Writerâ€™s Cloudy Africa Vision
I am sorry if you find my mail too strong in condemnation; but I was so disappointed and in the end annoyed with your article. What I find annoying of all is your moral statements rather than a clear view on the way forward, which must be political and based within Africa itself. Look, those who formulate the issue as you have done in accordance with the false point of view of the G8 Countries, who are deluded by the futile promises of among other things 'financial accountability', 'debt linked to democratic reforms', 'Aid tied to democratic reforms', etc, who feel that their admired global leaders like Bush and Blair are â€œrationalâ€? and â€œmoralâ€?..
I would like to comment on the article by Peter Okema Otika (US & UK Owe Africa $Trillions Blackstarnews.com June 10, 2005). The article started off by commenting correctly on the US view to aid. Then it lost its way in my view. Clearly the US does not share UK's view of common interests with African leaders like John Kufour (Conservative) and Benjamin Mkapa (Liberal). The sure route to maintaining supply of raw materials is continued war and chaos for US and liberal-conservative strangulation of progressives by the UK. Both approaches have the same objective in international relations: the continued exploitation of Africa and the negation of all progressive movements. While the former focuses on the hard issues of international relations, the latter focuses on the soft issues; thus while the presence of war and chaos makes it easier to for example kill progressives under its guise, the presence of aid makes it easier to destroy any challenge to the legitimacy of the dominant two-party democracies taking root in African countries. And the West can support all the democratic reforms that you want; and supposing they do that, do you really think that will lead to progressive development on the African continent? Do you really think that 100% cancellation of debt will mean the destruction of the fiscal causes of the need for debt and aid?
Of course debt cancellation is welcomed but by itself it simply tinkers with the symptoms of a debt virus while leaving the virus intact. Indeed, you end up specifically asking that we look up to Bush and the US for answers when you have already told us that their view is opposed to development on the continent: "This should stop. Mr. Bush should press not only for financial accountability but also for democratic reforms all over the continent. Aid should be tied to democratic reforms and be denied where the political and people's welfare is being threatened by the leaders of that country." It must be clear that should Bush do this, international capitalist forces will lose one of their tools of war and chaos; and even if they follow Blair, that only ends them up on the soft issues too. So, both hard and soft issues have no fundamental interest in the progressive development of the continent. I therefore found the posturing of your article which started on a progressive note most unacceptable and dangerous to logical political analysis and thinking in its posturing.
This kind analysis such as you provide in that report has resulted in an impasse for African development because a lot of such analysis simply fails to draw out the progressive implications of either Bush or Blair. I would add that not only are you yourself not seeing the issues clearly but are confusing the readers. Frankly, over 30 years since Nkrumah died I am still surprised that the ideological guidance that he left for us in especially his three books Africa Must Unite, Neocolonialism and Consciencism is not being employed to chart the way forward even if it comes to ideological clarity. If this was so, we will not have the kind of report that you provide. I am sorry if you find my mail too strong in condemnation; but I was so disappointed and in the end annoyed with your article. What I find annoying of all is your moral statements rather than a clear view on the way forward, which must be political and based within Africa itself.
Look, those who formulate the issue as you have done in accordance with the false point of view of the G8 Countries, who are deluded by the futile promises of among other things 'financial accountability', 'debt linked to democratic reforms', 'Aid tied to democratic reforms', etc, who feel that their admired global leaders like Bush and Blair are â€œrationalâ€? and â€œmoralâ€? and will put forward rational progressive policies that will lead to the increasing standard of life of Black people are tragically mistaken as the history of Ghana and Africa since 24th February 1966 has shown. Globalization, like imperialism before it, knows no law beyond its own interests.
This writer is based in London. For more reports please call (212) 481-7745 to subscribe to the newsstand edition of The Black Star News, the worldâ€™s leading Pan African news weekly.
Ann GarrisonNovember 30,2013 @ 12:14 PM
It was sexy to be against the war back then. He was probably in it to get laid.
carpinteyrobwmJuly 14,2013 @ 09:29 PM
carpinteyrobwmJuly 14,2013 @ 08:34 PM
amslctciikJuly 13,2013 @ 01:47 AM
http://youngsgear.us - louis vuitton bags cheap on the inside...
No Record Exist!!