A New Frame: The Bright Continent

In an interview on TED Radio Hour for NPR, Ugandan journalist Andrew Mwenda shares his intelligent criticisms of foreign aid outlook towards Africa and how it perpetuates the notion of Africa as a hopeless continent.

Central to Mwenda’s argument is the way Africa is viewed, specifically by the G8, the eight powerhouse countries that provide the majority of aid to Africa. The common view is one of pity. Africa is too quickly deemed as unstable and needy, rarely a marketable prospect for foreign investment. Yet according to Mwenda, foreign investment that seeks out economic opportunities rather than being derailed by humanitarian issues is the key to building up the continent. Too often outside attention is troubled by Africa’s big problems like Malaria and HIV/AIDS, overlooking chances to invest in resource rich economies. While these are admittedly pressing issues, Mwenda’s underlying counter argument is that these big problems can solve themselves when the economic strength of African states and their people are improved. Simply put, African countries must be framed in a different context: “From a challenge of despair to a challenge of hope.”

Africa can be seen as a place full of diverse potential: resources, young minds, stock, etc. Problems need to become opportunities i.e. taking a lack of electricity as an opportunity for sustainable energy (wind, biofuel) to be invested in urban areas and other locations that have the demand for that market.

Mwenda desires the creation of wealth in Africa, but wealth as a function of income, and not an offshoot of aid. For instance, providing schools and education for African youth won’t help them if there are no jobs available when they come of age but giving scholarships for African students to study abroad can lead them towards international careers that help put Africa on the map of the global economy. Yet despite the inevitability of international interaction, Mwenda wants most for African countries to focus on their local playing fields. Governments that have lost interest in the productivity of their citizens do not benefit from foreign aid that continues to draw their attention outwards. “Governments’ fiscal survival must depend on the productivity of their citizens.” Allowing that foreign investment improves local economic prospects, government will be persuaded to care about the productivity of their people.

Aid also lacks accountability and easily ends up in the pockets of corrupt bureaucrats. Yet this builds up to another conundrum of exaggerated views of corruption in Africa, which becomes a deterrent to investment. Mwenda argues that corruption is decreasing due to easier access to foreign exchange that was previously only accessible through bribes. To avoid corruption, new forms of aid should avoid connections between local and international politicians.

The discussion concludes with media representations of Africa. Not only have negative portrayals of Africa affected an attitude of pity among Westerners and other donors, they are also perceived by Africans themselves, creating a warped reality of their own lives. This negative media simultaneously disables parties inside and outside the region. This compliments Michael’s urging of these blog posts to also consider positive cases in Africa among so many negative cases. It is imperative of us as higher educated people to speculate on both ends of the spectrum and perhaps empower ourselves with the optimism that Mwenda deems necessary to improving conditions on his continent. I chose this article because it takes into account the intelligent perspective of an actual African, rather than so many distant Western sources, but also because it shares a radical way of viewing the “Dark Continent” as not necessarily so dark.

Here is the whole interview with Andrew Mwenda: