Is Pan-Africanism Dead?

Pan-Africanism, the notion that people of African descent share common interests and should therefore be unified. This of course was proposed at a time of great racial injustice both in Africa and against Africans in the diaspora. W.E.B. DuBois’s famous statement that “the problem of the 20^th century is the problem of the color line” was widely believed to be made with the clear knowledge that not only were people of color suffering in America, but even on the African continent under the yoke of colonialism.

To rid Africa of colonialism and fight for racial justice were largely viewed as inseparable. Marcus Garvey took it a step further by calling for the return of Africans back to Africa in his famous Africa for Africans slogan. Not only that, he believed that no person of color will ever have any dignity as long as Africa remained unliberated.

These ideas have picked up steam since then and eventually led to the political independence of African states in the mid-20^th century.

The idea of pan-Africanism started in the so called diaspora, of course in Africa there were individual struggles against colonialism to liberate specific territories. Names like Martin Delany, Alexander Crummel, and Edward Blyden are cited as early proponents of this idea.

W.E.B. DuBois though stands out more prominent and actually studied African history and culture, a concept he advocated amongst blacks. This gives the idea a more political and cultural outlook.

As the idea grew in popularity, so too were the supporters. The Honorable Marcus Garvey came on the scene with the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) in 1919 to 1924. His philosophy was for both economic as well as political liberation, although his Black Star liner wasn’t as successful as he hoped, coupled with his troubles in America, UNIA didn’t register much success, the idea of Pan-Africanism lived on and continued. Through the 1920s and 1940s C.L.R James and George Padmore were the most prominent proponents of the idea. By this time the idea was gaining a foothold on the continent.

Jomo Kenyatta, who was influenced by the teachings of George Padmore, in fact believed to be his disciple went on to lead Kenya to independence. There was Leopold Senghore, father of Senegal’s independence. This was by the late 1940s when the ideals were receding somewhat in America and picking up steam on the continent.

The most important figure on the continent for the movement was of course Kwame Nkurumah, who fervently believed that   colonialism could be totally defeated on the African continent. To prove it, he mounted a relentless campaign against the colonial institution in Africa and led his country; Ghana, to independence in 1957, the first sub-Saharan African nation to be independent.

Ten years later, all of Africa south of the Sahara will be independent with the exception of the Portuguese colonies and much of Southern Africa as well as the island nations. All in all, only nine out of the 48 nations of the mainland will remain under colonial rule, even then, by 1975, only Zimbabwe, South Africa and Djibouti remained to be independent.

Quite a feat knowing how entrenched the institution of colonialism was in Africa. This goes to show how a well-organized grassroots movement can create an impact, exactly what is needed at this time; a well-organized grassroots movement.

The various independence leaders of Africa can all be said to have Pan-Africanist views.

During his speech marking the independence of Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah said; “the independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is connected with the total liberation of the entire African continent.” To this he dedicated his efforts culminating in the formation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) on May 25^th 1963, (today celebrated as African Liberation day).

The OAU aimed to, amongst other things;

·         Intensify the fight against colonialism in the remaining territories of Africa, notably South Africa and Angola, two of the most brutal colonial outposts, and to end white minority rule.

·         To coordinate and intensify cooperation

·         The defense of the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Africa.

Nkrumah’s mantra was “independence today, tomorrow; THE UNITED STATES OF AFRICA, and he was not playing. For him it was much more than winning political independence, economic liberalization and cooperation was as crucial if not more so. Total independence with non-interference and non-alignment as well as the ability to defend African’s sovereignty were his goal. You can see why he had to go. Unfortunately, disagreements on how to go about such a union created division in the OAU which impeded success.

Looking at Africa today, we see why he made the matter so urgent, his prophetic words; “unite now or perish” stand as testament to the urgency of the matter.

So we ask, is that a fight worthy of fighting and if so, what challenges are to be expected?

We are witnessing the rise of the far right in Europe and its move from the fringes into the mainstream. With the immigrant crisis and global terrorism, it is only a matter of time before it dominates the mainstream, especially in Europe. What then in that scenario as they are heavily anti-immigrant (non-white) and often promoting white supremacist ideals? Who would’ve thought people will march in the streets of Europe, in broad daylight, with dressed in Nazi regalia and displaying Nazi symbols and slogans in 2016?

Meanwhile in Africa, we seem to have no direction and our issues are only footnotes in the global mainstream media.

The goals and approach may be different in this day and age, but without some form of unity, Africa's condition and the suffering of African women and children will never end.

When Peaceful Protest Desrves Death

Peace is only sustained by justice. Justice is ensured by the equal treatment of all before the law. For far too long have we, as a people endured under the yoke of tyranny and oppression. Each time an act of injustice took place, tempers flare and a call to arms is sounded from certain quarters, but thankfully cooler heads have prevailed and chaotic situations have been avoided. But everyone’s endurance has a limit, there comes a time when even the most cowered individual stands his ground and refuses to be pushed around. When that time comes, two things are at stake; his dignity as a human person or his freedom.

That time has come for Gambians, some would say it came and went several times. Hiding behind religion/faith and calling for peace and stability gets to a point where it becomes hypocritical. Such calls it can be argued, are borne out of cowardice, fear, insincerity, selfishness or some other human deficiency rather than a sincere call to maintain peace and stability.

This has sadly been the norm in The Gambia for far too long; whenever the powers that be abuse their power, only a few point out such abuses, the majority stays mute or indifferent, content with their false sense of security. When the excesses of the authorities become too much to bear the few that have been speaking out all along decides to take action, the silent majority comes out screaming peace. The hypocrisy on display in this scenario is that of ignoring the excesses of the tyrant and condemning the protestations of the afflicted. Even though you deny it, you are siding with the oppressor. Do you see why hiding behind religion to call for restraint is not heeded, but worse shows the hypocrisy that is being masked?

We have seen time and again, people refuting claims that a wrong has been committed consistently and endeavor to make their position seem neutral and objective. Propaganda is nothing short of manipulating facts to suit a certain narrative. Here is a system that consistently acts with heavy handedness each time their position is criticized and hides behind national security claims to justify their oppressive stance, little wonder we hear claims of “Gambians are peace loving”, “Let’s pray for peace”, etc. Peace; peace; peace. The absence of war or chaos does not mean the presence of peace. Peace and justice go hand in hand; one does not survive without the other, only temporarily.

If you are writing posts calling for peace, ask yourself the following:

What do you mean by peace? 

Is it the violence that you are afraid may ensue from people taking to the streets or the disruption of the order of society?

Is there a justifiable call to protest? 

The protesters claim is that citizens of The Gambia were exercising a constitutional right and got arrested without breaking any laws and their are claims of torture to death. Is it okay that three weeks on the government officials have so far remained mute as to what happened to the arrestees or even to confirm if they have anyone in custody. Isn't that in itself disrespectful? 

Is Mr. Jammeh or those he entrust with positions of authority infallible?  

Our belief and that of every sane person is that nobody is perfect. Despite your best sincere efforts, mistakes are always a part of human efforts. If mistakes occur, is it just that the citizens, whose lives will be affected by such mistakes, express their dissatisfaction and offer alternative approaches? That is one aspect of democracy, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION; it’s not a western concept or ideology. Because citizens demand it does not mean that they are being instigated to destabilize the country by some foreign power. Where such attempts at dissention are heavy handedly cracked down on, tyranny is the driving force behind such repression. Tyranny simply means refusing to uphold the law that guarantees the rights you fight against.

However you look at it, the opposition parties, the UDP in this case, are not out to destabilize the country. For far too long has the government treated the members of that party with heavy handedness and impunity and each time they exercised restraint, but taking the life of an innocent person who posed no threat to anyone and expecting the same level of restraint is unrealistic, even you know that. Femi Peters was jailed for using a PA system without permit, an unfair jail term; the party refrained from making a big deal of it leading some of its supporters and critics to label them as cowardly and irrelevant. Amadou Sanneh’s case is still fresh in our minds, as a top executive of the main opposition, he still languishes in jail without any protest from his party, and they respected the law even though everyone knew the law was manipulated. Kanyiba Kanyi is still unaccounted for, Ousman Ceesay was shot and killed in Tallinding during a welcome parade for the opposition convoy with no one held to account.

The list goes on and on. Each time, the UDP stood by the law to have their rights respected, where they were betrayed by the very laws they believe in, they remained faithful to the law. Even now, they are not breaking any laws by taking to the streets. The constitution guarantees the right to peaceful protest, but we all know how the exercise of this right is being treated.

Such repressive nature can only go on for so long and here we stand with the finish line in sight. It has been constantly peddled by the administration that those who oppose the current regime are unpatriotic, peddlers of tribalism, troublemakers, and agents of foreign powers bent on seizing the peace and stability of little Gambia. And the sad fact is that the supporters of the APRC buy the storyline hook, line and sinker. 

Truth is, those who oppose are citizens too, with rights guaranteed under the constitution. The peace you so cherish can only be sustained in an environment of respect and tolerance. Respect for dissenting views, accepting that we are all different and have differing views on issues. But each time such brute force and heavy handedness meets peaceful demands for reform, a little is chipped away from that peace and eventually the repressed masses will rise up and demand what is rightfully theirs – their dignity.

Whether you support the government or not, such acts of wanton disregard for the lives of individuals should be condemned by all, especially when those murdered in cold blood only committed the “crime” of daring to speak out against their unfair treatment.

It is hard to figure out what approach to take to address the issues facing our nation collectively especially when talking to the sympathizers of the regime. Do we speak to their emotions? Do we invoke reason? Do we speak from a religious pulpit? All these approaches have been tried, yet the reaction is the same – Jammeh was right, the victims were wrong. It is especially sad when young men and women, who by all accounts are smart, brilliant, articulate and holding so much promise for the future of our beloved country are the ones standing up to defend acts of repression. With so much information at our finger tips, these acts can only be deemed contemptible if not entirely selfish. One thing is for certain, they are insincere.

One Possible Way Forward

Africa is the one continent that can go it alone, with enough fertile land to feed the whole world.

Enough water resources to harness for our needs, either for irrigation or power generation.

We can be energy independent and stay green in the process:

Windmills along the hundreds of miles of coastlines all around Africa, solar panels in the Sahara, or the Kalahari; dams on a few of our many rivers. We won't need to drill in Angola, Nigeria, Gabon or Equatorial Guinea.

We have the brains to develop the technology needed to harness our resources to optimal use; where such technology is not already available, the technology can be hired.

We will certainly have to address the numerous conflicts, some of which are engineered by powers outside of Africa for economic and geopolitical reasons. Which makes it imperative to make the African union a more efficient and meaningful body.

The point being made here is that should we reset the clock and we all live on our share of planet earth, Africa will endure longer than any other. Rather than needing anyone else, we can be totally self-sustaining and have the rest of the world needing our resources as they currently do. But that ship has sailed a long time ago, and there is no gains in wishing things were different. The gain lies in actually turning things around and making our resources work for us all, equally.

Making the African union a more relevant voice on the continent than the UN (most of whose members will see a united, independent Africa as a threat to their economic hegemony, and therefore move to hinder any such progress). If the EU can reign supreme on European matters, the African union too can take on a similar role on African affairs...speak with one voice with Africa's interest above all else.

The main obstacle standing in the way of any potential progress seems to be political. Be it political unrest, lack of commitment on the part of the political leaders or institutionalized corruption backed by bad economic policies.

The status quo is untenable. As has been stated numerous times before, the sooner the issues confounding Africa’s progress are addressed, the better for the millions of poor and struggling Africans.

Remaining part of international bodies like the UN and the various other institutions is essential for any progress in the affairs of Africa. We cannot afford to isolate ourselves from the rest of the world, for despite all the shortcomings, there is a lot to be gained. The task at hand therefore, is coming up with strategies that will help make these international bodies serve Africa and Africans better, not just on occasion but consistently.

Let us start with the most basic of our needs – food self-sufficiency! With food security, we can move on to other aspects of development. As long as we rely on others for our sustenance, we will forever be beholden to them for their ‘support’. Where is the dignity in that? 

Africa and the UN - To Stay or To Leave II

The issue of walking away from the U.N. is an isolationist move which will bear more ills than good. In the world we live in, we need more alliances than segregation. When a system is not working as expected it is better to work trying to change it from within. Every member of any team has some leverage he can use in any organization to sway things a certain way. Africa does have that leverage and can use it effectively and in the process make this important institution more viable for the many vulnerable citizens of the world.

Africa indeed has a genuine reason to be wary of the U.N. and Africa’s role in it. The devastating effects of war and the drive to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war” Made the U.N. a welcome idea among nations of the world, it cannot be made to lose that relevance. But on that promise, which is part of the U.N. charter, Africa has been failed miserably, so miserable that the Brahimi report was commissioned in 2000 to review U.N. peace keeping missions, a lot of which was in Africa in the 1990s. The report concluded that “the U.N has repeatedly failed to meet the challenge” outlined in its charter.

Africa witnessed devastating conflicts in the 1990s that resulted in the deaths of over a million people partly due to the failures of U.N peacekeeping missions; the notables being Rwanda and Somalia. The mission in Liberia, which started in 2003, is often cited as a success. In fact, the intervention of the Nigerian led ECOWAS force supported by the U.S., as well as President Obasanjo’s team of African diplomats that resulted in Charles Taylor’s relinquishing of power deserve more credit. Africans resolved that conflict through their own efforts. The U.N. facilitated the peaceful transition to elections.

Between 1992 and 1994, there were over 30,000 U.N. peacekeepers deployed in Somalia; the period during which 800,000 Somalis were massacred. This was such a huge failure that President Clinton announced U.S. troop withdrawals followed by a highly restrictive policy of deploying U.S. troops on future U.N. peacekeeping mission. This after 18 U.S. soldiers were  killed, dismembered and dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, 75 injured as well as 25 Pakistani  soldiers killed and another 54 injured. The U.N.’s own Commission of Inquiry set up to investigate that specific peacekeeping mission recommended “the U.N. should refrain from undertaking further peace enforcement actions within the internal conflicts of states.” (Jacobson, 2012). But a body as relevant as the U.N. shouldn't be reduced to just monitoring ceasefires and elections

In spite of such a recommendation, then came the case of the genocide in Rwanda. Prior to the swiftest and most systematic genocide, there was the Arusha Accords signed between the Rwandan government and the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) that saw an end to a three year civil war and brought much needed stability. Many factors could be cited as to having led to the breakdown of the peace accord and the beginning of the infamous Rwandan genocide. Some of the points raised by international diplomacy and public policy experts included the failure of the U.N. body to give Rwanda a permanent membership on the Security Council amongst other issues. In the 104 days of violence start started after the peace accord broke down, almost 1 million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were massacred.  After the massacre started, the U.N. peacekeepers disgracefully abandoned the thousands of civilians who sought refuge in the places the U.N peacekeepers were stationed knowing full well that the militia will kill these vulnerable civilians, which they did. They chose to focus on evacuating their own expatriates, government officials and foreign nationals leaving the Rwandans to fend for themselves.

Two weeks after the massacres started, which the U.N. failed to recognize as genocide, it went ahead to reduce its peacekeeping troops by almost 90 per cent.  This move was, made contrary to the recommendations of Nigeria, the African representative on the Security Council at the time that civilians were in grave danger and that U.N. peacekeepers should be mandated to protect them.

A U.N. commissioned report in December 1999 assessing the organization’s involvement in Rwanda stated that “member states failed Rwanda in deplorable ways; ignoring evidence that genocide was planned, refusing to act once it was underway and finally abandoning the Rwandan people when they most needed protection.”

However one chooses to look at it, it was a lack of will, more than anything else that prevented the U.N. from acting in saving many Rwandan lives. An assessment by the U.N’s own human rights investigator for Rwanda in August 1993 cited the possibility that genocide might occur. That following January, Canadian Lt. Gen.  Dallaire sent a cable warning of the risk of genocide which was received by Kofi Annan but never shared with the Security Council as should be the norm. These two assessments should have been enough to compel the U.N. to act and prevent the genocide from reaching the scale it did in 1994.

There is the current case of U.N peacekeepers sexually abusing women and children in their assigned countries like Congo and Sudan adding to risks of increased HIV/AIDS cases.

Despite some success, the failures of the U.N. are many and cannot be ignored. So Mugabe can be forgiven for taking the stance he took on the U.N. and her role in Africa, but most importantly on the failures of the body to give the African voices the attention they deserve. It is a tragedy that in a body as important as the U.N. non-African voices prevails over African voices on matters regarding Africa.

If you are tempted to argue that African leaders need to get their collective acts together in order to be heard or respected, the fact that their various countries are accepted as members of the U.N. counters that position. If they are not good enough to be listened to, then they shouldn’t be accepted in the organization. Which ties back with Mugabe’s point that reforms are needed at the U.N to reflect Africa’s representation as viable.

But in typical fashion, since Mugabe has been labelled a tyrant and undemocratic, that suffices for him not to be heard and his message, regardless of its relevance can be ignored. A typical case of shooting the messenger

Bob Marley’s famous line that “How long shall they kill our prophets, while we stand aside and look…” can be relevant in the case of dealing with Mugabe.

Despite what is being portrayed in the media, Mugabe command respect among his peers, but most importantly, a vast majority of ordinary Africans and people of African descent view him as a hero, a defiant hero who has Africa’s interest at heart. A view not shared by Africa’s so called intellectual class. In many cases, with the exception of a few, most of their assessment of African affairs are viewed as extensions of imperialist views.

Africa and the UN - To Stay or To Leave?

"We will fight a fight for our own identity, our own integrity and personality as Africans, We are Africans. If we decide, as we shall certainly do so one of these days, that down with the United Nations, ...we can't continue to be artificial members of it. If the United Nations is to survive, we have to be equal members of it." (Mugabe, 36th AU Summit, 2016)

Like in typical African fashion, the grandfather has spoken words laced with wisdom, wisdom addressed to his family of youngsters he may not get to meet again trying to instill a sense of pride and dignity in them to fight the course of their motherland.

Unfortunately for us, when Mugabe speaks, it is a case of shooting the messenger, in the process his message gets lost amidst arguments of whether that was the right occasion to say some of the things he said, or whether he shouldn't more focused on the governance issues on the continent. Some even suggesting that he should die and leave us alone already. It seems his detractors, those determined to see him reduced to no more than an old senile man and his ramblings, are winning. They have succeeded in making our minds up for us about Mugabe, at least some of us. Tragic!

Mugabe is certainly no saint, points alluded to in an earlier post; just like no political leader in our modern world is. He is one of those people you cannot sit on the fence for, you either love him or hate him. Whatever side you're on, let's not fall victim to discarding his message in its entirety because he spoke them. Africa is at a crossroads, as is indeed the world at large. We can use every perspective we can get to help shape the future of the continent.

Africa's problems and challenges are numerous, but in the mind of the so called intelligentsia, with their Eurocentric perspective needless to say, none of it has anything to do with the West or the institutions they fund and their relationship with Africa. Where a case is established that in fact such institutions pose a challenge to Africa's progress economically or otherwise, the suggestion the same intellectual class comes up with is that let Africa take care of its leadership and governance problems first before shifting the blame outside. And sadly, they are the ones given the platform to shape the views of the word on Africa and African affairs. As always, there is that exception to any rule, a lot of the intellectual class is speaking for the Africans and the unfair dealings Africa gets with the West.

What about the proposition that Africa leaves the United Nations? Will there be consequences for leaving? Certainly; is it an extreme proposition? Probably. Is the African Union functional enough to be an effective alternative? Likely not. But does that change the fact that Africa and her interests are dealt a bad hand at the UN with hardly a voice that gets listened to? Unless there is reform as proposed, that fact will remain. As a global body, all members, regardless of economic, political, or military status should have equal say on world affairs. But as he pointed out, that sadly is not the case.

A lot of his counterparts probably giggled at the idea of a UN exit, and should some agree and make the move, they'll be hung out to dry. Remember Sankara and his proposal for a refusal to pay IMF and World Bank debt with their exorbitant interests? He knew that "If [he] go it alone, they will come after [him], so it can only be done together." Why, because the economic situation in Africa was so dire that we cannot afford those huge loan repayment terms. He stated that "They will not die if we do not repay, but our people will die if we pay that loan." Meaning taking that much money out of an already broken economy for debt servicing will deprive the poor masses of much needed economic booster. What happened to him for proposing such ideas needs no further elaboration.

Truth is, Mugabe is sick and tired of the same game being played on Africans and that some Africans agree to be used as pawns in that game of self-destruction. He has been in the struggle for Africa's liberation longer than any on that platform. He knows the game being played and we can't seem to see things from his perspective. At the very least, we can give him the respect he deserves as a hero for the struggle of the dignity of the African people. He may have used the wrong formula sometimes, but who doesn't make mistakes? The younger generation of Africans and people of African descent see in him a hero worth celebrating in so many respects. One or two flaws here and there wouldn't be enough to cast a dark shadow on his long struggle for a dignified Africa.

That much we owe him.

The bigger question is, can Africa afford such a move?

African Sheep are Wool-less, Nor Does It Snow in Africa

Well with the exception of parts of South Africa, the peaks of Kilimanjaro or the Atlas Mountains in North Africa. The point is the average African child knows not what snow or wool is.

Mary had a little lamb, it’s fleece is white as snow…..a nursery rhyme every English speaking African child memorized was nothing but a bunch of meaningless words shoved down the throats of confused kids with teachers who had no clue what they were teaching either.

In almost all nursery rhymes sung by kids, the meaning is lost to them, if in fact they assume the words to mean anything. Take the popular Baa, baa black sheep for example, how confusing will that be to an African child to ask a sheep if he as any wool? Not because we literally can’t talk to sheep, but because what wool is, is lost to him. Sheep in tropical regions don’t need to grow wool, a fact learned many years later. And to top off the confusion, one bag of wool is for a dame!

Who is a dame? What does it mean? The answers to that too come years after leaving school, if one is curious enough.

The realities in Africa are not reflected in the curriculum and children just plod along school corridors repeating words they have no clue as to what they could mean. The formative years, it will be safe to say, are lost to mumbo jumbo. A lot of the good grades scored in exams is attributed to memorization, what we call “cramming”. Literally copy the words in your mind and paste them to the relevant section on the exam paper.

If education has to be meaningful and topics of discussion well understood, then a lot needs to change at the very least. One would be tempted to call for a complete overhaul of the education system, but such ideas are fought repressively from conception.

This notion of redesigning the school curriculum across Africa to be more meaningful to Africans will be dismissed as impractical at this point from many Africans, especially the so-called intellectual class.

How about simpler issues like the national anthems of the various African nations? If these songs are to inspire patriotism and national pride in citizens, why then are they still in languages that a greater majority of citizens do not understand, the languages of the oppressors? In fact they do not know what a national anthem means. At the bare minimum, all that is required is a translation into some common dialect, but here too calls of tribal bias and ethnic favoritism are evoked to deter any such move. At some point, we just have to stop worrying about such issues and do right by our people collectively.

With the exception of a handful of southern African and East African nations and the North Africans, all national anthems, especially in West Africa are in French, English, or Portuguese. Even school children hardly pronounce the words rights talk less of understanding them, imagine then what the highly “illiterate” masses think of it.

A Ghanaian state minister once suggested exactly that; that the national anthem be changed from the English to native dialects to enhance the sense of nationalism. His suggestion was dismissed as having ethnic undertones. This is the sad reality of our situation.

African societies were traditionally set along ethnic and tribal lines, a fact that was disregarded by the Europeans. We were bundled into nation states with no regard to traditional values. Granted, it may be too late or even unwise to re-draw these national boundaries, but being stuck in this scenario or rejecting any of our local dialects in favor of foreign ones to avoid any kind of ethnic or tribal disenfranchisement is absurd. We are actively helping the killing of our own culture and values with such claims.

Children’s curiosity and thought process will be greatly enhanced if they are taught in languages they understand and use every day, even better if the learning environment is familiar with relatable characters and familiar sounding everyday things. That much we owe to the future generation. Strides are being made in this regard but there is still a great deal left to do.

As to what language to choose, that could be determined by a lot of factors such as lingua franca, or whatever language or tribe the majority belong to, or a combination of many languages. It won’t be easy to develop, but any great accomplishment is always worth the challenges they come with.

Compare the anthems of Africa’s two giants; South Africa and Nigeria and see which has a greater impact on you, even though you may not understand the South African languages used. The African sounding lyrics in them impact the heart more; and awaken that sense of pride more than Nigeria’s. 

We need to start somewhere and the sooner the better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBKjWRjwMkY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avPeagYhbgo

An African Union

A child in need, hurt and aching; calls out to her mother, longing for her touch, her comfort and her assurance. It is said that even dying men call out for their mothers. Africa, home of the black man, is that mother to people of African descent. They have suffered all forms of injustice, indignity, and suffering. Even in lands that have been set up as their home away from Africa, they find no peace. Black people are looked at with contempt, disrespect, and belittled in every way imaginable.

In April and May 1964, Malcolm X sought the help of independent African nations to help the course of the black civil rights movement. This visit led to his formation of the Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU) with such goals like restoring the connections with Africa, educating diaspora Africans about Africa as well as setting up economic ties with Africa, all in the hope of reorienting blacks to a positive image of Africa. Africa, through the newly formed Organization of African Unity (OAU) wasn't very effective in furthering the course of the civil rights movement, neither was it in a position to put any pressure on the US to recognize black as citizens of the US with rights like any other citizen of the US. Besides, apartheid was at its worse right under its nose too but collectively, the continent couldn't save her own citizens on the continent. One may say this is due to the infancy independence and the lack of structures to effectively lobby for any course.

Fast forward to 2015, Guyana's new government is asking for support from the African Union amongst other international players to help diplomatically resolve the border dispute with its larger neighbor Venezuela. This help too will not be forthcoming unfortunately due to the ineffectiveness of this continental body. A sad situation however one looks at it.

Black people as a race, have collectively been fighting for their dignity longer than any group of people, they have suffered the most, collectively as a people. They are the most oppressed. No reprieve, no hope for better days, they feel so down and beat almost to the point of defeat; then they look up to Africa for help, and what do they see? Their hopes are dashed, dreams crushed, salvation unlikely, because the mother herself is in bondage, suffering, crying and bleeding more than they are, yet we can’t seem to do much to help. Even the oppressors cite conditions in Africa to justify their oppression of blacks, because our leaders are worse. Then, unwillingly, we accept our status and the labels put on us. We’ve lost the physical fight, we’ve lost the mental fight, and the spiritual strength is waning fast. 

But if history taught us one thing, it is that you cannot break the spirit and will of the true black man to true self-determination and dignity. And fortunately, there is still a lot of those true spirits left and they are not resting, they are fighting on.

The Israeli prime minister recently called for Jews 'persecuted' in Europe to come back to Israel and will be received with open arms, even though it may be back to some stolen land, they have a place to go with hopes of a better life. What African leader could say the same to oppressed blacks elsewhere who choose to look up to Africa for salvation? They cannot even stand up to face leaders of countries openly dehumanizing black people and tell it to their face because collectively their words amount to nothing even at the assembly of nations. 

Listen to the voices of some of your oppressed brothers and sisters and for once see things from their position. When the Emperor Haile Selassie gave Sashamane Land to the blacks from Jamaica who wanted to resettle in Africa, he did it with a higher goal in mind, the unification of blacks across the world.

Black unity should be understood in the context of brotherhood amongst people with so much in common and not as a plot to dominance over any group. It is a fight for dignity and independence in the true sense of the word and not a power struggle. Africa can be independent of the rest of the world in every sense of the word, so Africans need not dominate or colonize others for any reason.

Nkrumah said it decades ago that if we do not unite, we will perish, the situation in Africa today is proof of that.

But just like we emerged from colonialism, so too will we emerge from neo-colonialism. The dawn of Africa’s true independence and subsequent unification is upon us and we should embrace it.

“Unite for the benefit of your people for its later than you think...Cause Jah children wanna come home” (Bob Marley)