Europe’s Colonial Ghost

Why so many African states are condemned to failure

Troops of the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, near the contested city of Goma in 2013

Since the end of the Second World War, peoples across the planet have thrown off the shackles of European imperialism. All across the map of Africa, countries have done just that, redrawing outdated colonial borders, creating their own governments, and embracing the wonders of capitalism and liberal democracy.

Or at least they’ve tried.

Nation-building in the 21st century is no easy task. All across the continent newly formed governments have collapsed, creating a myriad of so-called “failed states” where the collapse of state institutions necessary for law and order, like the police and judiciary, leave countries in chaos and their governments as little more than ghosts on the world map (Thürer). Today, Somalia is a hotbed of piracy, mired in famine and ruled by competing warlords. The Democratic Republic of the Congo barely exists as a country, rife with insurgency and human rights violations. Both Sudans are still reeling from the consequences of civil war, and Chad remains one of the world’s poorest countries (Messner). Policymakers in the western world looking to help solve Africa’s woes must ask why so many African governments fail.

Many attribute Africa’s woes to tribal conflict, as the borders left behind from the colonial era often forced various ethnic groups to all live unhappily under the same government. However, ethnic tension alone is not enough to bring the failure of a state, as most of the time, tribal disputes are mediated by a third party. In modern times, this third party is usually the national government. Only when the state is too weak to act as an intermediary and enforce its decisions do tensions boil over and turn into armed conflict, as with countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, and Liberia (Driscoll). As such, pointing to ethnic tensions as the explanation for weak governments would be circular reasoning, and would not explain why national governments are too weak to mediate ethnic disputes in the first place.

It’s no coincidence that the Global Fund for Peace’s Fragile States Index ranks South Sudan, the world’s newest state, as the world’s most fragile country. The Fund for Peace looked at the causes of South Sudan’s instability and found that the speed with which the country gained independence was the root cause of its instability. International aid focused on bringing South Sudan independence, largely ignoring the challenge of turning South Sudan into a viable state. As a result, a country politically divided and devoid of infrastructure returned to the brink of civil war soon after its independence (Taft).

South Sudan’s failure reflects a deeper, more fundamental problem. All across the continent, Europe’s colonial ghost has left behind economies that are barely functional for want of incentive, justice systems that are inefficient and corrupt, and political divides both violent and uncompromising. New regimes fail because they ignore these problems and are consequently toppled by military coup or rebel insurgency (Driscoll).

Until these problems are finally solved, no amount of European and American money will fix Africa’s failed states. At the end of the day, only Africa can fix Africa.

Works Cited

Driscoll, Jesse. "Social Conflict and Political Violence in Africa." Stanford Program on International and Cross-Cultural Education. Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Spring 2009. Web. 9 Mar. 2015.

Messner, J.J., and Kendall Lawrence. "Failed States Index 2013: The Troubled Ten." Failed States Index 2013. Global Fund for Peace, 24 June 2014. Web. 12 Mar. 2015.

Taft, Patricia. "Statehood or Bust: The Case of South Sudan." Fragile States Index 2014. Global Fund for Peace, 24 June 2014. Web. 9 Mar. 2015.

Thürer, Daniel. "The "failed State" and International Law. International Committee of the Red Cross, 31 Dec. 1999. Web. 6 Mar. 2015.