“A new colonialism: Europe must go back into Africa”

There have been suggestions that Europe must go back into Africa to put the continent back on track. Despite independence Europe never left Africa. It’s like governors went on indefinite vacation leaving behind Africans acting as Officers-in-Charge (oic). Through these oics, Europe has continued to exert tremendous influence (perhaps more than if Europeans were in direct control) in many ways that have contributed to the many political economy challenges Africa faces.

For some African countries, their relationship with Europe after so-called independence can be compared to relations between a department chief who before going on mission or vacation instructs his/her designated officer-in- charge (oic) to implement the chief’s decisions, and have the chief clear all outgoing correspondence before they go out under the signature of the oic. There are many instances when correspondence is drafted by the chief and signed by the oic. Many are deceived that the oic is in full control of the department and acts independently in the absence of the chief. Similarly in some African countries policies come from Europe or the international institutions they control although they bear the signature of the African head of state or head of department concerned. This has been particularly the case since the 1980s when stabilization and structural adjustment programs (SAPs) or the Washington Consensus were launched.

Ethnic relations in the Great Lakes region are antagonistic

Let me begin with two statements.

First, when my article on “How Rujumbura’s Bairu got impoverished” appeared in (Uganda) Observer, some Uganda readers were convinced that I was sectarian and hated Bahororo (another name for Batutsi who sought refuge in Rujumbura when the short-lived Mpororo kingdom disintegrated and Rwanda and Nkore troops moved in). Since 1986, Uganda government has been led by Bahororo many of them from Rujumbura or with roots in Rujumbura. With Uganda currently experiencing un-preceded poverty, hunger, unemployment, marginalization and functional illiteracy, many Ugandans have revisited the above article and drawn parallels with how the whole country of Uganda has been impoverished.

Second until the 1960s, the history of the Great Lakes Region was dominated by followers of J. H. Speke, C. G. Seligman – British explorer and academic, respectively – and African scholars mostly from aristocratic families who shared the two British biased opinions led by Alexis Kagame, a Catholic priest and historian associated with Rwanda royal court. The writings of these people were extremely biased in favor of Batutsi (Bahima, Bahororo and Banyamulenge are clans of Batutsi) who were described as white or black Caucasian, intelligent, well built, civilized, wealthy through invasion and plunder of Negroes and born to rule. On the other hand they portrayed Bantu-speaking people (dubbed Bairu and Bahutu {slaves or servants} by Bahima) as reported by J. H. Speke (1863, 2006) as black Negroes, without a civilization, poorly built or ugly and short, unintelligent and born to serve the rulers. They used these racist and psychological instruments to rob Bantu-speaking people of their true identity, civilizations and wealth and reduced them to servants or serfs as in Rwanda.