FW: Barack Obama tells Africa to stop blaming colonialism for problems
Assensoh, Akwasi B.
From: ifat...@gmail.com <http://www.freedomnewspaper.com/Homepage/tabid/36/newsid367/8807/Barack-Obama-tells-Africa-to-stop-blaming-colonialism-for-problems/Default.aspx>
http://www.freedomnewspaper.com/Homepage/tabid/36/newsid367/8807/Barack-Obama-tells-Africa-to-stop-blaming-colonialism-for-problems/Default.aspx
Barack Obama tells Africa to stop blaming colonialism for problems
President Barack Obama has told African leaders it is time to stop blaming colonialism and "Western oppression" for the continent's manifold problems.
By Alex Spillius in Washington 12:28AM BST 09 Jul 2009
Ahead of a visit to Ghana at the weekend, he said: "Ultimately, I'm a big believer that Africans are responsible for Africa.
"I think part of what's hampered advancement in Africa is that for many years we've made excuses about corruption or poor governance, that this was somehow the consequence of neo-colonialism, or the West has been oppressive, or racism â?? I'm not a big â??
I'm not a believer in excuses.
Mr Obama, the son of a Kenyan, added: "I'd say I'm probably as knowledgeable about African history as anybody who's occupied my office. And I can give you chapter and verse on why the colonial maps that were drawn helped to spur on conflict, and the terms of
trade that were uneven emerging out of colonialism.
"And yet the fact is we're in 2009," continued the US president. "The West and the United States has not been responsible for what's happened to Zimbabwe's economy over the last 15 or 20 years.
"It hasn't been responsible for some of the disastrous policies that we've seen elsewhere in Africa. And I think that it's very important for African leadership to take responsibility and be held accountable."
Mr Obama told AllAfrica.com <http://AllAfrica.com> that he chose Ghana for his first trip to the continent as president to highlight the country's development as a democracy.
Providing glimpses of a speech to be delivered in Accra on Saturday, he explained: "Ghana has now undergone a couple of successful elections in which power was transferred peacefully, even a very close election."
Mr Obama made it clear that Kenya's ongoing instability had ruled out his father's homeland as an initial destination, despite the euphoria it would have produced.
Source:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/
--
--
Indiana University, Bloomington.
kenneth harrow
on the other hand, "The West and the United States," as well as CHina and the rest of the global economic apparatus are far more responsible for the economies of the world than ever before in history.
but why would the chiefs of a neoliberal global economy want to accept responsibility for its effects abroad?
ken
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsub...@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
-- kenneth w. harrow faculty excellence advocate distinguished professor of english michigan state university department of english 619 red cedar road room C-614 wells hall east lansing, mi 48824 ph. 517 803 8839 har...@msu.edu
Anunoby, Ogugua
It is for every country to correctly identify, define, fight for and protect its national interests. A country fails to do all the above at her peril. A country may not reasonably blame another for its avoidable failures. Brazil, China, South Korea, Malaysia, and Taiwan among others are all well aware of the realities of international relations including trade and investment. They take advantage of them rather than fall victims to them. They have all figured out how to successfully navigate the turbulent seas. African countries prefer to moan and groan and blame all but themselves for their victimhood and lack of success. I would soon be reminded that South Korea was a client state of the United States. So was Mobutu’s Zaire (Congo Kinshasa) for many years too. The difference that leadership made in both countries is clear for all to see.
All through history some civilizations and countries have sought, sometimes successfully to dominated others. That will never change. It is for each country to avoid the domination and exploitation of another or other countries. If a country will not get rich by developing, trusting, and using its people to exploit her natural resources for example, it has by default chosen to collect royalties, taxes, and some fees from other countries she allows to exploit same resources. One example is instructive. South Korea is today an exporter of crude petroleum exploitation technology even though she is barely an oil producing country. Why isn’t Nigeria? Nigeria cannot and will not because her engineers are abandoning engineering careers in droves, and seeking careers in banking, finance, politics, and commerce- buying an selling. Nigeria’s universities continue to lose much of their strategic relevance and value. They are increasingly becoming grossly underfunded grace and favor institutions. Has anyone noticed? Is Great Britain responsible for these development too? Can a country be more fertile for foreign exploitation?
oa
kenneth harrow
haven't circumstances changed somewhat, or largely, w globalization? when apple finds a tax haven in ireland, or wherever; when sony buys a major hollywood studio; when my toyota is made in california; when everybody's t-shirts are made in china and bangladesh, when china makes apple computers and i phones, when all these major corporations have globalized, i dare you to identify something as coherent as a national state in pure economic terms.
i know it isn't a simple picture, and i defer to the economists and poly sci people to explain this to me
ken
Anunoby, Ogugua
Changes have taken place indeed. Are African countries better or worse off following the changes? I would say the latter. Globalization is at the same time a threat and an opportunity. It is for each country to position herself to thrive with and in it. Globalization has for example driven the shifted of some manufacturing activities and collaterally technical knowledge and skills to Asia and Central and South America (ACSA) but not to Africa? ACSA countries are slowly but surely closing the economic development gap while African countries by volition, allowing the widening of the gap. Why is Africa mostly outside the current industrialization loop? Bad politics seems to be one answer. African countries’ leaders have continued to ensure that their countries have more industrialization failure factors than success factors. Their countries therefore have few or no competitive advantages that stand them in good stead to be distinctly competitive and attractive to local and international capital for especially manufacturing investment. Is it any surprise that their countries have remained plantations and extraction fields, and exporters of raw materials well after there is near general unanimity that more value and wealth are created in the processing raw materials than in producing them. Under-development is a choice. Development is no longer a choice. It is imperative in today’s world.