Political Odyssey 6: Ghana's self-Induced Economic Mess

?God and Nature first made us what we are, and then out of our own created genius we make ourselves what we want to be. Follow always that great law. Let the sky and God be our limit and Eternity our measurement.? Marcus Garvey.

In this Odyssey, we ask Ghanaians who are now gaining an awareness of the economic mess Ghana has been plunged into, in Pidgin English, ?NA WHO CAUSAM?? That Ghana?s economic mess is self-induced is a fact that can be easily proved. Marcus Garvey, 1887-1940, a Black Nationalist of Jamaican birth and a leading black advocate for the Improvement of black people of African Descent, teaches that there is no limit to what a man or a nation can achieve on their own, using the concept of preparedness as one of their sound moral principles. Likewise, no one can do anything better for Ghanaians than what the determined people of Ghana can do for themselves. Have we done that? The majority opinion would be a resounding No!

Are colonialists responsible for the plight of Ghanaians and of black people? Stella Orakwue, writing in the New African March 2002 Edition said ?Once it was a scramble for Africa; now we're told it is the struggle for Africa. And how the West squirms as it searches for new ways to deal with the Africa it confronts in the 21st century. Each period of European history arrives with its own particular answer to the question: "What shall we do about Africa?" We have had slavery, imperialism, colonialism.., each leading seamlessly to the other. Each created to satisfy the economic and cultural needs of other people's histories. After independence, post-colonialism led us by our greedy and naive noses into debt.? Are Ghanaians capable of knowing when they are being led to the path of perdition? Of course, we do, but choose almost always to tow the FAMA NYAME (Give it to GOD) line. Hence, the neo-colonialism that Nkrumah warned about has thrived and Ghana has faltered.

Kwame Nkrumah, the acclaimed father of Ghana, acknowledged Marcus Garvey, as the greatest influence on his political activism. Nkrumah said, ?Of all the literature that I studied, the book that did more than any other to fire my enthusiasm was ?Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey.? Garvey advocated for Africans to control the wealth of Africa. His teachings were precise and to the point: ?that control of resources, control of self, control of nation, requires preparation?. In 1945, the 5th Pan African Congress held in Manchester, England, attended by Nkrumah, Azikiwe, Kenyatta, Du Bois and other future African leaders, where the ideas of Marcus Garvey were re-examined, gave impetus for the drive in the 1950?s to create African Economic Awareness and to re-define the evils of colonialism.

When Ghana gained political independence, the British colonialist still controlled our economic machine. Nkrumah discovered that most educated Ghanaians, including those who invited him to become General Secretary of UGCC were a serious drag to the aims and goals of Ghana?s nationhood. They did not see the benefits of local traditional and cultural emphasis on state machinery, political and economic. They would conjugate Latin verbs in a heartbeat; recite tomes of English poetry whilst looking down on the wise sayings of the village sage. They would prefer bacon and sausages to Kontomire and local diets. Give them fresh broiled fish and they would ask for imported sardines and tinapa mackerels. John Henrik Clarke?s description of the African goes as well for the Ghanaian elite when he said: ?None of them had been trained to rule an African state by the use of the best of African traditional forms and strategies. As a result African states, in the main, became imitations of European states and most of their leaders could justifiably be called Europeans with black faces. They came to power without improving the lot of their people and these elitist governments continue until this day. In most cases what went wrong was that as these leaders failed to learn the lessons of self-reliance and power preparation as advocated by Marcus Garvey and in different ways by Booker T. Washington, W.E.B Dubois, Elijah Muhammad and Malcolm X. Africa became infiltrated by foreign agents. Africans had forgotten, if they knew at all, that Africa is the world's richest continent, repository of the greatest mineral wealth in the world. They had not asked themselves nor answered the most critical question. If Africa is the world's richest continent, why is it so full of poor people? There is still no unified force in Africa calling attention to the need for this kind of preparation. This preparation calls for a new kind of education if Africans are to face the reality of their survival.?

Stella Orakwue?s moaning 'What shall we do about Africa?' is accompanied by her forceful answer: ?Real, lasting, positive and sustained development in Africa can only be created by Africans, of all classes, themselves. No one else has the motivation or the interest.? Orakwue?s declaration is in accord with Marcus Garvey?s teachings. Nkrumah, in moments of political optimism referred to Africans and for that matter Ghanaians as being capable of managing their affairs. Pessimists on the contrary, would sniff that what Ghanaians are truly capable of, is the ability to mismanage their affairs. Both Nkrumah and the pessimists are not taking something important into consideration in this regard. We are guilty of harboring misplaced priorities. We stand indicted of paying lip service to patriotism. Ghanaians should admit we are a confused lot. We are maintaining an educational system that churns out graduates ready to fit into a Westminster type environment in metropolitan areas, but balk, when slotted into rural areas to even perform mandatory national service. We produce world class medical personnel, lawyers, accountants, engineers and astro-physicists amongst others who easily slide into western systems, but cannot lead the voiceless to demand land reform, irrigation, or re-configure materials used in making village thatch buildings, or re-engineer urban dwelling using all local materials. Some have even sniped that our educational system produces ?illiterate graduates?, not because these graduates cannot hold their own against foreigners, but simply because they cannot hold their own against local conditions and demands!

Ghanaians have said that the colonialists ladder-like railway system from the Capital Accra to Kumasi the hinterland and Takoradi in the West of Ghana and the triangular road network built between these places were to ensure the smooth evacuation of local raw materials from areas where resources were accumulated to the colonial homeland. They point out that railway system in East Africa followed a similar objective. But the question to ask is whether any successive Ghanaian Government, by itself or through private investment, built any additional 1 mile stretch of railway line to augment or improve what the colonialist left behind? Have those not fallen into a state of disrepair, with a do-nothing Ministry of Ports and Railways enjoying taxpayer largesse?

Colonialists exploited raw materials and cheap labour to feed their industries in their homeland. They exercised monopoly, eliminated local competition and used the colonies as dumping grounds. In the first of this writer?s six-part Historical Agricultural Odysseys, on Ghanaweb, it was articulated that the colonialists set up agricultural policies that only encouraged the production of cash export crops and undermined, by neglect, crops for domestic consumption. That policy still exists long after colonialism has ended. Refer to: http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/features/artikel.php?ID=98375 But why should this be so? Why would an independent Ghana still pursue colonial agricultural policies? Why would our educational institutions imbibe foreign influences at the expense of traditional influence? It is a running joke that Ghana?s cemeteries are choked full of dead people with traditional herbal formulas, medical knowledge, traditional wisdom, never passed on from generation to generation which was not the norm in Gold Coast era. Before the advent of the ?book-long? Ghanaian, such knowledge was passed on from family to family. Unfortunately, these were not reduced to writing and have been lost to eternity.

Ghanaians glibly say the colonialists? real objectives were economic exploitation. Nkrumah believed Africans must free themselves and form a political union to control their economic destiny. On attainment of Ghana?s Independence, Nkrumah declared ?The Independence of Ghana is meaningless unless it is linked up with the total liberation of the African Continent.? Those words were original but the idea was not, as Marcus Garvey had already pointed that out. Nevertheless this was the greatest patriotic vision that a leader and a people ought to identify with. In 1914, Marcus Garvey organized the Universal Negro Improvement Association and its coordinating body, the African Communities League. In 1920 the organization held its first convention in New York where Marcus Garvey outlined his plan to build an African nation-state. He set up the Black Star Line which failed just like the Black Star Line Kwame Nkrumah set up when he won power. Again, the idea was sound but the business was poorly managed. Real Intra-African Trade would certainly have given Ghana and Africa real clout to determine the prices of Africa?s commodities, instead of the exploitative processes in place today where New York, London, Brussels and others such as Zurich determine and fix both manufactured goods like cars and electricity plants as well as raw materials from Africa like Gold, Cocoa, Coffee, Bauxite. The whole purpose of this lop-sided arrangement is to keep the African economically weak and dependent.

The West aligned together with other prosperous nations has formed G-8 nations where they meet periodically and the one constant item that appears on their agenda is Africa?s Debts and Impoverishment. As noted above, slavery, imperialism and colonialism morphed into each other. In post colonial era, programmes developed to deal with Africa?s poverty include Devaluation, Economic Recovery Programmes (ERP), Structural Adjustment Programmes (SRP), Poverty Alleviation Programmes (PAP) and lately the ignoble Highly Indebted and Poor Country (HIPC). None of these have worked or show any promise of bearing long lasting effects. In addition, all these programs are viewed, in certain intellectual circles, as being part of what is termed, ?the neocolonialist agenda?.

According to Wikipedia, neocolonialism describes certain economic operations at the international level which have alleged similarities to the traditional colonialism of the 16th to the 19th centuries. The contention is that governments have aimed to control other nations through indirect means; that in lieu of direct military-political control, neocolonialist powers employ economic, financial and trade policies to dominate less powerful countries. Those who subscribe to the concept maintain this amounts to a de facto control over targeted nations.

Critics of neocolonialism portray the choice to grant or to refuse granting loans (particularly those financing otherwise unpayable Third World debt), especially by international financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, as a decisive form of control. They argue that in order to qualify for these loans (as well as other forms of economic aid), weaker nations are forced to take steps (structural adjustments) favourable to the financial interests of the IMF/WB, but detrimental to their own economies and often safety, increasing rather than alleviating their poverty.

Some adjustments mandated by these international financial institutions actually also work to contribute to socio-political instability within an economy. It has been the mantra of the western powers to insist on devaluation to ease a hard pressed economy, like Ghana?s under Busia and that devaluation would reduce trade deficits. The Marshall-Lerner Condition states that the sum of the absolute values of the elasticities of import and export demand must be greater than one in order for a currency devaluation to have the desired positive impact on an economy. This means that for a devaluation to be successful, the local demand for imports must be sufficiently responsive to the now higher prices, whilst foreigners? demand must also simultaneously be suitably responsive to the now-cheaper (to them) domestically produced goods. Whether or not Ghanaian governments take this into consideration when implementing IMF-imposed currency devaluations is something best left for their economic czars to answer. Here was a Ghana that had an economy dictated by export agricultural cash crops whose prices were fixed by the very same people demanding devaluation to make those export cash crops cheaper to them! The problem with Ghana?s currency devaluations is that it does not take local demand into consideration. Ghanaians have been trained by their colonial masters to have a demonstrated preference for foreign and imported goods. As a result, their tendency to consume imports is rather high, and tends to be inelastic with respect to changes in the price of imported goods. Therefore, when the cedi is devalued, the price of imports goes up, but the quantity consumed remains the same; reducing half the effect of the original devaluation. In Ghana?s history, it is the NLC, Busia, and Rawlings, who have introduced currency devaluations of the cedi. The current government has so far not gone down that path and would be well advised to stay clear of this economic tool.

Ghana has a long relationship with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank beginning from Kwame Nkrumah. In 1965, Nkrumah asked for help from the IMF & World Bank. Their response was a prescription of curtailment of government spending as precondition. Nkrumah rejected the conditionality outright and rejected their offer since he was required to stop all capital spending, including schools and hospitals. The NLC coup of 1966 brought International Foreign Institutions (IFI) knocking on Ghana?s door. J. H. Mensah, now NPP?s Senior Minister, was in charge of NLC Finance and he quickly satisfied the conditionalities earlier imposed. Subsequently, Nkrumah?s economic projects were tagged as ?prestigious projects? and abandoned. Busia had as Finance Minister, the same J.H Mensah whose opposition that time to IFI intervention, was ignored and devalued the cedi on December 27, 1971 as a condition to IMF support. Immediately, prices of basic items like sugar, rice, and milk shot up. Seventeen days after Busia?s devaluation of the cedi, on January 13, 1972 coup makers headed by Kutu Acheampong overthrew Busia. Rawlings also devalued the cedi and liberalized trade. The International Community hailed Ghana as one of Africa?s best success stories mainly because during the years 1983-1999, Ghana?s GDP were said to have grown 5-6 percent per year.

Yaw Oduro writing for the March 1, 2004 Edition of Public Agenda Newspaper titled ?NPP pursing same harsh IMF driven policies as NDC? said ?Today we have a government under President Kufuor, which, having lived through the devastating effect of IMF/World Bank policies as opposition party, is spewing out these same nonsensical statistical GDP numbers in complicity with the IMF/World Bank to justify the continuous strangulation of Ghana?s economy and sellout of our sovereignty through HIPC. From 1983 to the present 2004, Ghana?s domestic budget has been vetted, revised, and approved by IMF/World Bank technocrats in Washington with our government having little or no say whatsoever in how we manage our own affairs. How gullible and silly can we be? Our Finance Ministers from Kwesi Botchway to Yaw Osafo- Maafo have been taking their marching orders from the IMF/World Bank since the inception of SAP and HIPC. So much for Ghana?s hard won INDEPENDENCE. Yet the NPP spin-doctors are quick to point out to the suffering masses that the party is ?laying a solid foundation for economic takeoff?, ignoring the fact that in 1990, after seven years of rigorous implementation of IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programs, Rawlings and his NDC government said the same thing when they established the National Development Planning Commission (NDPC) and charged it to ?lay the foundations for accelerated economic growth?. So what are Kufuor and his NPP government doing differently from what Rawlings and the NDC government did from 1983 to 1999? For Christ?s sake, let us use our brains?

Are Ghanaians not architects of their own economic mess? What needs to be done to get back on solid path?

Empower Domestic Producers. Political Odyssey 5, published last week on Ghanaweb, enunciated powerful sentiments that could form the basis for a head on tackling of Ghana?s economic woes. A portion quoted said ?weakness of the African private sector best explains its inability to become an engine of economic development. Africa?s private sector lacks political power and is therefore not free to operate. Above all, it is not free to decide what happens to its savings? Rural poor must become the real owners of their primary asset, land. This is the only way towards environmental improvement, as opposed to the trend of rampant deforestation and desertification. To do this, freehold must be introduced and the so-called communal land-tenure system that in reality is state land ownership - must be abolished?Peasant producers must gain direct access to world markets without the political elite acting as the go-between through state-owned corporations. This means that internationally traded cash crops - such as coffee, tea, cotton, sugar and rubber - must be auctioned by the producers themselves rather than being sold first to state marketing boards.?

But the big question is which Ghanaian leader can develop the political will to make this a reality, when smooth liars are almost always chosen over truthful candidates? Will an electorate vote for someone who will step forward with concrete plan of action, specifying; how and why Land Reform must take precedence over renovation of Minister?s bungalows; how and why massive irrigation of Afram and Accra plains must take precedence over costly official foreign per diem trips in many cases where Ghana?s Ambassadors Abroad should be made to work for their salaries; how and why Aveyime Quality Rice Project should be resuscitated to take precedence over 100 million dollar importation of Foreign Bagged Rice; how and why locally produced health personnel should be remunerated adequately to take precedence over foreign health personnel contracted at huge dollar salaries; how and why petrol guzzling behemoth vehicle owners should be taxed more for every drop of petrol they suck into their tanks; how and why no government official should be assigned such petrol guzzling behemoth vehicles; how and why public officials should live holistic lives otherwise be fired without the need to use taxpayer monies for CHRAJ to re-tell sordid details of their indiscretions, and many more of such matters.

At age 49, two scores plus nine, Ghana is over her middle age. What is there to show? True, Ghana won her political independence, but is struggling and has not succeeded with managing her economy. It is eye-balled in debts and thus lacks economic independence. Three statements by Kwame Nkrumah may appear daunting, even confounding. Yet, if achievable, the answer to Ghana?s plight may be found therein. Nkrumah said: Seek ye first the political kingdom and all other things shall be added unto it. Then he said as quoted above that: The independence of Ghana is meaningless until it is linked up with the total liberation of Africa from colonialism. Nkrumah further called on Africa to unite in 1963, at the Accra Summit of African Heads of State. He said: Africa Must Unite!

The rest of Africa is free of colonial bondage. By virtue of the Africa Union, Ghana is linked up with the rest of Africa. Getting Africa united into a true United States of Africa under one government, or truly modeled after the European Union concept, is still on paper, not in practice. ECOWAS, with its parliament and economic wings, have been set up, however, it is not clear, how effective its rulings weighs on member governments.

It is hoped that a strong leader will emerge, who will be the no-nonsense type, eschewing political shenanigans and going in for a four year term as a matter of service to the electorate, not as the captive of special interest groups or with one eye on re-election and thus temper necessary action for his/her own self-aggrandizement.

To the political pessimist, described in Political Odyssey 4, such a leader is yet to be born of woman and if Christian be baptized in the Densu or Volta River followed by seven immersions into the La Kpeshie Lagoon; if Moslem, must have only one wife, not the customary four; if traditionalist, must stay away from Trokosi, but may swear to Antoaa Nyamaa, La Kpa, Akonnedi and as many other lesser gods the late Eyadema may have recommended before his death, without swallowing Live frogs and Lizards!

To the political optimist as described in Political Odyssey 5, such a leader is in the offing and he will come with tenacity of purpose, imbued with the true mandate of the masses, begin work of the people right after inauguration, be courageous and bold, kind and just, efficient and truthful and be leader of all of the people including those who may not have not voted for him! Ghana will succeed, long before she attains three scores plus ten.

Views expressed by the author(s) do not necessarily reflect those of GhanaHomePage.