Evaluation of democracy and governance in countries can vary depending on different criteria and perspectives. Diane Francis comments and comparisons between former French and English colonies are strongly biased against France (not for the first time). Actually, if in January 2013, when Al Qaeda affiliates allied with Tuareg insurgents attacked Bamako, the capital of Mali (a former French colony) French forces prevented Mali from becoming a jihadist caliphate in the heart of the Sahel and the Malian population, in Bamako, expressed their gratitude to France with fervor and joy. “Thank God France, it is France which saved the whole world and not just Mali”... It is true that some of the former British colonies are a model of democracy and, just to be fair, let’s give a few examples: Zimbabwe: has experienced a brutal repression under the rule of Mugabe, which lasted for several decades. During this time, there were human rights violations, poor economic management, and excessive concentration of power. Even now, the country continues to face challenges in democracy and governance. Uganda: not especially a paradise under the brutal rule under Idi Amin, and, since, the country has been criticized for controversial elections and restrictions on political rights and civil liberties under President Museveni in power since 1986 ! Nigeria: has been faced with a lot of “democratic” challenges, such as widespread corruption, political instability, and ethnic conflicts.Home of Boko Haram, the world's deadliest terror group, the country stability and governance has been seriously impacted. Sudan: Although not a former British colony, South Sudan, independent in 2011, was a region under British and Egyptian administration and has faced internal conflicts, human rights violations, and frequent regime changes, which have had implications for political stability and democracy. South Africa: until Mandela comes to power, the apartheid regime cannot be considered as an example of democracy ...
What a mess - I feel so sorry for Africa in general. For decades the invasion of 'white' influence & deception has muted any internal strength from development of freedom & progress.
The French and English have provided a natural experiment demonstrating that policies and treatments make a difference. While there are certainly other factors (e.g., family and tribal incluences) involved, it is clear that the manner in which a nation treats people makes a difference.
My sense is that though Britain may have left democratically structured institutions in its former colonies, these became only nominal in some of these countries as “strongmen” took over. Tribal rivalries would be deliberately exacerbated in a divide-and-rule strategy for such “strongmen” to come to power. I am thinking of the case of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia). He belonged to the dominant tribe and also had a Western education in Marxism.
Which formerly British colonies did better in sustaining a democratic system, I wonder? Of course the USA is one such, though not in the same continent, and it is certainly wobbling now.
I agree with L.G. Anderson's comment, "what a mess?". Again, power corrupts and the desire of corrupt regimes (thugs) love to take advantage of the mis-managed / vulnerable countries. Despite the good intention of well meaning democracies, they cannot support all these developing / desparate countries, not only in Africa but around the World.
Evaluation of democracy and governance in countries can vary depending on different criteria and perspectives. Diane Francis comments and comparisons between former French and English colonies are strongly biased against France (not for the first time). Actually, if in January 2013, when Al Qaeda affiliates allied with Tuareg insurgents attacked Bamako, the capital of Mali (a former French colony) French forces prevented Mali from becoming a jihadist caliphate in the heart of the Sahel and the Malian population, in Bamako, expressed their gratitude to France with fervor and joy. “Thank God France, it is France which saved the whole world and not just Mali”... It is true that some of the former British colonies are a model of democracy and, just to be fair, let’s give a few examples: Zimbabwe: has experienced a brutal repression under the rule of Mugabe, which lasted for several decades. During this time, there were human rights violations, poor economic management, and excessive concentration of power. Even now, the country continues to face challenges in democracy and governance. Uganda: not especially a paradise under the brutal rule under Idi Amin, and, since, the country has been criticized for controversial elections and restrictions on political rights and civil liberties under President Museveni in power since 1986 ! Nigeria: has been faced with a lot of “democratic” challenges, such as widespread corruption, political instability, and ethnic conflicts.Home of Boko Haram, the world's deadliest terror group, the country stability and governance has been seriously impacted. Sudan: Although not a former British colony, South Sudan, independent in 2011, was a region under British and Egyptian administration and has faced internal conflicts, human rights violations, and frequent regime changes, which have had implications for political stability and democracy. South Africa: until Mandela comes to power, the apartheid regime cannot be considered as an example of democracy ...
What a mess - I feel so sorry for Africa in general. For decades the invasion of 'white' influence & deception has muted any internal strength from development of freedom & progress.
The French and English have provided a natural experiment demonstrating that policies and treatments make a difference. While there are certainly other factors (e.g., family and tribal incluences) involved, it is clear that the manner in which a nation treats people makes a difference.
My sense is that though Britain may have left democratically structured institutions in its former colonies, these became only nominal in some of these countries as “strongmen” took over. Tribal rivalries would be deliberately exacerbated in a divide-and-rule strategy for such “strongmen” to come to power. I am thinking of the case of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia). He belonged to the dominant tribe and also had a Western education in Marxism.
Which formerly British colonies did better in sustaining a democratic system, I wonder? Of course the USA is one such, though not in the same continent, and it is certainly wobbling now.
I agree with L.G. Anderson's comment, "what a mess?". Again, power corrupts and the desire of corrupt regimes (thugs) love to take advantage of the mis-managed / vulnerable countries. Despite the good intention of well meaning democracies, they cannot support all these developing / desparate countries, not only in Africa but around the World.
Thanks
I had been asking Charles but am interested in your answer too, Diane. Both of you seem very knowledgable and insightful to me when few are both.