Dikembe Unchained: Mutombo’s GEICO Commercial

Dikembe Mutombo, speaking during a press briefing at the New York Foreign Press Center. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Congolese basketball player Dikembe Mutombo has been receiving largely positive responses with regards to his new advertisement for GEICO, an auto insurance company in the United States of America. The commercial, "Happier than Dikembe Mutombo Blocking a Shot" depicts Mutombo running around blocking ordinary people from making ‘shots’ in everyday situations.

In the commercial, he blocks a crumpled ball of paper from being thrown in to a trash can, a boy from throwing a box of cereal in to a shopping cart and a woman from throwing laundry in to a washing machine and in other similar situations. During this time, he is making mono syllabic statements like "no, no, no", "not in my house!" and "ha ha ha."This is supposed to be a commentary on his defense skills as a basketball player where he blocked numerous shots.

For many basketball fans, it brings about nostalgia from the days that he was playing in the basketball leagues. However, for some of us the commercial shows an African basketball athlete, running around town hitting objects out of people’s hands, who is also seemingly inarticulate. One almost expects him to yell, “yabba dabba doo!” like Fred Flinstone . Simply speaking, the commercial makes Mutumbo look like and oafish cave man. He evokes images reminiscent of the arch stereotype of the African male who may not be intelligent, may not be articulate, but ‘can sure play ball!’.


This portrayal of Mutumbo is really unfortunate because Mutumbo is a very accomplished man. There is an above average brain lurking behind this Neanderthal representation of him.  Mutumbo was the recipient of an academic scholarship to the highly ranked Georgetown University as a pre-med student. His original goal was to become a medical doctor!  Albeit playing time-consuming college basketball, he eventually graduated with two degrees in Linguistics and Diplomacy from Georgetown. As an entrepreneur, he is the founder of the cable network ‘Africa Channel’ and has embarked on other business ventures. However, outside of basketball, he is mostly renowned for his not for profit ventures.

English: Dikembe Mutombo speaks to the Senegalese population about the importance of sleeping under mosquito nets (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Mutombo is the founder of the Dikembe Mutombo Foundation which builds schools and hospitals in Kinshasa, Congo. In addition, he has made several donations to charitable foundations both in Congo and the United States which have earned him recognition as one of the most generous professional athletes in the world. Due to his philanthropy, he was inducted in the World Sports Humanitarian Hall of Fame and has received the President’s Service Award. Lastly, not only can he speak English well, he is in fact a polyglot conversant in many languages. He speaks French, Portuguese, Spanish, Tshiluba, Swahili, Lingala and two other central African languages. Multilingualism is useful and compliments his many international endeavors which involve communicating in boardrooms, at conferences and with the general public. Therefore, playing an ‘oafish’ mono-syllabic caricature for the commercial is a misrepresentation of who he actually is.

Of course, it needs to be said that no one should take themselves too seriously. There should always be room for African athletes to represent multiple sides of themselves which includes a humorous side. However, we are still in an era where African athletes continue to be represented as all ‘body’ and no ‘brains’ as athletes and as scholars. Since athletes are considered ambassadors for their country of origin, how they are received and perceived becomes a concern for many at international levels. It is of particular concern for African athletes who continue to face racism worldwide when competing in various sports. They are often susceptible to taunting, heckling and stereotyping by fans based on their ethnicity.

English: GEICO logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Some may recall an incident when a basketball fan heckled racist slurs at Mutumbo from the stadium stands.  This would have been a more opportune time for him to run around unhinged, feverishly blocking verbal shots and uttering words from his GEICO ad like, ‘no, no, no… not today… not in my house!’In response to the heckling incident, Mutombo actually remarked, “I am not going to take that. He was insulting my race, my family, my integrity. For him to call me a monkey ... that should not happen today,"indicating that he is quite aware that racial stereotypes continue to exist today. It is therefore ironic that he was able to take the GEICO commercial script as lighthearted humor thereby perpetuating a popular African stereotype. Players and their agents/managers have control over the image of a celebrity and his decision partner with GEICO in this manner is very problematic for his own representation and that of the continent. Unfortunately for Mutombo, with great fame, comes great responsibility. Asking the GEICO team for a new concept is typically an option for stars of his stature that should have been exercised. In a world where Africans are still battling stereotypes about Africa, it is too soon for our biggest and brightest stars to be dumbing themselves down for sport.

This article appeared on Africa on the Blog , February 26, 2013

Africa's Greatest Non-Inventions?

This image  of  an African man with rubber man around his head has  gone viral with a new country named in each e-mail in order to ridicule the nationals of that country although it probably originated in South Africa as signified by the references on the computer screen.. Photo credit:unknown

Many people have received the popular email of the African man with an elastic band and cell phone tied around his head with the caption reading “hands-free cell phone”. A few weeks ago, I was sent a link to a blog with similar images depicting African non-inventions, entitled “11 amazing devices that could only have been invented in Africa”.  The blog consists of a number of ‘inventions’ - or rather African adaptations of contemporary technology credited to Africa. These adaptations include a hand held sprinkler system made by attaching the top of a plastic bottle to a hose pipe; a box ball (foosball) table carved from an actual box box; and many similar ‘humorous’ non-inventions.

The latest series of such type of photos were included on a blog run by the Africa Geographic Safari magazine which also has some of these images on its Facebook page. It credits the source of the photos to another Facebook page, Africa, This is why I live here – owned by AfricaThisiswhyI livehere.com- a wildlife blog that promotes conservation of Rhinos. There is a note on the ‘about’ section of the Facebook site of the latter, reading “not intended for anyone with a bad sense of humor”.  On the Africa Geographic magazine, the user comments also make reference to the humor in the photos and the ‘ingenuity’ of African peoples. Whilst no malice is intended by displaying these images, the messages conveyed cannot be viewed simply in jest because of the context that they are presented and their messages.

Pictures Worth a Thousand Inventions

In light of the blog’s content, the title “11 amazing devices that could only have been invented in Africa” is problematic. It introduces an element of ‘otherness’ to African people and products coming out of Africa. It writes that this type of ‘inventiveness’ can only occur in one geographic location, Africa, and not another. This suggests that Africa invents one type of invention (makeshift ones) and not any other (true inventions). It implies that real inventions occur outside of the African continent and not within it. Furthermore, it implies that nothing new really comes out of the continent; instead, innovation takes the form of crude adaptations –that make use of anything in reach-to things already invented elsewhere.

They give the impression that Africans simply mimic things without a deeper understanding of how they function or in what context they function in. The stereotypical associations that these images conjure have real life consequences for many Africans  in classrooms and in work places that are prejudged as bringing no real innovation.

Equally problematic for Africans are that the ‘African inventions’  photos are presented by wildlife and safari themed sites in the middle of content primarily about wildlife. This poses problems because since they primarily focus on Africa’s environment, and seldom people, the way they present people makes a more pronounced statement. When a magazine about flora and fauna frequently depicts people in a similar manner, it creates lasting impressions in the mind of the viewers of the images of those people. It contrasts clever animals adapting to nature in their natural habitat to slow humans trying to adapt technology.  Readers of the site are bombarded with numerous photos of animals doing a variety of tasks, whilst the few African people being shown are doing ‘silly’ things like tying numerous tires around a car for ‘safety’ purposes.

There are other nuances surrounding the relationship between Africa’s wildlife and African people that manifest given that these images appear in the context of ‘environmentally’ – themed platforms. African people are usually not depicted as part of Africa in much of the popular imagination of wildlife enthusiasts -Tourists go on Safari to look at animals and conservationists are looking to save them! When people are rarely featured in the backdrop of African nature for tourism purposes, they are usually adding to the ‘exoticism’ of the environment. The dynamics of the Global North and Global South also play out here because typically tourists shown are from the Global North or ‘outlander’ types who are ‘roughing’ it in 'wild Africa'. When depicted in conservation magazines, people are destroying the environment with their ‘modern ways’. Conservationists from the Global North are depicted saving the environment where local people are usually destroying it. Therefore, the fact that these images appear in the backdrop of many stereotypes and grand narratives surrounding the romanticism of African wildlife, how African people are depicted becomes more conspicuous. So, rather than inventions portraying ‘ingenuity’ ‘humor’ and ‘cuteness’ in the continent; the photos begin to come across as patronizing and projecting the idea that  when it comes to inventions, Africans are a little dull.

Africa's Real Inventions

A urine powered generator was invented by Nigerian teenagers, Duro-Aina Adebola (14), Akindele Abiola (14), Faleke Oluwatoyin (14) and Bello Eniola (15) in 2012. These types of real and useful inventions though are less likely to go viral on social media. (Photo credit: whiteafrican)

Although there is little space for these nature-themed sites to focus only on a presenting a balanced view of people, greater consideration is needed. Africans have historically been denied credit for their inventions or receiving acknowledgement for their contributions to civilization.  In the traditional western belief system, Africans and women do not feature as inventors, innovators, or holders of knowledge. African inventions are typically given less value or are not seen as significant unless certified by someone from the Global North. There are a few sites such as Kumatoo , South African Info, and  International African Inventors Museum, that aim to highlight genuine African inventions that are rarely given space nor enough attention to ‘go viral’. Although, the nature sites do not need to go in to detail about those other inventions since this isn’t their main purpose, they do need to be more conscious about the messages they send about the continents people. For a continent that produced the pyramids, Great Zimbabwe, writing systems, irrigation systems, vaccines, and more recently, the urine fueled generator, reinforcing the stereotype that African’s inventions are rudimentary or lack any ‘real world’ utility is problematic.

Whilst all these nature site platforms are enthusiastic about the continent, its peoples, and its wildlife, the messages they are sending out about African people through these series of photos needs better reflection. To the credit of Safari magazine, they do have a blog post about the Mozambican Fashion Show that does show African people in positive light in terms of invention. There is also another post that shows Santa sightings throughout Africa that is humorous without bordering on offensive. However, it is important to note that the final video on that page from a charity called Ripple Africa in Malawi is problematic and needs an analysis on its own.  The majority of the site does not have images of Africa’s real ingenuity and inventiveness to provide for a more balanced representation. There are many inventions that came out of the continent that need greater awareness so that they can balance out such types of 'non-inventions' that often circulate around the internet. In a world where both Africans and non-Africans believe no inventions came from Africa, the popular image of Africa's ingenuity should not be limited to  make-shift non-inventions on the internet for amusement. It should also incorporate the real inventions coming out of the continent that should drive Africa's future.

This article also appeared on 'Africa on the Blog' on 12/21/2012 

‘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

Johnson Sirleaf: Transforming Liberia Through Traditional African Leadership Roles

Image via Wikipedia

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

This year’s Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee, Tawakkul Karman of Yemen and Ellen Sirleaf Johnson for ‘their work on women's rights’. When Liberia’s Johnson Sirleaf was announced as the Nobel Prize winner for 2011, the headlines worldwide noted that Africa’s ‘first’ female president had won the Nobel Peace Prize. Johnson Sirleaf however, is the second female head of state from Africa. This honor should be rightfully accredited to Ruth Sando Fahnbulleh Perry of Liberia. She was the head of state from 3 September 1996 until 2 August 1997, and succeeded by the notorious Charles Taylor. Sirleaf Johnson made history as the first ‘elected’ head of state for Liberia. Perry became head of state after Wilton G. S. Sankawulo stepped down as head of state (chairman) though the Council of State of Liberia. Liberia has the distinction of being the only African country in recent history to have two female heads of state and this is usually ignored in commentary in efforts to build up the image of Sirleaf Johnson as a pioneer in women’s leadership in Africa. It also reinforces the stereotype that African leadership tradition is inherently gendered (women and men had strict roles), and has traditionally excluded African women until western feminism came to ‘free’ African women from their men. This is the narrative that we usually hear from western countries, unfortunately, it is also the narrative that we hear from within the continent. It is important that when people talk about ‘African traditional culture’, they are not talking about ‘African colonial culture’ and passing it off as an African tradition that is timeless and was ‘always there’. We need to distinguish between African traditional culture and African colonial culture because erosion of leadership roles for African women came at the hands of foreign control, and is anything but ‘traditional’.

Image via Wikipedia

Queen Cleopatra of Egypt

Africa’s true traditional culture has always been inclusive of women’s leadership. The African continent has had a long history of female leadership ranging from Queen Cleopatra from Egypt to Queen Nzinga of Angola. In fact, in traditional African culture, prior to colonialism, female leadership in Africa was not an anomaly. We need to remember that traditional African culture has always been more gender neutral then western culture. Gender roles in African culture have also been traditionally more fluid, and this includes female leadership. Prior to colonialism, women in Africa held roles as priests, spiritual leaders, head of clans or ‘tribes’, and other socio-political organizations (since there were no ‘nation-state’ as we know them today). This is not to say that there was no system of patriarchal domination in Africa. The point is, that in terms of gender equality African women had more equality in the areas of land inheritance, property ownership, tracing lineage (matriarchal, matrilineal and matrilocal residence societies existed), and leadership roles. They also had their own systems of checks and balance so that male power was ‘in check’. For example, this includes traditions like postulating (bowing) to both men and women Priests leadership roles or bowing to females that were older. When foreign influence came to the continent, so did foreign ideas of gendered leadership roles. The European and Islamic tradition of inequality that was strongly patriarchal was forced on African traditional cultures so African women saw that now, they could no longer own land, inherit land, become priests, or trace their heritage through the female’s lineage. This means that African women actually lost their rights to be leaders as a result of colonization.

The gender inequalities that African women are experiencing today in terms of leadership are a result of European and Islamic colonization in Africa. They ‘gendered’ roles in leadership and exacerbated existing gender inequalities. Now, through Johnson Sirleaf, we hear of people celebrating the ‘progress’ African women are making in gaining leadership roles denied to us by our men. The steps that women like Johnson-Sirleaf and Perry are taking, are steps towards reclaiming progressive traditional gender roles. African feminism is about regaining rights that were lost. Perry and Sirleaf are stepping on the shoulders of a long tradition of African leadership that is often overlooked or forgotten because it ‘just doesn’t fit in’ to the stereotype of leadership roles for Africa that we like to cling on to. Just as Perry’s position as the ‘first’ head of state in Africa (which was barely 15 years ago) has just been forgotten by popular media and Africans on the continent, one hopes that Sirleaf’s role is also not forgotten in the near future like the countless African women that were leaders on the continent. At this juncture, questions like, ‘Is Liberia ready for a female head of state?’ shouldn’t have been making headlines in countries like Liberia or in any other country. Traditionally speaking, as Africans, we have always been ready for female leadership.

Gbagbo and the Chocolate Factory: Power & Cocoa in the Ivory Coast

Over the years, Chocolate eggs have been placed in Easter baskets around the world in Europe, America, and other continents across the globe.  Chocolate has become a central part of some religious and secular practices during the month of April. Year round, it is used to make chocolate coins for Hanukah or Santa Claus (Father Christmas), for courting on Valentine’s Day, and it used daily to make food and beverages. Not much thought is given by the general public in the west on the African origins of most of the Cocoa they consume or the labor used to obtain that luxury. Instead, when people think of Chocolate, they think ‘Swiss’ or ‘America’ when countries like Switzerland, Germany, and America don’t grow cocoa. Ivory Coast happens to be the world’s largest supplier of Cocoa. This means that the money that Gbagbo is clinging to is being funded by local Chocolate Easter Egg hunts and addictions to high-end chocolate lattes. Needless to say, the chocolate industry is very lucrative and holds the Ivory Coast’s purse strings. Similarly, I would like to point out that the Ivory Coast holds the chocolate industry’s purse strings as well. This is evident in how the current political crisis has impacted on the chocolate industry economically. In recent months, we have seen how the political situations in Libya, Egypt and now Ivory Coast has impacted prices of various commodities around the world. Hopefully, these events have given a chance for Africans across the continent to reexamine (and reevaluate) their central roles in the global economy and how their products affect prices world-wide.  The recent political crisis in the Ivory Coast is a clear example of this. The crisis has resulted in the rise of cocoa prices which increased to a 32-year high as a direct result of the political situation. According to Bloomberg report, Cocoa prices in New York had risen as much as 34 percent since the disputed elections where Gbagbo refused to step down. Prices only fell for the first time this year on March 4, 2011 because there were signs that Gbagbo’s reign as CEO of this large 'chocolate factory' was finally coming to an end. This shows the impact that the Cote d Ivoire situation has on the businesses on an international scale.

This raises the question on how we value African produced commodities both in the raw form and manufactured form. Particularly those products that African countries have a monopoly in supplying like chocolate. Since roughly, 50 million people around the world rely on cocoa for their livelihood, this gives Ivory Coast a considerable amount of power. Whilst only a few people will draw the connection between Chocolate producing Ivory Coast and its role in the global economy, and the political crisis, it effects have a real impact on many. Three quarters (67%) of the world’s cacao bean production takes place in West African in countries like Ghana and Ivory Coast. Ivory Coast alone supplies 43% of the world’s cocoa. Many people in the Ivory Coast (or outside of it) may underestimate the impact the country has on global industries and economies, but is is now being made visible. Whenever a large supplier of chocolate like Ivory Coast, cannot provide a regular supply, it will have a ripple effect on buyers all the way up the supply chain. It will also affect all industries connected to chocolates (milk, raisin, nuts, and peanut butter).  If Cadbury (See: Cadbury: An Ethical Company struggles to ensure Integrity of its Supply Chain) or Hershey is not able to get a regular supply of cocoa, it will cost them more to make chocolate and hence the price of chocolate will go up worldwide. Regular consumers will feel this impact at grocery stores and restaurants. Thus large chocolate manufacturing countries have a stake in Gbagbo’s presidency and on undervaluing the importance of Ivorian Cocoa to their products.

When they restructured the world cocoa market in the 1990s, it left Ivory Coast with little real power over the market. The liberalization policies still don't benefit Ivory coast and have led to large companies having power in the industry (See: Global Restructuring and Liberalization: Cote d' Ivoire and the end of the International Cocoa Market).  Realizing the value to African commodities through their effect in the global economy and branding them will be beneficial to Ivory Coast. At this juncture in its economic history, Ivory Coast should be synonymous with chocolate even if it’s not producing a finished product. As a comparative example of the importance of branding raw products, Colombia’s coffee beans are known worldwide as quality beans in their raw form so any product that uses Colombian beans has added value and can fetch a higher price. Ivory Coast is producing more chocolate than any other country, and clearly, their ability to supply chocolate impacts the chocolate industry. Clearly, it should be able to set prices of Cocoa at a fair trading price. Ivory Coast is in a position to negotiate Cocoa prices. The Chocolate companies know the value of their product and of the Cocoa they are getting. The misnomer that large MNCs will simply and easily ‘go somewhere else’ has been used for years but it doesn't make good business sense and is not an easy feat. For businesses, there are large switching costs that they will incur, and getting a new large supplier would change everything from its pricing strategy, production costs, and may cripple that company. MNC’s have been encouraging countries to mass produce cocoa so that they can achieve economies of scale (drive prices for the consumers down due to large supply of cocoa). Even if they were to go somewhere else, will that new country will probably not be able to meet the demand without large investments in infrastructure that many times the MNC is not prepared to pay. It will also mean the end to unreasonably low cost chocolate for customers in the western market.

There are always economic reasons why MNCs enter a certain country initially (and it is clearly not for humanitarian endeavors). There is no cocoa grown in Malawi, Zambia, Tanzania (much less America or Europe) so Ivory Coast has a product that not many countries can supply at that price. Yet, for some reason this adage that African countries are interchangeable and have ‘little’ to offer the world of economic value is persistent and internalized by some African leaders. not knowing the value of their product in global terms affects their bargaining power.  There is little reason that Ivory Coast is not in a position to set price minimums so that chocolate money trickles down and can be used for schools as opposed to being used to employ child labor of children that can not afford to go to school. There is also an added need perhaps, for this country to brand itself as the ‘Cocoa Coast or Chocolate Coast’ internationally to help add value to their raw product as is the case with Colombian beans. This can trickle to other industries and create and/or ‘chocolate development’ or even ‘chocolate tourism’. This 'chocolate tourism' though should be done in a way that is progressive and does not result in continued abuse of chocolate farmers. In the event that an MNC does get supply ‘elsewhere’, then that country can concentrate on getting another buyer and/or diversifying its products to make more food products that can be consumed locally or regionally. If Ivorians are unable to ‘feed themselves’ working as laborers on cocoa farms,  we then need to question the real life benefits of these farms for them. Their labor is on this farm may be wasted and they may benefit more from selling and growing items that will sustain them or that they can actually eat.

The International Cocoa Organization  (ICO) and the World Chocolate Foundation (WCF) appear to be the foundations in charge of setting standards and guidelines for the cocoa industry. Unfortunately, the latter ‘chocolate police’ are primarily made up of MNC’s and the goal for businesses is to provide value for its shareholders.  In the case of the ICCO, Ivory Coast, Togo, Ghana, Cameroon, Gabon and Sierra Leone are all represented but I think it is also important for regional agreements to made so that work on common issues as a united front in the board. Ivory Coast used to have a Cocoa board (CSSPPA) that was dissolved in the 1990's that was powerful but was dissolved to make way for liberalization. Although this board may not have been perfect, it created some standards within the country and protected farmers at some level.  With no real representation, the question of who is really looking after the primary interest of the Ivory Coast needs to be raised?  Just like in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, we can see how economic wealth and greed has played a key role in the chocolate industry. A few companies and people are getting rich from the labor of the hard working people in an exploitative way. Currently in these plantations, child labor, debt servitude (‘slavery’) and displacement of people still exists because of the chocolate industry (see: Chocolate Work or read: Chocolate Nations: Living and Dying for Cocoa in West Africa (African Arguments)). Cocoa does not fetch an economically sustainable price for the farmers who are the suppliers. Gbagbo and his supporters have benefited from this industry and this is evident in his unwillingness to step down. Gbagbo’s Ivory Coast has also not lead to the type of economic growth that the Ivory Coast has the potential to realize. The challenge will be to see how Mr. Ouattara’s Chocolate Factory will look like and if his presidency will mean change for the Ivorian people that rely on Chocolate for their livelihood. In his attempts to liberalize the Ivorian economy, we hope that he will set an agenda that helps Ivory Coast receive an equitable price for its Cocoa and that children will be eating cocoa instead of picking it.

"Going Native": Beyonce's 'Tribute' to Africa

Beyonce Knowles recently did a photo shoot where she wore dark make-up and African inspired clothing with the theme of "African Queen". The narrative surrounding Beyonce's recent photo shoot was that it was done to honor late Nigerian musician, activist and pan-africanist, Fela Kuti. However, this move was controversial and has had varied reactions in the United States and Europe. Some have argued that Beyonce was insulting African-Americans by donning 'Black Face'. Her make-up however, is distinctively void of the coal colored paint or the widening of the outline of the lips with white (sometimes red) make-up that characterizes 'Black Face'.  Others have commented that what she did was not mocking African-American history because she was paying tribute to Fela Kuti who is African and was honoring Africa. Whilst all the hullabaloo has been about how she is representing African-Americans, it is important to remember that she was not trying to represent African-Americans nor their history. Her intention was clearly to represent who she believes Africans are and what she believes Africans look like. This representation of Africa is should be a concern for Africans because it is projecting an image of African identity on Africa. It is reinforcing stereotypes about who Africans are, what Africans are supposed to look like, and alienating Africans who do not fit that image. Furthermore, it reinforces an image of what an African looks like to a world that already has a myopic viewpoint on African culture.

What is fundamentally missing from all the narratives that I have read, is an African critique of her move. After all, it is Africans she was representing and not African-Americans. Africans have little knowledge about the history of 'Black Face' nor what it means so they would not automatically associate the move with the history of 'Black Face'.  In fact, when I read  about the story in African press, they largely reproduced the arguments that African-Americans and American media were having about Black Face and how it affected Africa-Americans. The African press made no mention to the fact that she was passing judgment on Africans. Nor did they note that by painting her face dark, she is sending a message to the world that Africans are supposed to look a certain way. In examining Africans from Cape to Cairo, we should recognize that Africans are Asian, Caucasian and Black African and Brown African (including bi-racial and non-bi-racial Africans). They look like Cleopatra, Alek Wek, Charlize Theron, Thandie Newton, Winnie Mandela, or Mo Ibrahim. If Beyonce, wanted to honor Africa, and look like an authentic African, she could have done just as well in her natural skin color. If you go to Africa today, you will find Africans that look like Beyonce. what makes it equally problematic is that Beyonce has been to Africa but chose to represent an image of Africa, that persisted in her mind or the mind her entourage.

The MTV article: Experts react to Beyonce's Black Face, notes that the french are not aware of this American racial faux paux and that needs to be understood in the context of American history with African-Americans.  Since this is a plausible argument, we may need to understand it based on how France would interpret this given Frances own problematic  history with Africans. We need to recognize France is a country that has a large percentage of African immigrants and French Africans. They mainly come from North Africa (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, etc...) and  Franco-phone Africa (Cameroon, Senagal, Sierra Leone). France is therefore  certainly aware of what Africans look like and can not claim ignorance about the impact of statements and images about color. Whilst they may have not been aware of the cultural significance or ties to 'Black Face', they certainly are aware of Africans in their back yard. On the national stage, we can use the example of the high profile French national soccer teams that are largely made up of  people directly from the African continent or first generation children of immigrants. The teams have also been at the center of racial debates in France. If we assume that they were not commenting on America, then it leaves us no alternative then to look at it as a commentary about Africa. This means that the reflection was about Africa but  inadvertently insulted African-Americans due to Beyonce's American roots. Perhaps this move can be seen  as social reflection of how France views Africans which is equally problematic.


According to French fashion magazine L’Officiel's official response, "The series was conceived as using art and fashion in paying homage to African queens." Perhaps would have pulled it off better though, had they just left out the dark make up.  According to the magazine, "As for the artistic makeup, the inspiration came from several African rituals during which paint is used on the face. We find the images beautiful and inspiring". Maybe, but when you make rituals exotic and take them out of their cultural context it becomes problematic. When you combine this dark-make up with 'African War Paint' on her cheeks and lips, a leopard print jacket, and a necklace made of bone, it makes for a social commentary about African cultural identity. The outfit on its own may have  been  a less obvious way to honor Africa through the display of African inspired outfits.  Yet the the outfit on its own also makes Africans be seen as the 'exotic' other. Add the make-up, and it is an overt ill conceived photo-shoot that reinforces an idea of  'The face of Africa'. The magazines official statement reads, that is was a

"A return to her African roots, as you can see in the picture, on which her face was voluntarily darkened. All the pictures will be available in the collector edition, on sale at the end of this month."- L'Officiel Paris

According to the magazine Fela Kuti was the inspiration of the photo shoot. One wonders if the magazine had been doing a Pocahantas inspired shoot if they would ask her to wear Red paint on her face and if she would have agreed? Or if she was asked to do an Asian inspired theme, if she would paint her face yellow? It seems odd then that they would think that painting their face dark-brown was the optimal way of honoring Femi Kuti. Fela Kuti was a talented musician, pan-Africanist and a sympathizer of the Black Panther Party.  His mother, Funmilayo Ransome Kuti, was a teacher, Women's rights activist and Pan Africanist who was acquainted with Amy Jaques Garvey, and Kwame Nkrumah. His brother was an activist and medical doctor who built clinics. His cousin, Wole Soyinka is a Nobel Prize Laureate for Literature, writer and poet.  Lastly, his son, Femi Kuti is a famous musician in his own right. If L'Officiel or Beyonce wanted to honor Fela Kuti, I am sure that they would have been a plethora of other opportunities to able to honor him and/or who represent him in more profound ways. I am also quite certain that if they wanted to honor African art, they could have found other artistic ways of doing this.

Corporate Irresponsibility, Extraction, And The Nigerian Oil Spill

The world recently watched a minute-by-minute play on the oil spill in the Gulf, but the inhabitants of the Niger-Delta region in Nigeria have been watching minute-by-minute oil spills for the past 40 years. As the world watches every single step taken by BP to clear up the oil spill, the Nigerians watch  rivers already flowing with oil due to lack of any clean up effort, giving the Gulf region a precedent of the damage that can occur, and leaving them little room to speculate about what may lay ahead for the Gulf. Large oil producing MNC's like Shell, have been spilling oil in the region with little regard for the environmental guidelines. According to the BBC, there were over 7,000 spills, large and small, between 1970 and 2000 which amounts to an estimated 13 million barrels of oil. According to News Desk article,  'Niger Delta Oil Spills Dwarf BP, Exxon Valdez Catastrophies',  Idris Musa, head of Nigeria’s oil spill response agency, said "an additional 2,405 spills by all major oil companies in the region have occurred since 2006." The discovery of oil in this region has been a nightmare for the 31 million living in the area. This has caused the pollution of water, land and air in this region. The Ogoni are the dominant ethnic group that live here and over the years, they have watched their fisheries depleted in the oil-rich area, catapulting them in to a life of hunger, disease and poverty. Although human rights groups and Nigerians have protested about the disregard of enviomental guidelines here, little improvements have been achieved. Shell, for example, has blamed sabotage for the oil spills and denied responsibility.



The oil spills in this area are a result of a mixed combination of  factors including an aging oil infrastructure, corroding pipes, and sabotage by thieves or rebel groups. Whilst Shell may not be responsible for every single oil spill, instead of making attempts to clean up the environment,  they have been using evasive tactics when it comes to Nigeria. Shell, which controls the majority of the oil industry in Nigeria, defends itself by claiming that 85% of spills are caused by sabotage instead of corroded pipelines and poor infrastructure. It seems like corporate social responsibility for Shell, is confined to select geographical locations -  Niger-Delta is not one of them. Nigerians that have resorted to protesting against the company and the government but have been met by paid armed Shell employees, and by a government clamp down, labelling protesters as mere rebels. A womens protest group protesting Exxon, was once met with armed gaurds who beat and assulted the protesters. In fact, the Niger-Delta conflict that arose in the 1990's centers around the struggle between the Ogonis and Ijaw people and the oil companies. They feel that they are being exploited and also want to see oil profit trickle down to their communities. Although, many regard their plight  and the civil war in Nigeria to inter-ethnic ('tribal') conflict over control of resources, their struggle is not simply about 'warring tribes' that dislike eachother fighting for oil. According to Walter Rodney in his book, 'How Europe Underdeveloped Africa' "...to accept such a contention would mean extending the definition of tribe, to cover Shell Oil and Gulf Oil!" In what some term, 'blood oil', there are definitive corporate roots in the development of the oil spills and oil crisis. In spite of a boycott by activists against Shell, and a call from the US and UN for the company to correct its wrongs, it also seems like there is more talk than action and the poor, as usual, will lose out.

While it’s easy to lay blame only on Shell and MNCs, we need to consider the role that the Nigerian government has played in branding the Niger-Delta area as a place for oil extraction and not oil investment.  Nigeria is a member of OPEC, and one of the top oil producing countries. Nigeria is the fifth largest exporter of oil to the United States and the largest producer in Africa. The government gets about 80% of its profits from oil. It turns a blind eye to the wrong doings of Shell, and in exchange, Shell keeps the governments purses filled with oil money. In  a blatant display of loyalties, Nigerian government went as far as hiring a former Shell employee as the minister that overseas the oil sector. With recent progress, it makes, one wonders what image or brand Nigeria is trying to portray to the world about itself and its people. The stereotypical Nigeria or the new Nigeria under Goodluck Jonathan, that's trying to shake and rebrand its negative reputation and leave it behind them. The President, incidentally, is of Ijaw ethnicity, born in the Niger-Delta and has been able to stabilise the area in terms of attacks so far. He also has a degree in zoology and has worked for the environmental protection department. Hopefully, these factors and his desire to maintain good international relations (particulary with the Obama administration), will spark an interest in cleaning up, both politically and environmentally, the Niger-Delta crisis.

The rebranding of Nigeria began a few years back through the launch of the the Nigeria Image Project in 2004.  It was taken a step further in 2009 with a campaign to rebrand Nigeria. According to Robin Sanders of Galaxy television, the aim is to "not only aimed at improving Nigeria's image in the international community, but to position her as a good destination for tourism and investment in Sub-Saharan African." In the controversial documentary, "Welcome to Lagos", the Nigerian government is shown making progress towards trying to rebrand itself as a government concerned about the welfare of its people. They are seen cleaning up the streets for Lagos from loiterers, landscaping the city, implementing a sanitation and 'clean up' day once a month, and razing shanty towns which they cite as a breeding ground for crime and disease. Its actions in the Niger-Delta  region the past few years however, are a sharp contradiction from the country that its trying to become. A government needs to put its people first, and send out the message that it thinks all of its people deserve clean air, water, and land. Only when the Nigerian government is able to send a consistent and paternalistic  message through actions that protect its people from the big oil companies, only then it can truly realise the transformation that it seeks as a rebranded nation. Only then can we truly say that we see an image change in the country, a new Nigeria. Right now, Shell enjoys an extractive relationship with Nigeria, making other areas of development investment challenging.  One cant attract long lasting foreign direct investment with a system of extraction. The manner in which Nigeria is letting Shell treat its people is also the manner in which other people will treat Nigeria as a nation.

In a surprising  move though, the government did slap Shell with a fine of over $100 million in punitive damages for oil spill damages in Rivers State, Nigeria, which Shell has been violently protesting, claiming that such a fine will effect its future $40b  investments in the area. Claims which are ludicrous since that amount is really minuscule in comparison to the profits oil companies gain. The amount of money BP is spending for the Gulf oil spill fund alone is $300b dollars, an amount which people criticized BP for because it pales in comparison to the profits it earns. Shell should be prepared to shell  out more for its consistent history of abuses and violations in the area. The oil industry is very lucrative and 'black gold' is a commodity that the world relies on. Oil producing countries, in essence, are in a position where they can make demands on the companies that rely on oil. Cleaning up after an oil spill is a  socially and environmentally responsible demand to make and the Nigerian government should begin make better efforts. The chances of MNCs actually pulling out of the country are very slim since its a lucrative commodity.What we must do now is sit and watch to see if this fine will be paid or if the case will disappear in the system. It is also important to note that in spite of all the revenues earned by oil, the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), is unable to meet all its financial obligations which indicates that some of the oil revenues have also somehow disappeared in the system.

Since the Nigerian oil crisis can be seen as a precedent to the damage and abuses caused by oil companies, we also hope that other countries take heed and learn from it. American media attention is certainly keeping BP honest in the Gulf but unless  there is this type of pressure, many coporations will continue to neglect enviromental law for profits. They will continue to place profits over people.  They will continue to let pipes erode, spills to occur, and people to suffer... It certainly is the right time for Nigeria to move forward in making demands from the oil companies. Uganda is going to be an oil producing country in the next 5 years and may become an unwelcome competitor for Nigeria. It will also provide the oil companies with alternatives. I only hope that Uganda take the necessary precautions so that they don't create another Niger-Delta crisis in Uganda. Uganda will need to make an effort to brand its oil sector as investment and not extraction through greater controls. The discovery of oil should be able to uplift a country in to wealth and not impoverish it. With Libya, we have seen it taking several decades before their oil money has really began to create wealth in the country and trickle down. Under Gaddafi's new course for Libya, many of the recent public works and infrastructure developments have been long overdue. In certain aspects, for countries like Malawi, where their is evidence of oil but also where oil in Lake Malawi has not been fully explored, it may be a blessing in disguise. None of the Malawian Presidents have made oil drilling in Lake Malawi central to their economic goals perhaps its diverse population of Cichlids has been the lakes saviour. What will be the saviour for the crisis in Niger-Delta? Perhaps, the discovery of new energy sources.

African Citizenship for African-Americans

Presidents from 12 African nations and private sector African American leaders began considering a proposal to grant dual citizenship to African-Americans in hopes of increasing  investment and interest in Africa at a summit in Abuja, Nigeria in 2006. The event was hosted by the Sullivan Foundation and included  former US President Bill Clinton and World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz. The summit considered granting either: Africa-wide citizenship through the African Union, Regional African citizenship, or individual country citizenship. Since that summit, there has been other campaigns by African Americans for African countries to allow dual citizenship on grounds that they are members of the diaspora and originally from Africa. They feel it will help them gain a better sense of cultural identity, thus healing the wounds of separation from Africa and giving an opportunity for mutual collaboration. African Americans, under this plan, would be allowed to travel freely to African, own property, and start businesses.

In  past discussions, problems arose over identifying which countries African Americans could legitimately lay citizenship claims to. However, since technologies have improved, DNA testing has allowed several African-Americans to trace there roots back to select countries. In Teresa Watanabe's article, 'Called back to African by DNA', she highlights how celebrities like Isaiah Washington , have traced back their roots to Africa and are contributing to their ancestral lands. Isaiah became a citizen of Sierra Leone, after finding that he is a decedent of the Mende ethnic group and has since been contributing towards the development of the country. Likewise, many other Americans are seeking their African roots: Chris Rock- Cameroon, Whoopi Goldberg - Guinea Bissau,  and Oprah - Liberia (Kpelle ethnicity). The brothers that made up the 80's band, "The boys", moved to the Gambia a few years back and now operate music studios from Gambia . Under their new name, Suns of Light, they continue to produce music for both US (New Kids on the Block, Akon) and Gambian artists from their studio that is based in Gambia. They hope to promote Gambian music overseas (Interview: A Chat With 'Suns of Light'). Despite many calls from African Americans to have dual citizenship offered to them, many African countries have not taken any extra steps towards this other than encouraging such a move. 

Allowing dual citizenship would provide a sense of ancestral identity for African-Americans. It will also increase ties and trade between America and that respective country. In the sense of nation branding, it would make Africans appear warm, friendly, accepting and sympathetic towards the history of African-Americans. It would also be beneficial in carrying African culture to America using American born citizens. Oprah's much publicized school in South Africa may have been built in South Africa in part, due to her belief that she was of Zulu origin. As a celebrity, she has helped bolster the image of South Africa  through her link with the school. No amount of advertising money can buy they type of publicity she brought for South Africa in choosing to build her school in that country. Even for the non-celebrities, people with dual citizenship can influence their families, churches, employers etc.. to invest, visit or work with a particular country. These dual citizens would help promote culture and development. In essence, it sounds like this would be a win-win situation.

So far, Ghana is the only country that legally allows for dual citizenship for African-Americans. Currently, there are an estimated 5,000 African-Americans living in Ghana. Other countries have been more hesitant. Perhaps, this is a more difficult move for those African countries that do not allow for dual nationality for their owned citizens that acquire citizenship in another country, or are born abroad to citizens. Perhaps landlocked countries that had fewer slaves feel that there is less linkage to African-Americans or perhaps there is the larger question involved as Anor, editor of Asante magazine aptly notes, "Just because your genetics show you came from a place, should that mean you can lay claim to that group of people or place now?".

With Africa being the cradle of the humanity, essentially, anyone in the world could lay claims to African citizenship. Yes, some may feel inclined to dispute these distant claims using color lines, but does color define what it is to be African? Whilst I understand the plight for African-Americans in terms of self identity, I feel that African countries should tread cautiously in providing citizenship to large numbers of people that are distantly linked to the continent. One needs to consider the current image of Africa in the Americas. For example, a large number of African-American still have the 'Tarzan' image of Africa, and want little do do with the continent. Whilst some do not hold these perceptions, they are so pervasive to the point that they may inadvertently manifest in later dealing with Africa. Whilst we hope that African-Americans that discover their roots will have the desire to help improve the situation of their newly found cousins, we cannot assume that every African-American has good intentions and need to take protective measures.

If there is to be any dual citizenship, what I would propose, is to take the route of India. India's diaspora is widespread and includes many Indians living abroad that have been in foreign land for generations. What they have done is introduced a new status quite like dual citizenship only with more limited privileges than what one would normally associate with dual citizenship. Like in the case of African-Americans, many Indians living abroad are many generations removed from India. In South Africa for example, the people of Indian origin have been there since the late 19th century and early 20th century. In the 1800's many were sent to South Africa to work on the plantations as indentured servants (many involuntarily and on life contracts). South Africa hosts the largest population of Indians outside of India (about 1 million) and in some cities, like Durban, they are the largest ethnic minority (See: Indian South Africans). Given India's situation, it would be problematic for India to incorporate that many people of Indian origin in to their already large population as full citizens. Instead, the government of India decided to grant the status of Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) as a way to tap in their diaspora.  Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs) of certain category who migrated from India and acquired citizenship of a foreign country other than Pakistan and Bangladesh, are eligible for grant of OCI. It is commonly known as ‘Dual Citizenship’ but Indian constitution technically does not allow dual citizenship. It is more similar to a 'special status' visa. Their benefits include: life long multiple entry, multiple purpose visas, exemption from reporting to Police authorities for any length of stay in India; and the right to work, study, visit, or own property (except in the acquisition of certain agricultural or plantation properties). People that hold OCI status may not vote or hold Indian passports. They may also not occupy constitutional posts such as President, Vice President, Judge of the Supreme Court or legislative posts (See: Passport and Citizenship - Dual Nationality)

In drawing parallels with India, in Africa's case, African-Americans living in the U.S are also several generations removed, and also did not migrate purely from their own free will. A status similar to OCI would be suitable and perhaps more palatable for African leaders rather then conceding dual nationality with the same rights as a citizen. I will call the new proposed status 'Overseas Citizenship of Africa (OCA)'. Like the India's version, and OCA status would not concede the right to vote, change legislation, or hold high ranking government posts.It would make provision for multiple entry, land ownership (with restrictions), and the right to work, study or visit for an undisclosed period of time. It will hence facilitate trade, cultural sharing, and mutual understanding without the fear that exists in granting full citizenship rights to large groups of wealthy, and perhaps politically or culturally influential people (African-Americans are collectively the wealthiest population of black people). It would, in essence provide most of the benefits African-Americans are seeking from Africa, and it would provide Africa with most of the benefits they seek from the African-American diaspora.
 
Perhaps the biggest divergence from the Indian version that Africa may face with this level of integration, would be the language barrier. Unlike our Indian counterparts, Indians in the diaspora still largely speak or at least understand their mother tongue. African-Americans do not. Since language is a reflection of ones culture, I believe a requirement should be included that stipulates that person applying for OCA status, be required to speak at least one African language at the basic level. According to anthropological theory, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis states that language determines culture, and thought process. It would be beneficial for African-Americans to thus understand the language so that they can better understand the culture. If citizenship is granted at the local level, than it should be the predominant language of that country that is required. If it is regionally based, than it should be a language of that region. At AU level, then any language should suffice.
 
Since the discussions of dual nationality for African-Americans started a few years back, I am sure that it will be a while before other African countries follow in the footsteps of Ghana. There are other factors that way in the minds of African leaders that prevent them from moving this forward. A major one would be justifying granting this type of status to African-Americans for countries that do not allow for dual citizenship for their own nationals that acquire foreign citizenship, nor for foreign born children to citizens. In this brave new highly globalized world, I feel that African leaders should be able to make bold decisions that are not carbon copies of western citizenship and immigration laws. A form of OCA status may be the way forward for brand Africa.

President Obiang of Equatorial Guiniea to Rebrand himself

A few days ago, the president of Equatorial Guinea, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, met briefly with Anti-apartheid activist Archbishop Desmond Tutu in Cape Town, South Africa. They discussed various issues concerning Africa and perhaps, touched on religion.  He went in to the meeting a caterpillar, and half-an-hour later, emerged a butterfly, outlining to the world a 10 year plan for Guinea-Conakry that would lift that country out of poverty, propagating it to new democratic heights. Guinea-Conakry, as it is sometimes know to distinguish it self from Guinea-Bissau, is the only Spanish-speaking country in Africa. It is also the host of the 2011 African Union meeting which will bring the leaders of Africa to its back yard. So whats in Obiang's back yard?

According to Slate author, Peter Maass, Obiang's back yard includes a three decade rule, corruption, repression, and oil money that did not trickle down to the masses. Their have also been rumours of spending-The situation in Guinea-Conakry has contributed to a mass exodus of Guineans migrating to Spain over the past few years. Arguably, Maas claims that Obiang is the worst dictator in Africa's history, surpassing that of the notorious Robert Mugabe. Yet, we rarely here about this man nor about oil-rich Equatorial Guinea. Perhaps, its because Equatorial Guinea lacks the drama of the land dispute issue in Zimbabwe that sent millions of white Africans to flee Zimbabwe, paving the way for land redistribution that  captivates western audiences who are still recovering from the discovery of white Africans. Media hardly reports about the on-goings of this small central African nation. Well, now this President who has gone virtually undetected by Western Media wants to put his country on the map, spread his wings and fly. He wants to distance himself from his current image as a corrupt, oppressive leader and become a progressive peoples president.

Obiang is so committed to rebranding himself and his country that, according to New York Times by Celia Dugger in African Leader Hires Adviser and Seeks an Image Change, he has hired an American lobbyist, Lanny J Davis, to help him with his image. He has entered in to a one year, $1 Million  contract with Davis, who has an extensive network in D.C and has worked with high profile clients like Bill Clinton. So it was in Cape Town last week, in front of heads of states,  including Bill Clinton himself, that Obiang announced his New Deal for Equatorial Guinea. This new path includes transparency and a goal to be  'just like the U.S'.



Yet this move has been met with much criticism. Cynics argue firstly, that a leopard can not change his spots. Secondly, that he has not accepted blame for all the human rights abuses and Third, that $1M is a hefty price tag for a nation where people live for less than a dollar a day. Is it possible that in his later years, he wants to be remembered as a hero to his people and not villain? Is it possible that he just wants prosperity for his country? Perhaps, their was a touch of Obama mania (yes we can!) or an instance of divine intervention as he met with the Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu. Every once in a while, we see caterpillars emerge out of their cocoons as butterflies. I believe that if this president has made change a part of his agenda, we should give him the benefit of the doubt until he proves us wrong. I say to the nay sayers, perhaps quite idealistically, that people have the capacity to change sans, civil war. In recent history, we have seen other leaders in Africa like Banda (Malawi) and Gaddafi (Libya) embrace transformation.



In examining Libya, Gaddafi has taken active steps in paving a new road for Libya-literally. He is building super highways and improving the infrastructure for his people, and has set out on a pan-Africanist mission of uniting Africa under one banner. He has attempted to rebrand himself, going as far as admitting fault for the Pan-Am airways hijacking that he previously denied, in order to make amends with the rest of the world. Few in the west though are impressed by Gaddafis new image, and shake his hands at arms length. Although Libya is still under Gaddafis rule, I think it is important for us to accept these achievements. In Malawi's case, under political pressure, self proclaimed 'life President' Banda, stepped down in the 90's, to allow for multi-party elections. It is important to note that he was not re-elected. Banda, perhaps due to his old age, let Malawi change from a one party state to a multi-party state after being the sole president from 1964. So contrary to popular belief, change by African heads of state is possible, regardless of motivation.



If the first step in solving a problem is admitting that there is a problem in the first place, than in Obiangs case, that's part of the problem. Vehemently denying all allegations that have plagued his presidency, makes for a less convincing platform of change. According to the advice from his new image consultant needs to admit to a few wrong-doings, and as his new advisor has told him, win elections by a slim majority instead of a large majority.  Thus far, he is allowing  the Red Cross to come in and investigate human right abuses as a start, but many still doubt his sincerity. Davis has come under criticism too for accepting this role and being a 'stooge' to the president. Both Davis and Obiang are being criticised for taking advantage of the people of the country since his salary is coming from their government. On this matter, I would like to point out that whilst one should never take advantage of ones people, there shouldn't be an expectation of a discounted price because his client is African. Davis is working in his professional capacity. If that's the price that he charged Bill Clinton, than that is what his services are worth. Also, in the long run, if spending that 1 million dollars, is an investment in to Guinea's future in terms of building networks that will lead to favorable development projects, then it is money well spent.


The idea that African leaders should somehow be immune to spending money on items with high tag prices is a delicate one. I understand that in some instances, a leader will spend money on premium products while money could be used by the poor, but I also understand that in a socially stratified capitalist society, their is always going to be those that have, and those that do not. This is not to say I condone the wanton spending habits of some leaders, but to say that, unless Davis offers a 'developing country discount' for his services, for what Obiang wants to achieve, that is the going rate.  I recall an incident where South Africa was hosting several heads of state at a state dinner a few years ago. On the menu where lobsters, shrimp etc.. The media began to report on the lavish nature of the event due to the menu choice in light of the poverty in Africa. What they failed to do was to adjust for South African standard of living since South Africa enjoys ample access to water, the cost of a lavish dinner for head of state in S.A would nowhere be the same as it would overseas. Yes, it is more expensive than an ordinary dinner but since South Africa was hosting foreign dignitaries and heads of state, they had to make a menu befitting of the guests. Let us keep this in perspective by highlighting that Washington DC is also home to one of the highest population of homeless people in Washington D.C. yet, when the President holds his state dinner, we do not hear, in the same news story that, 'Washington DC is also home to thousands of starving Americans', yet we somehow think it is acceptable for them to mention a state dinner in South Africa and comment on the poor in that country.



No one can predict if this latest move by Obiang will be a move that will benefit the country in the long run or if K street can help him rebrand his image. In addition to Davis, Obiang has hired PR firm, Qorvis Communications and a security firm to help guard areas of national aquatic resources. We should help the people of that country by creating a less hostile environment for presidents in Africa seeking change and giving them room to come out of their cocoon's and let the change manifest. Rome was not built in a day, and we can not expect Obiang to change over night. Understandably,  with his past record, he also has personal interests that he has an invested interest in safeguarding. Obiang cannot change his past record, and the world should not forget it either but, if Obiang is committed to change and is taking steps towards this, than we should be enablers of Equatorial Guinea's change.