Article 4
|
The
Futility of Name Change
May
25, 2001
Posted to the web May 25, 2001
Levi
Obijiofor
You have heard of cosmetic changes, facial make-ups, window-dressing,
plastic surgery, antiseptic dressing and property renovations.
They all have one thing in common: the impermanence of human
nature. They are all about human approaches to change nature.
That's exactly what African leaders decided to do when they
resolved last week to gradually move toward a name change, effective
tomorrow. The Organisation of African Unity, founded in 1963,
has decided that after nearly four decades of failures and disappointments,
a name change might pave a new path for the dawn of a new economic
and political era for the embattled continent. So, from tomorrow,
it's no longer going to be known as the OAU. It's now to be
known as African Union. It's going to be a tough call, one which
the present leaders in Africa are unsure of its likely outcomes.
If
there is any lesson that African countries have refused to learn,
it is the lesson that name changes do not result in miraculous
social and political transformations. Nigeria moved its federal
capital to Abuja in order to escape the problems that crippled
administrative and economic life in Lagos. But see how those
problems have also relocated their headquarters to Abuja, along
with the ministries and parastatals, to effectively stifle the
dreams the original designers held for Abuja. If you think that's
not enough evidence to suggest that artificial make-ups do not
work, take a look at the universities in Nigeria that have undergone
some cosmetic re-designs. Those antiseptic changes have not
entrenched peace in Nigeria's tertiary institutions nor have
they raised the quality of higher education in the country.
Beyond Nigeria, the former Upper Volta changed its name to Burkina
Faso as if that would guarantee an end to political instability
and abject poverty. Rather than the positive outcome the leaders
anticipated, the name change in fact produced more vicious political
and military leaders. The former French colony of Ivory Coast
switched its name to Cote d'Ivoire, perhaps to reflect its French
colonial heritage and historical ties. Years after that cosmetic
name change, the country was launched into a period of political
instability never before experienced by that citizens, something
that was an anathema throughout the decades that former strongman
Felix Houphouet-Boigny held the country together.
The
problems that have confronted the Organisation of African Unity
(OAU) over the last four decades cannot be resolved through
a name change. Those who pushed for this name change and succeeded
would need to do more than change the name of this continental
sleeping giant. They will need to impose some kind of amnesia
on us all so we can forget the many blunders, the powerlessness
of the OAU, the organisational inefficiency, the factional feuds
within the OAU and the inability of the leaders to achieve any
form of unity or union within the continent. Today the African
continent is more divided than it has ever been. The Arab north
prefers to distance itself from any reference to Africa. In
the United Nations' agencies and other international inter-governmental
forums, they prefer to be identified as the Arab group. Africa,
to them, is a political, social and economic liability. In their
view, identifying with the rest of Africa, or "Black"
Africa, as some of their leaders call it, is like siding with
a losing side. They are right. Africa is be-devilled by so many
problems. There are pockets of wars in the North and Northwest,
insurgency in the East and Central parts of the continent, as
well as guerilla warfare and cross-border disputes in the West.
Some of these wars, such as the western Sahara dispute between
Morocco and the Saharawi people, the Hutu-Tutsi ethnic battle
in Rwanda and Burundi, the crisis in the Democratic Republic
of Congo, the Angolan insurgency and the Ethiopia-Eritrea seasonal
clashes date back to the 1960s, the early years of political
independence in the continent. The OAU failed to install a culture
of peace in Africa and increasingly in modern times, the international
community has taken over the search for peace in the continent.
The United Nations has become the vanguard of peace in Africa.
Ironically, the OAU has taken a back seat, playing instead the
role of a continental weakling.
One
of the biggest problems that have bedevilled Africa is the absence
of leaders with foresight and commitment to continental progress.
Africa lacks benevolent despots such as Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore
and Mahathir Mohammed of Malaysia. These men have their dictatorial
tendencies but they also achieved tremendous successes in their
countries. Despite international criticisms, Mahathir Mohammed
remains focused in his determination to extricate Malaysia from
the legendary Asian economic crisis of 1997. So far, he has
achieved socioeconomic and political transformation for his
people. But we cannot close our eyes to the high-handedness
with which he has stifled political opposition, including the
incarceration of his former deputy Anwar Ibrahim, now languishing
in jail. Singapore and Malaysia present good case studies in
the ability of developing countries to overcome social and political
problems.
In
much of Africa, we have had the misfortune of producing corrupt
and greedy dictators whose sole concern in office remains how
to transform the state treasury into their personal property.
Without selfless and informed leadership Africa has drifted
from one end to another like a rudder-less ship. The inability
of the OAU to usher in peace, to amicably resolve continental
disputes has often been blamed on the charter of the organisation,
which upholds the principle of non-interference in the internal
affairs of member-countries. That may be true but it is also
the case that the biggest obstacle to the inability of the OAU
to call erring members to order is largely due to regional and
often ethnic affiliations and alliances.
As
President Jacques Chirac of France said during his visit to
Africa in 1996, the future of Africa lies ultimately in Africa's
ability to utilise its wisdom, experiences, history and traditional
values to transform its peoples and societies. Our historical
experiences may seem uninspiring and terrible, but there is
still hope in the horizon. After all, according to a Somali
proverb: "What you lose in the fire you must seek in the
ashes." This is the lesson Africa must take from its historical
experiences. Name changes won't do the trick.
Comment
by Mukazo Mukazo Vunda
Levi
Obijiofor hits
the nail on the head. For more over what I think about name
changes on our continent, click here!