freedoms might look like a luxury that the poor can ill afford. The regimes have also exploited the poverty they have created to stay in power by attempting to buy political support from the poor. In Ethiopia, Human Rights Watch reports, the regime systematically uses the food aid it receives from the West to recruit political supporters. But poverty is not anathema to the struggle for democracy. The poverty-stricken African masses have fought for their rights since the colonial period.
The proportion of educated people in most of the sub-Saharan countries is lower than that of Egypt. As a result, on the surface it would appear that the African masses may not be politically conscious enough to fight for their rights and freedoms. But though they may not be well-educated, they can read quite well the intentions, motivations, and ambitions of politicians. Whenever they have been given the chance, they have proven that they are as politically savvy as their educated counterparts. Every time free and fair elections have been held, the masses
have voted to change oppressive regimes. In 2005 in Ethiopia, the majority of the peasants voted against the regime, but it refused to acknowledge the results and is still in power. The recent events in Ivory Coast also indicate that Africans are keenly aware of their countries' politics.
The Internet was a catalyst in the uprising in Egypt, but in black Africa, with the exception of South Africa and a few others, only a small minority, usually members of the ruling elite, have access to the Internet. For example, in Ethiopia, with a population close to that of Egypt, it is estimated that only 0.1% of the population has Internet access.
Facebook and Twitter will not provide the means for organizing the population of sub-Saharan Africa.
Ethnic diversity is a major hindrance to a successful uprising in the region. Egypt is mostly an ethnically homogeneous country. Most countries in sub-Saharan Africa have different ethnic groups, often numbering in the hundreds. The regimes have skilfully exploited Africa's ethnic diversity to their advantage by bestowing economic, political, and employment benefits along ethnic lines. The beneficiaries are mostly from one ethnic group -the ethnic base of the rulers. Along with showing ethnic favouritism, to stay in power
some of the regimes have accentuated ethnic differences at the expense of shared values, cultures, history, and national unity. The regime in Ethiopia is perhaps the most ethnically divisive one in Africa. It has created or sponsored the creation of ethnic civil-society organizations, ethnic political parties, ethnic companies, and ethnic administrative states. It has even enshrined in its constitution the right of each ethnic administrative state to secede. Any popular uprising against the regime in Ethiopia -or elsewhere in Africa -is very likely to engender ethnic tension and conflict.
The challenge for activists is therefore to avoid this ethnic trap and to rally the populace around a common goal that includes the aspirations of all ethnic groups.
The African armies are perhaps the biggest obstacle against a popular uprising. The Egyptian army, a respected national institution, eventually sided with the people when the revolt continued. But most of the armies in black Africa, whose high-ranking officers come from the same ethnic group as the rulers, are loyal to the dictators. Zimbabwe's army is loyal only to Robert Mugabe. The army in Ethiopia, one of the largest in black Africa, is a private one, an ethnic army that was created by the political party that came to power in 1991. Its loyalty lies with Meles Zenawi, the despotic prime minister, not with the Ethiopian people. For a successful upheaval to take place, military officers will have to be persuaded to abandon their allegiance to the dictators.
Despite these enormous challenges, the question is not whether a popular uprising will ensue in sub-Saharan Africa; it will. The question is when. For that to happen, Africans need a broad-minded civilian leadership that includes all ethnic groups and inspires the populace to struggle for the common good: for a united, democratic and prosperous nation. And then the military leadership may be persuaded to abandon its allegiance to the autocrats and to stand with people.
Worku Aberra is head of the Department of Economics at Dawson College.
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment