Is Africa Ready for Female Leadership?

CAPE TOWN/SOUTH AFRICA, 4JUN08 - FLTR: Pierre Nkurunziza, President of Burundi, Bingu Wa Mutharika, President of Malawi, Thabo Mbeki, President of South Africa, Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum, John Agyekum Kufuor, President of Ghana, and Raila Amolo Odinga, Prime Minister of Kenya, captured during  the World Economic Forum on Africa 2008 . Image: Eric Miller (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As Joyce Banda, Malawi’s First Female President and Head of State, was sworn in this month, many Malawians were ecstatic. During the spectacle that occurred after late President Bingu wa Mutharika’s cardiac arrest which resulted in his death, foreign journalists debated whether Malawi was “ready” for a female president. Some Malawians asked the same question, speculating that a constitutional coup would occur that would prevent her from assuming this role. Forgotten was the role that women such as former Official Hostess (First Lady), Cecilia Kadzamira played in the nation. She was the most powerful woman in Malawi for three decades. Towards the end of Kamuzu Banda’s presidency, she essentially run the country and was the de facto president. Therefore in recent history, Malawi has had a precedence of a strong female leader. However, what was also forgotten was a long tradition of female leadership in Malawi and Africa as a whole that came before her. As Africans, I think that it’s important for us to have a common, accurate and collective memory with regards to historical events on the continent, including societal issues. As Malawi ushered in the First Female Head of State in SADC, the media and public were mis-educating each other about the real progress of female leadership in Africa in various ways.

Joueur d'Uruncungo (Player of Uruncungo) Women played an active role in business and trade in the markets (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I will start with the terminology. In order to have a head of state, there needs to be a state. Prior to the Berlin Conference of 1884, where African states originated, there were no states in Africa.  However, there were other forms of political units that had leadership like Kingdoms, Empires, Chieftaincies, clans, or ‘tribes’. Many of these political arrangements in Africa were matrilineal (traced ancestral descent through the maternal line), matrilocal (husband goes to live with the wife’s community), or matriarchal societies (A woman who rules a family, clan, or tribe). These arrangements lead to a long list in history of African leaders like Cleopatra of Egypt, Queen Nzinga M’Bandi of Angola, Princess Grace Matamba of Congo, Queen Nana Yita of Nsuta (Ghana), Queen Nana Aberewa Ampen of Juaben (Ghana), Sultan Fatimah of North Zanzibar (Tanzania), Ret Abudok nya Bwoc of Shilluk (Sudan). Over the years this history of female leadership in Africa, has continued in many rural areas. Therefore, if we are to only look at our history, we may conclude that Africa has always been ready.

In fact, prior to colonialism Africa’s real traditional culture, was more gender progressive then the hybrid system that was introduced during the colonial era. Traditional African culture has always been more gender neutral then the cultures of the global north where patriarchy and capitalism have created inequalities that have challenged for female leadership. Gender roles in African culture have traditionally more fluid. Africans women were serving as spiritual leaders (contemporary day pastors, priests), healers or sangomas, (midwives, nurses, doctors), herbalists (pharmacists), traders (business women) and other prominent positions. Women were also able to own property and had political participation.  During this same era, western women were not able to play these roles in their own societies. Therefore when colonialism was introduced state sponsored patriarchy, African women legally lost their social and political positions. African countries became states during the colonial era where Africans were not in charge of their own states. This made the ascension of African women difficult because both African men and women could not be heads of state. They could not practice their traditional leadership roles that included women under this new system. This means that women’s leadership in Africa has been more about reclaiming rights we lost under colonialism rather than achieving them for the first time. In contemporary times, challenged with regaining female leadership on the continent under new political formations, the modern state, African countries have made considerable gains. I compiled a descriptive list of contemporary women Heads of State in Africa that have been head of state that we can draw on to begin to pull our collective memories together:

1. Ruth Sando Fahnbulleh Perry (Liberia) – Appointed, First Female Head of State in Africa, First Female Head of State in West Africa.
2. Ellen Sirleaf-Johnson (Liberia) – Elected, Second Female Head of State in Africa, First Elected Female Head of State in Africa, Second Female Head of State in West Africa.
3. Joyce Hilda Mtila Banda (Malawi) – Appointed, Third Female Head of State In Africa, Second Appointed Female Head of State in Africa, First Female Head of State in Malawi, First Female Head of State in Southern Africa.

Rice (left) and Laura Bush (second from the right) meet Liberian President-Elect Ellen Johnson Sirleaf (center), the world's first black female president, before Sirleaf's inauguration in Monrovia on January 16, 2006 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In addition, there have been African women that have acted as head of state like President Rose Francine Rogombé of Gabon who served as interim head of state and Sylvie Kinigi of Burundi, and Carmen Pereira, of Guinea Bissau. Perhaps, the difficulty in including them on the list is can be explained by terminology. The titles ‘Interim’, ‘Acting’, and ‘Appointed’ Heads of State may suggests a short term, temporary arrangement. It can also imply that the person is not the ‘real’ head of state. What is also problematic is confusion that arises over who is the head of state in political units. African countries have mixture of heads of state that have the title of President or Prime Minister – some countries others have both positions. However there is evidence that there is room to extend this list in the African context. Therefore, as journalists frantically try to meet deadlines in the corporate media houses, there is little time for them to take an accurate survey or analysis of female leadership. In addition, many journalists in the global North already have a limited knowledge of Africa. They seldom take the time to do their own research on the history of the continent outside of highlighting data centered on societal factors like the level of poverty, disease and women’s oppression. Therefore, this often leads to the misrepresentations and distortion about the dynamics of topics like gender and leadership on the continent. Many have never heard of Ruth Perry, the first African Head of State in Africa (1996-1997) who was succeeded by Charles Taylor in Liberia. She is sometimes not regarded as Head of State, however, many do differentiate Sirleaf-Johnson by noting that Sirleaf-Johnson is the first elected head of state. However we must decide how we want Perry to be remembered because she is in danger of being forgotten in our collective memories in spite of this achievement. In addition, because of the global practice of sourcing news from a few media outlets like Reuters or the Associated Press, at times, African journalists often source their material from these media outlets and end up unintentionally doing the same. This is why Africans need to have a collective memory about their history in terms of female leadership.

Queen Nzinga in peace negotiations with the Portuguese governor in Luanda, 1657. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It is important to note that there have been a countless number of women that have been serving as Prime Ministers, Presidents (that may not necessarily be head of state) or vice-president in Africa in recent history. However, there needs to be recognition that these women, including Sirleaf, Perry and Banda, are following in the footsteps and tradition of Africa’s long record of female leadership. In order to answer burning questions about our countries’ “readiness” for female leadership, we need to understand our own histories outside of the ‘popular imagination’ of what Africa is. This question is based on assumptions on the level of gender equality in Africa. The assumption is that African men and African societies are sexist due to gender inequalities inherent or rooted in African traditional societies. This is simply untrue. African women in traditional societies have been leaders, healers, priestesses, and property owners. These rights that were increasingly denied to them under colonial patriarchy, and this then carried on beyond colonialism. African Women largely lost their rights and never regained them. There are several accounts of women’s participating in the political process by signing treaties as well as accounts of colonialist refusing to negotiate treaties with African women. These attitudes reflected gender relationship inequalities in western societies. These attitudes also continue to affect western women in countries that are highly capitalist and therefore, highly patriarchal. Therefore, our challenge today is to reclaim and regain traditional role as leaders for African women. Our challenge is also to see African tradition as progressive in terms of gender equality. However, we must have a collective memory with regards to our histories and herstories. This means learning about African history and recognizing the achievements of all our women.

*A version of this article appeared on the blog Africa on the Blog.

‘Arab Spring, African Fall’: A Reawakening

Image via Wikipedia

Uganda's infamous dictator, Idi Amin

For some reason I thought it would be much easier to find a compiled list of African dictators online. Africa has been branded as the ‘continent of dictators’ along with Asia and Latin America since the waves of independence from foreign control. Even though the world’s dictators are spread across four continents (Europe’s dictators rarely ever get a nod), Africa is more often associated with dictatorial rule than its counter parts. Indeed, the continent has been home to its fair share of notorious dictators like Idi Amin, Kamuzu Banda, Al Bashir, Mengistu Mariam and Robert Mugabe. But African leadership is transforming. By looking online and trying to piece together a complete list of dictators, it looks like there are 17 dictators left out of the 48 countries on the continent:

• North Africa – Algeria, Chad, (North) Sudan, Morocco
• East Africa – Somalia, Rwanda, Ethiopia, Eritrea
• West Africa – Guniea, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia
• Southern Africa – Angola, Zimbabwe, Swaziland
• Central Africa- Congo, Central African Republic

It should be noted that the classification of who is considered a dictator varies by definition and list (one analyst, went as far as listing the number of African autocratic states as 39). Even though Africa is commonly seen as the continent that wrote the ‘dictator’s handbook’, the majority of autocratic leaders today, are largely in Asia. Across different lists of autocratic governance and across different indices that measure levels of freedom enjoyed by citizenry, Asia seems to currently bear the brunt of tyrannical rule. This is even more so since Africa lost four dictators this year. It’s not often that Africa is given credit for teaching and/or upholding the ideals of democracy. Dictatorships in Asia, which have already been inspired by events in North Africa as seen in the ‘Arab Spring’, can (and should) continue to draw parallels and learn from the long history of anti-dictatorial revolts in Africa by its citizenry.

Image by cactusbones via Flickr

Arab Spring in Egypt was a paramount event.

African dictators have been falling this year. This year, Africans have witnessed the fall of Moburak, Laurent Gbaghbo, Ben Ali and now, Ghadaffi. Although some African leaders tried to hold out a candle for Ghadaffi, even the African Union has now conceded that the he is no longer the leader of Libya. By examining the list, it appears within the continent, North, East, and West Africa have a lion’s share of countries led by dictators. It is clear that at the beginning of this year, the numbers of dictators within Africa, were disproportionally in North Africa. In fact, according to Judy Smith-Höhn, a senior southern Africa researcher at a Pretoria-based think-tank the ISS Sub Saharan (SSA) countries like Malawi and South Africa, experienced the events witnessed in North Africa this year, in the 1990s and yet people are constantly trying to use protests that occurred recently in countries like Malawi, as southern Africa’s `Arab Spring’ (Irin News). As an example, in southern Africa (consisting of nearly 14 countries), Zimbabwe, Angola, and Swaziland are the last remaining dictatorships. So it is also fair to say that North Africa too should have been able to draw parallels and learn lessons from the history of anti-dictatorial movements in southern Africa by its citizenry. When protest led to Kamuzu Banda and De Klerk’s National Party left power, we should have also looked to North Africa asking, “is North Africa next?”

The events in the Middle East that began in North Africa have to an extent been unfairly called the “Arab Spring”, “Arab Awakening” or “Arab Uprising” which by description alienates African countries. Many of the participants are both Arab and Africans or are Africans who are simply not Arab. This terminology marginalizes the millions of people and perpetrates the stereotype that all North Africans are Arabs or the even more problematic one – the claims that Arabs are not Africans even though they are physically on the continent. It also means that when the ‘Arab Spring’ started, a large part of the world initially looked towards the East (Syria, Bahrain etc...) and not at what was occurring in neighboring countries in the South. African presidents though saw the connection. They knew that their disgruntled citizens could once again take to the streets. African presidents’ continent wide, reflected on their own governance, began to panic and preemptively protect the status quo – even the ones that were not dictators! In democratic Malawi, a university professor was even investigated and fired for comparing the conditions in North Africa to conditions in Malawi. African presidents knew that their sleepy (but not asleep) citizens would rise.

In SSA this year, we have seen an African reawakening happening in Angola, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Djibouti, Ivory Coast, Gabon, Malawi, Mozambique, Senegal, Swaziland and Uganda to name a few. It could have easily been termed the “African Fall”. In fact, the successful revolutions this year, so far have only been on the African continent. However, the power of media attention to sustain a revolt is important to a movement, and without much international support, SSA revolts didn’t turn in to televised revolutions. Instead, the western international media gaze was focused on what their governments have been holding their breaths a long time for - regime changes in much of the Middle East. Although this inspiration to overthrow current leadership has largely been viewed as an impact of the Arab Spring it’s also important to note that many countries in SSA had been ridding themselves of their dictators or other unpopular leaders for a long time. Fighting for democracy on the continent is not something new – it has been only 50 years since the struggles against the colonial rule (essentially, foreign dictatorships) and many of those freedom fighters still remember those battles. The recent struggle for independence seeping across the continent is about gaining independence from our own home bred leadership. We are witnessing, what I hope is the reawakening of Africans and the start of an ‘African Fall’.

--A version of this article was published on African on the Blog

Faces of Black Africa: The Enemy of the Libyan Revolts

In the absence of live television feed of the events in Libya, television shows on CNN (Anderson Cooper 360) took to getting information over the phone by anonymous Libyans. The message that was being repeated by their informant(s) was that Libyans were being targeted by “Black People” or African Mercenaries.  This means that the automatic face of the ‘enemy’ became the dark-skinned non-Arab people from Africa. Indeed there were reports of people from Sub-Saharan Africa that were raiding houses but there were also reports of Africans from Morocco, Chad and Tunisia (who may look more like Libyan) hired as mercenaries as well. It seems though that reporting of the 'sub-Saharan' enemy was most salient to report (and loop) before a proper, and thoughtful analysis could be made on the profile of the enemy. Whilst I appreciate the media outlets attempt at reporting the movement ‘as it happened’ (unlike the case with Egypt where Al Jazeera was the only station in that country from the beginning), this move proved to be problematic because it served to indiscriminately single out all the dark-skinned people  ‘the enemy’. This contributed the targeting this demographic. Libya is comprised of both dark-skinned and light skinned Libyans (See:Black Africans in Libya). It is also host to a number of Libya also hosts dark skinned and light skinned Africans from various countries in Africa. Thus social constructs of color and ethnicity can be problematic because there are no clear lines between color and ethnicity; many dark-skinned Africans can be Arabs and many light skinned Africans can be non-Arab.
 

Many dark-skinned Africans have been living in Libya for a long time. This consists of sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) embassy workers,  students, workers from private companies and the majority that are migrant workers. The foreign migrant workers were already facing resentment in Libya due to labor competition with Libyan citizens. So when 'Black Africans' were openly and repeatedly being singled out as the enemy on major international networks, this exploited color- based divisions within Libya. Although it was not the networks reporters that were reporting this information themselves, it needs to be noted that when news media allow an avenue for people to name an ‘enemy’ (particularly ethnic minorities) they fuel an already volatile situation. There is a clear difference between informants saying on air that “people from Niger  or Chad are shooting us” and looping statements based on color like, "the Blacks are killing us"  which creates sensationalism. The former is more likely, result in Libyans making a greater effort in trying to identify who is a member of that particular group through more probing questions, the latter is more likely to result in being targeted based appearance. This can be compared to the attacks on minorities in America after September 11^th where naming Arabs as ‘the enemy’ resulted in regular Americans targeting all “Brown peoples” (American and non-American alike) based on visual appearances. Americans did not distinguish between Indians, Saudis, Koreans, or other groups. They targeted all people that looked like what they thought members of the ‘the axis of evil’ looked like. This is what began to happen in Libya, we soon saw hundreds of dark-skinned Africans begin to get killed by mobs of angry Libyans that were upset that African mercenaries were hired to kill them. Most mobs under such conditions will kill first and ask, “Are you a mercenary or migrant?”, later.

In one some cases, dark-skinned  and/or African Libyan citizens were killed because people started viewing them as ‘the enemy’. It even led Gaddafi (albeit not in a position to make moral judgments) to state that Libyans are both Black Africans and Arab Africans in his speech.  In one particular case, footage of alleged mercenaries were captured and uploaded on you tube. This video depicts the bodies of ‘alleged African mercenaries’ displayed in public in front of the mob quite reminiscent of the lynching of African-Americans in the South. What is particularly problematic in this case was that bodies were that of Black Libyans mistaken for Black African non-Libyans. Furthermore, the video has been placed on many websites that link to  the You Tube footage. In an increasingly globalized world that uses social media, footage in one country is easily accessible in another country. This raises greater need for sensitivity on how the deceased bodies of African people have been historically displayed in the media, (and now using social media and user generated content). On one newspaper that reproduced this footage, somebody who actually recognized the one of the people killed and left this comment:

“Submitted by Fazzani (not verified) on Wed, 23/02/2011 - 10:28.

I am very sorry to see these clips. One of the guys in the seen is black Libyan "not from other African countries" His family lives in EL Mansoura village in Elwadi shatty district. About 200 KM from Borack Ashhati. ( Borack AL Shatty is about 700KM south of Tripoli). I have not got permission to put his name here. Hope his family will see this and they will clarify....” Source: France 24

This type of images, particularly for the friends and family of the deceased, are insensitive towards people who are victims of mob injustice.  When the victims face and identity are so clear, their lives are devalued as human beings. It also raises questions whether these images would still be on YouTube (I flagged it two days ago) or the web pages of news outlets like France 24 or even ‘gone viral’ if the victims were not from Africa or the ‘global south’. It propagates the stereotypes of violent and 'savage' Africans particularity since similar violent images from the global North are often filtered or taken off line.  I have yet to see a comparable video where the deceased is a member of a non-African country on You Tube.  In another report, 70 dark-skinned African migrant workers that had been working with an international company in Libya were massacred at the site of their employment because they were dark skinned whilst all other workers were spared. These were obviously not mercenaries since they were clearly working but Sub-Saharan Africans continue to be targeted in Libya in this way. What has noticeably absent from CNN which first  eagerly aired reports on ‘Black African ‘ mercenaries, were follow up stories about dark skinned Africans (both Libyan and other African immigrants) being targeted and killed by Arab or light skinned Libyans. Perhaps if they dedicated equal time to this type of story, it may have not made all Black Africans automatic victims.  Sub-Saharan Africans are now trying to leave Libya in droves in fear of their lives but many are unable to leave. They are the most vulnerable group in Libya at the moment and face genocide.

As noted in: Africans Revolt in the Middle East: How Egypt's Revolts Won't Impact Africa , the separation of Arab and Sub-Saharan Africa is problematic for Africa as a continent.  Class divisions have lead to Arab Africans suppressing Black Africans (including Black Libyans), due to the existence of class divisions based on color. The division between North African and Sub-Saharan Africa has manifested in the violence that we have seen in the past few days. It has lead to a situation where mercenaries from sub-Saharan Africa, have not been able to unite around Libya’s attempt to overthrow an oppressive regime. Instead we see easy recruitment of willing mercenaries from sub-Saharan countries that may not necessarily view Libyans as Africans with common oppressions. It should also be noted that some of the mercenaries have been unwilling participants having been forcibly recruited by the Libyan regime. The future relations of Africans from the North and South will face challenges due to this incident because it will widen the divide. There needs to be greater effort for North Africans and Sub-Saharan Africans to recognize their common continental history as Africans to mitigate xenophobia between the two entities.

Africans Revolt in the Middle East: How Egypt's Revolts Won't Impact Africa

The narrative of Egypt’s protest by the west has been void of Africa and void of an analysis on its implications for Africa. Egypt is often cited, together with South Africa and Nigeria as the strongholds in Africa. In fact, Egypt was instrumental in the creation of the African Union (AU) and its neighbor Tunisia, is home to African institutions like the African Development Bank. Yet, it appears that the narrative surrounding the peoples revolts in North Africa (Algeria, Tunisia, and Egypt) are being covered as if they bear no consequence or effects for African nations in the continent that they belong to. It is certainly appreciated that the revolts will have effects on Middle Eastern countries like Jordan and Yeman, but it should be appreciated that we cannot pretend that it does not affect Sub-Saharan Africa. We can certainly not expect current African leaders to make bold statements about the revolts in Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt because it has consequences for many their own leaderships. In fact, the African Union has stood in the background as they meet at the 2011 African Union meeting and continue to discuss the fate of another dictator, Gbagbo. Instead, we are confronted with a string of CNN experts on Middle East that have been summoned for a political analysis, but have yet to hear CNN (or any other major network in the US) inquire about the African Union’s position on the revolts or any opinion on what this means for the rest of sub-Saharan Africa. Furthermore, there has been no mention on how these revolts will affect its immediate neighbors, Sudan and Libya. Sub-Saharan African countries have many historical, political, cultural, and economic similarities with the North African countries (including a shared land mass), yet there is the continued popular western tendency is to separate North Africa from sub-Saharan Africa. This sentiment manifests in the types of narratives and coverage we are hearing from the western media and politicians about the revolts.

The perception that somehow Africa is a homogenous continent and that all Africans are Black, Christian, or non-Arabic, non-Muslim is an underlying assumption used in denying North Africa's connection to the rest of Africa. The other factor centers on an unwillingness to attribute ancient Egyptian civilizations advancements to the continent of Africa because of the euro-centric belief that there were no advancements in Africa by Africans prior to European contact (hence, North Africans are not African). The argument is that North Africans have ‘Middle Eastern” cultures, but at what point does “middle eastern culture” simply become “North African culture or African culture in the North Africa?”.  The current social construct of the Middle East has been inconsistent, irrational, and problematic for many. North Africans should be able to claim a double heritage of being African countries with Middle Eastern heritage. It is possible for a continent to have multiple cultural groups in it.  As an example, the East Asian country of China and the south Asian country of India are both in Asia but have different cultures but share some similarities as Asian countries. Similarly, the countries of Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria, Morroco, may have ‘Middle Eastern’ cultures, but also have strong African roots that are similar to countries like Sudan, Nigeria (which both have a large Muslim populations), Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Kenya. Egypt and Sudan's histories have intertwined for years. Instead of trying to separate the continent, we (particularly, the west) should allow space for duality for these countries. We should be looking at North African and Middle Eastern cultures as having the same cultures as opposed to trying to separate North Africa from sub-Saharan Africa. Whether one likes to admit it or not, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Mauritania, Western Sahara and Sudan are African countries and their histories are part of the history of Africa.

The practice of western governments supporting African dictators is not unique to North Africa, it has happened in many African countries. In the age of internet and Wikileaks though, its harder for them to deny propping up dictators. Particularly, those that do not have the support  and interests of their people. Egypt and Tunisia are not the only African countries that suffer high inflation and unemployment under dictators. This is happening in other countries throughout the continent like Zimbabwe, Gabon, and Senegal. The difference is the west tends to think that African people, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, only revolt because they can’t get along with others from a different religion or ethnic group (“tribalism”). Africa’s problems are not only about race, ethnic groups, or ‘tribes’- economic injustice is usually an underlying factor that takes form in ethnic tensions. Africans across the continent struggle for economic a political justice and this plight is not unique to North Africa. Africans all over the continent are seeking fundamental changes. The events in North Africa will have consequences in Africa (See: Fire in the Arab World: A real lesson for African politicians).  In fact, according to political scientist Alemayehu G. Mariam, Ethiopia’s government has issued a complete blackout on coverage of the Tunisian riots to its public for fear of it spreading to its borders. One wonders if this year will mark a second revolution for many African countries - a peoples' revolution where all the people of Africa will take back their countries from dictators and send them packing to Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia seems to be a popular destination for dictators. Another infamous African dictator, Idi Amin, went to Saudi Arabia to seek refuge just like Ben Ali did, and this is the potential destination for Mubarak. So when Tunisia’s Zine El Abidine Ben Ali left power, the revolution was not just a Middle Eastern story, it was also an African story. As noted in an article by Alemayehu G. Mariam, “The Tunisian people's revolution should be an example for all Africans struggling to breathe under the thumbs and boots of ruthless dictators.” Similarly, the revolt about economic injustice is an African story. 

So as the African Union meets in Ethiopia this week to discuss events on the continent, two of its long standing leaders may not be represented. African leaders are already dealing with the repercussions as they sit to discuss the current protests in Gabon. Already, we are seeing revolts of over 5,000 people in the Gabon revolts that started Tuesday, January 25th, 2011. In  surprising move, the opposition leader, Mba Obame declared that he is the winner of the contested 2009 elections and is the legitimate president.  During the 2009 election, there were riots in Gabon over the election results that soon died out. Obame this week cited Ivory Coast and Tunisia during a rally, saying "history was on the march". In this case though, it is clear that Obame is the figurehead of the revolts and that it may not be a grassroots movement but a politically led one. Other African Presidents like Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal have stated that he is not worried about a revolt occurring in his country because he would be able to suppress it. Nevertheless, there is evidence that African leaders across the continent are paying close attention to the events in North Africa because it has real consequences for Africa. However, coverage of the revolts and its effects have not been inclusive on its impact on sub-Saharan Africa even though Egypt is in Africa.

It was interesting to hear CNN’s “Facts about Egypt” being reiterated by CNN presenters that included a historical accounts of Egypt void of colonialism. CNN reporters are repeatedly citing that Egypt’s economy was under “foreign control” until 1953. By ‘foreign control’ they are indirectly referring to colonialism and are clearly glancing over the effects of foreign economic control over and neo-colonialism had on Egypt’s economy. True, it is not the only reason for wealth not trickling down to its masses, but my argument here is that one cannot just ‘glance’ the fact that the period of foreign control they are referring to  was colonialism, and colonialism is a part of the history and legacy in every African country (including Ethiopia, albeit not being colonized). When anti-colonial struggle were being fought on the continent, it was the people of the African continent that worked together to overthrow imperialism on the continent. It was not a Middle Eastern anti-colonial movement that came in to liberate North Africa; it was African people living under similar conditions jointly seeking self-liberation.  Not acknowledging Egypt’s colonial legacy or its connection and leadership in the continent robs Egyptians of their history in a subtle but meaningful way. Africans have long struggled for freedom over several years. The forms of governments that are in power in contemporary Africa have their roots in colonialism and the African experience. The North African revolts need to be analyzed given richer insight inclusive of the African historical experience.