Obama’s visit to Ghana: A reflection

The much awaited visit of US President Barrack Obama has come and gone. Many commentators have talked about the importance of visiting Africa not to mention frustrations about his judgement on choice of country. Regardless of the various arguments and counter arguments put forward by these commentators and politicians, President Obama’s visit should in my opinion engage critical analysis other than the choices he made.

President Obama has a way of engaging countries and their peoples. For example, he chose to engage the Arab World via Egypt (not Saudi Arabia). He spoke to the Far East through Russia (not North Korea). Just as there might be some diplomatic and political stratagem in President Obama’s choice of where to make major political statements, it will be sheer waste of energy reading meanings into those choices. Alleged eye brows raised by countries in Africa for being slighted by the US President are equally unnecessary for a continent with far more pressing challenges. What difference does it make if he chooses to speak in Nigeria or the DRC? We need to forge forward, first, by reflecting on what can be picked from his speech. To do this we must try to unpack some of the issues raised by the US President.

Most of the issues raised by President Obama are not new. Several development literature and socio-economic commentaries have spelt out those issues. The difference however is the political dimension added to those issues and its source i.e. coming from a US President with African decent. What the President did not do is to mix his professorial acumen with politics. If he had done so, he would have at least touched on the politics of development and development rights law being a lawyer. Obama’s speech contained relevant points which suits western media; so for the next few days western media would have a good mantra to once again present Africa as a trouble-child. In an exclusive interview with Sky News Political Editor, Adam Boulton, the interviewer mentioned issues about Afghanistan and some troubled states in Africa which I am not surprised about because Afghanistan is Britain’s headache and African immigrants in Britain are not always viewed positively no matter how decent they are. I am yet to hear western media demanding that western companies that buy or pay Afghans to plant poppy should be investigated. There is currently global shortage of opium for pharmaceutical purposes but pharmaceutical companies are threading cautiously in the drug politics and what is going on in Afghanistan. The issue of Afghanistan is more complex with ugly underpinnings than western media and their governments would like unsuspecting and innocent publics to believe. I will not discuss the politics of Afghanistan any further than focusing on Africa. Those interested in the history and global politics of opium and the ‘over-zealous drug control efforts’ according to Human Rights Watch (2009) can read more from: http://opioids.com/timeline/ index.html

President Obama’s admission that much of what he called progress is yet to be translated in practice means that not all is well in many African countries. The fact that Ghana scored one point by ensuring smooth transition from one regime to another does not necessarily make the country a haven. Of course, it is an achievement because most countries have hardly crossed that bridge. It is yet to be seen if Ghana’s success bridge will be blown especially where some politicians threaten fire and brimstone if they do not come to power as was reported in various media during Ghana’s last election.

President Obama’s speech is all about prodding and at the same time encouraging countries with the capacity to follow the example set by Ghana. His speech can best be described as aspirational. The Associated Press quoted the President as saying "This is a new moment of great promise." This does not mean Ghana is that Promised Land. Other countries on the continent have made far better strides. For instance Ghana can not be compared to Botswana or South Africa in governance. The choice of Ghana as Obama’s destination is political, a ‘good’ platform from which western propaganda can launch its motivational strategy for peace and stability in the region.

Associated Press which reported the Obama story said:

… President Obama called for 'good governance' in Africa and hailed Ghana’s thriving democracy. Ghana has created a positive outlook with peaceful transfer of power. It has become a 'model of democracy' in Africa...

There is a double superlative in the president’s speech. It is not possible for a thriving democracy to be a model democracy. ‘Thriving’ means WE ARE DOING WELL but NOT YET THERE. More so, the structure of the above report, i.e. the parenthesis on good governance and model of democracy says much about the doubtfulness of its sustainability. Asking African societies to ‘seize opportunities for peace, democracy and prosperity’ underscores the need to overcome potential volatile factors in order to make progress. This also means that Africans must identify those factors that divide them other than unite them. We need leadership in this direction. In addition, our countries need re-orientation to nation building and nationalism. Another point raised by our guest is good governance.

What is good governance and who defines good governance? Good governance can sometimes be confused with democracy in a country like Ghana. For instance, the founder of the ruling NDC describes democracy as ‘having the basic tenets of probity, accountability, justice and freedom’. He argued in a paper delivered in the Ashanti region that, ‘receiving the will of the people and then sinking into a state of somnolence and a disregard for the will of the people cannot be democracy’ (GHP, 2009). These are elements of good governance. Unfortunately, Rawlings’ text on ‘democracy’ is brailed in revolutionary anarchy (not the rule of law) as if to say that there is no ‘democracy’ or ‘good governance’ without the remission of blood. His reference to revolutions in France, Britain and Russia which swept away autocratic regimes are specific examples of his vision for Ghana. Democracy is a vision of the people just as good governance is an aspiration that electorates expect from those they elect into office. If President Obama says Africa does not need strongmen he is simply reminding perceived strongmen and women in Africa that the line between democracy and good governance may be a fine one but not an impediment; rather the two institutions promote peace, stability and development.

When President Obama says ‘Good governance is about strong institutions’, he is referring to institutions that can stand on their feet to rule against human rights violation or over turn government decisions and expose wrong doing instead of enforcing them. He is talking about structures that will ensure that you do not have to be called “Agymang Owusu” or “Kobla Gboxi” even so “Saied” or “Yusufu” in order to get a job or a scholarship for further studies. This is yet to happen in Ghana.

Let us examine some more quotes from President Obama’s speech on matters relating to democracy, good governance and investment (national or international).

"No country is going to create wealth if its leaders exploit the economy to enrich themselves or if police can be bought off by drug traffickers"

Africa has been pointed to in several literature as the cradle of corruption. I take an exception to this definition. Corruption has several colours and is like a chameleon. It changes its colour and form according to its environment and particular circumstances. Corruption is therefore a global phenomenon. The only difference between what pertains in Africa and the West is that western corruption is “refined” and that of Africa can be described as ‘crude’. Recent media reports of corruption by British politicians are an example. There were those who claimed from the State, contributions they made in Church. Some claimed for personal photographs they took; other took state money for water ponds they constructed for their ducklings; some dodged tax on the grounds that they acted based on advice from their accountants. Some even claimed monies for hiring private accountants to work out their taxes. Yet all these were said to have been done in the spirit of existing laws. There are also clichés like “talking to you behind close doors”, “talking to someone nicely”, “meeting over coffee or beer” etc. Corruption, whatever shape and form they occur can not be justified. There is obvious hypocrisy in hyping corruption in Africa and at the same time good reasons for doing so. Within the western donor community, countries accept within budget lines “facilitation fees”. It is only the United States of America that does not accept this practice. Germany does not accept the practice in Germany but allows it in foreign countries. In other words western countries help African countries to remain corrupt. As for the remote causes of corruption much has been said in various literature. When President Obama says:

"No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top, or the head of the Port Authority is corrupt”

This may be true to some extent but not in all cases. Kickbacks are a fact in business. It may be wrong but the business world has redefined the way neo-liberal economy should work. For this to happen, they talk about the rule of law (which resonates in Obama’s speech). Rule of law play a special role in keeping businesses unscathed by actions that are likely to hinder profitability. It works well in the wider context but at the same time western businesses have used the rule of law negatively. During Obama’s visit there were placard bearing people from the Biafra Community in Ghana some of which read ‘save the people of Biafra’; the US Supreme Court ruling against SHELL (Nigeria) Ltd over human rights violations is a case in point. I look forward to the day international businesses and of course local businesses will live up to their Corporate Social Responsibilities (CSR) in Africa. It is also my hope that the $40 Million dollar fine slapped on SHELL will be channelled to good courses other than individual pockets and bank accounts in the West. The FBI Economic Fraud Bureau scrutinises bank accounts of world leaders (including African leaders) but we are yet to hear or know that they have tendered in huge sums of monies (suspected to be stolen) back to an African State.

Of course, the conditions of many African countries riddled with conflict, serious violations of human rights, and poverty makes it precarious. But like Obama said, Africa can not continue to blame western countries for their situation. It is not as if African’s want to remain beggar nations but the reality of western activities such as trade barriers, unfavourable conditionalities makes the situation much more complex. President Obama, I believe means well, considering his background as African American, but those spectacles are no less than political rhetoric if the root causes of the problems remain challenged. Notwithstanding his statement that ‘no person wants to live in a society where the rule of law gives way to the rule of brutality and bribery’ is true.

Situations of tyranny where people can not express themselves for one reason or the other or because one belongs to an opposition party does not denote a healthy political climate; President Obama must have had good briefing on the matter. The fact that he chose to include tyranny in his speech to politicians under whose eyes Ghana has witnessed violent attacks on political opponents one of which has led to fatality is important (see GPH Report, 2009). The media in Ghana calls the process “contract killing”. Violent robberies are a worry but contract killing of so-called influential people and party opponents etc is more than a moral down grade. Certainly such a society will heighten capital and labour flight from the country. Those who commit this evil with the notion of putting the fear of God in their opponents are doing the country a disservice. I align with Obama’s thinking that ‘this is not democracy; it is tyranny, even if occasionally you sprinkle an election in there’. This style of governance must certainly end. It is political vendettas like these that have led to the many conflicts in Africa. These evil minded allusions of being destined to rule and being repositories of wisdom, often self afflicted, are dangerous mindsets that must be done away with. … Forces of tyranny and corruption must yield if Africa is to achieve its promise.

Now, President Obama has come and gone; the many ordinary men and women who defied harsh weather have all dispersed to their mansions and hamlets to face their realities. My heart goes with those who came from villages to catch a glimpse of this noble son of the land, the school children who had no choice of refusing orders to undertake specific tasks during the visit. For these, what is their portion of gain in the entire furore in Obama’s visit?

Comments on this commentary should be sent to tgokah@yahoo.co.uk

Theophilus Gokah is a former broadcast journalist, sociologist, development scientist and development rights law advocate.