Business in Africa: 1.2B opportunities(economist.com)
economist.com
Business in Africa: 1.2B opportunities
http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21696792-commodity-boom-may-be-over-and-barriers-doing-business-are-everywhere-africas
48 comments
There are numerous opportunities there. But the deterrents may outnumber the opportunities. Examples, lack of electricity, trigger happy governments whose policies are far removed from reality, insane levies on small businesses...
For foreign investors, having an audience with the government is an unwritten requirement. If not, they run the risk of their businesses being nationalized by a new government, or their funds frozen for frivolous reasons.
However for "democratic" African countries, having too close ties with a particular ruling party could pose problems. The next government could give one hell for being for the "other party."
Recently, the Buhari administration in Nigeria restricted all funds leaving the country. Theoretically, no funds were seized. And companies could still wire out their funds but only after lengthy approval processes and were often subject to insane exchange rates.
A common question on everyone's lips is - why won't the looters invest in their countries? That's because the next government makes the seizure of money, property, and businesses the first order of business for the first half of their tenure.
In my experience, Africa metaphorically is a jungle. Only psychopath and predator minded individuals thrive there.
For foreign investors, having an audience with the government is an unwritten requirement. If not, they run the risk of their businesses being nationalized by a new government, or their funds frozen for frivolous reasons.
However for "democratic" African countries, having too close ties with a particular ruling party could pose problems. The next government could give one hell for being for the "other party."
Recently, the Buhari administration in Nigeria restricted all funds leaving the country. Theoretically, no funds were seized. And companies could still wire out their funds but only after lengthy approval processes and were often subject to insane exchange rates.
A common question on everyone's lips is - why won't the looters invest in their countries? That's because the next government makes the seizure of money, property, and businesses the first order of business for the first half of their tenure.
In my experience, Africa metaphorically is a jungle. Only psychopath and predator minded individuals thrive there.
It sounds like the problem is government.
It's not just the government. It's also the:
1. Expectations of citizens
2. Love of Complexity
3. Culture of respect
Expectations of citizens
In Nigeria and Ghana for instance, people EXPECT government officials to steal. One who doesn't would be a laughing stock. (No joke)
Love of COMPLEXITY
Rural dwellers prefer politicians who speak using big words that often make no sense. Here's an example Patrick Obahiagbon. (Unfortunately, his words make sense grammatically. However there are those that throw out meaningless words.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1bt-GyxiYI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSddKH1ZO-U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozxY6V-vx-0
City dwellers are not exempt. Big sounding agendas like vision 20/20, revolutionary council... fool the populace. Moneies are spent but the people are left the same
The Culture
Many African countries have an undue, almost irrational culture of respect for elders. For instance, there are differences in verbs and adjectives used when speaking to someone older than yourself in Yoruba language. Ghana and Nigeria frown upon the use of left hand for waving, writing, handshake, eating, even raising of hand for answering a question.
Many have active traditional rulers and kings. Elders typically should not be questioned, at least not without going the roundabout way of hinting and finally acquiescing to the the choice of the leader.
This respect for authority extends to the University - which should be a place for questioning of ideas. I've got lots of painful memories as someone who prefers practicality over tradition.
Here's a well documented example of the effect of cultural deference to authorities http://blogs.wsj.com/middleseat/2008/12/04/malcolm-gladwell-...
1. Expectations of citizens
2. Love of Complexity
3. Culture of respect
Expectations of citizens
In Nigeria and Ghana for instance, people EXPECT government officials to steal. One who doesn't would be a laughing stock. (No joke)
Love of COMPLEXITY
Rural dwellers prefer politicians who speak using big words that often make no sense. Here's an example Patrick Obahiagbon. (Unfortunately, his words make sense grammatically. However there are those that throw out meaningless words.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1bt-GyxiYI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSddKH1ZO-U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozxY6V-vx-0
City dwellers are not exempt. Big sounding agendas like vision 20/20, revolutionary council... fool the populace. Moneies are spent but the people are left the same
The Culture
Many African countries have an undue, almost irrational culture of respect for elders. For instance, there are differences in verbs and adjectives used when speaking to someone older than yourself in Yoruba language. Ghana and Nigeria frown upon the use of left hand for waving, writing, handshake, eating, even raising of hand for answering a question.
Many have active traditional rulers and kings. Elders typically should not be questioned, at least not without going the roundabout way of hinting and finally acquiescing to the the choice of the leader.
This respect for authority extends to the University - which should be a place for questioning of ideas. I've got lots of painful memories as someone who prefers practicality over tradition.
Here's a well documented example of the effect of cultural deference to authorities http://blogs.wsj.com/middleseat/2008/12/04/malcolm-gladwell-...
> The next government could give one hell for being for the "other party".
Many of the inefficiencies of the US government were deliberate trade-offs made to avoid examples of this pattern that fell under the general name of the "spoils system".
Many of the inefficiencies of the US government were deliberate trade-offs made to avoid examples of this pattern that fell under the general name of the "spoils system".
> "In my experience, Africa metaphorically is a jungle. Only psychopath and predator minded individuals thrive there."
I would think HN readers were a bit more enlightened that this, no? Such absolutist pronouncements remind me of Yahoo news
I would think HN readers were a bit more enlightened that this, no? Such absolutist pronouncements remind me of Yahoo news
I'm African btw. My personal experience from my own country, neighboring countries and what I've read made me come to that conclusion.
Nice people are routinely walked over and preyed upon. On the other hand, people whose only care about you stops after collecting your money are the successful ones.
You may have found genuinely successful nice people. But I haven't.
For instance, my mum's business remained very unprofitable until my dad... One who fits the psych group above took over money matters.
I lost my own life's savings at one point and owed some more after running a joint business with some friends. The business was very successful in my point of view.
I set out to make sure that the customer experience was superb. And that our customers were always satisfied. I achieved that. The partners on the other hand were emptying the company coffers.
Nice people are routinely walked over and preyed upon. On the other hand, people whose only care about you stops after collecting your money are the successful ones.
You may have found genuinely successful nice people. But I haven't.
For instance, my mum's business remained very unprofitable until my dad... One who fits the psych group above took over money matters.
I lost my own life's savings at one point and owed some more after running a joint business with some friends. The business was very successful in my point of view.
I set out to make sure that the customer experience was superb. And that our customers were always satisfied. I achieved that. The partners on the other hand were emptying the company coffers.
> In western countries it's almost unimaginable to not be able to rely on banks to store your money safely
My relative lost seven figures from Cypriot bank just a few years ago. In Greece bank will not allow you to withdraw money or transfer it to foreign country.
My relative lost seven figures from Cypriot bank just a few years ago. In Greece bank will not allow you to withdraw money or transfer it to foreign country.
In Italy the government helped itself to current accounts with overnight decrees "in times of crisis", even more than once.
Your friend is likely making stuff up. This is not to say that there isn't lot of corruption and nepotism that one needs to fight against in order to setup a business there, but this is the first time I hear about bank employees stealing money from private accounts. The situation down here is pretty bad, but not that bad.
Pardon my repeating what sounds like a cliche, but Africa is indeed a big place.
I do not know of the situation on Ethiopia, but my first-hand knowledge (being originally from Ghana and now living in the US) is that banks are generally just as reliable as in the West. It would have been shocking to lose money to bank employees without recourse.
Of course a run on the bank is a different matter, but I never saw one in decades of living there.
I do not know of the situation on Ethiopia, but my first-hand knowledge (being originally from Ghana and now living in the US) is that banks are generally just as reliable as in the West. It would have been shocking to lose money to bank employees without recourse.
Of course a run on the bank is a different matter, but I never saw one in decades of living there.
This is one of the cases where using an "offshore" account to hold most of your money is probably justified.
It doesn't work all the time. This is because the new government really spends a lot of time tracing looted funds. As I mentioned earlier, it could dominate the first year of a four year term.
So, they travel to Switzerland, US, Dubai... And get list of properties, accounts, even companies owned by past government officials.
To prevent seizure, the incumbents go a step further and some how grab powers that even the current government can't touch. (I really can't explain it but that's how it now works.)
So, the only thing the new government can do is complain, and leak lists of properties, accounts owned by people in the outgoing regime.
Furthermore, through a gradual desensitization process, people no longer care if stolen money is repatriated because we all know that the money is only moving from one set of thieves to the other.
So, they travel to Switzerland, US, Dubai... And get list of properties, accounts, even companies owned by past government officials.
To prevent seizure, the incumbents go a step further and some how grab powers that even the current government can't touch. (I really can't explain it but that's how it now works.)
So, the only thing the new government can do is complain, and leak lists of properties, accounts owned by people in the outgoing regime.
Furthermore, through a gradual desensitization process, people no longer care if stolen money is repatriated because we all know that the money is only moving from one set of thieves to the other.
I wonder if this motivates some people to store their money in offshore accounts.
I lived in Uganda a few years ago, and pirating movies, burning them to disc, and selling them from a brick and mortar storefront was considered a good job for young people, in the north at least. There are way more than 1.2B opportunities there. People setup power-strips in their neighborhood and charge people small fees to leave their phone for a charge. People walk around the streets hawking everything imaginable, you can buy toilet paper, fresh produce, posters and toys, all while sitting in a traffic jam. I had a guy who sold me eggs, and he was my egg guy, and every week I'd stop by and he'd sell me a carton of eggs wrapped in twine. It's just an overall interesting place with tons of opportunities and existing ingenuity.
Not much has been said about the IT industry. Until recently transaction processing was a huge impediment as Paypal and the likes were blocking transactions coming from most of Africa. Then there is an inherent problem of physical addressing, which also impedes delivery and a host of GPS dependent services from having a good traction. Much of what has been done recently is to improvise or innovate to suit existing systems eg Mpesa
No recognition for developers or apps
There is still a lot of untapped opportunities existing at the bottom, You just have to look closely once the cost of access and speed of the internet, intermittent supply or electricity and load-shedding issues have been dealt with.
There is still a lot of untapped opportunities existing at the bottom, You just have to look closely once the cost of access and speed of the internet, intermittent supply or electricity and load-shedding issues have been dealt with.
If you run a large business in Africa there is a very real chance you will need to bride people, including government officials. Also, many African countries have captial controls, so getting our money back out requires breaking the spirit of the law (such as importing good and services at heavily inflated prices from a company you own in the West).
So need to be willing to break local laws and also break your home country laws if your country has laws against bribing government officials.
Many people have a moral objection to bribery or a self interest in not ever risking going to to prison (for me it's both).
In my industry every few years the Feds make a couple arrests for bribing government officials in Africa.
So need to be willing to break local laws and also break your home country laws if your country has laws against bribing government officials.
Many people have a moral objection to bribery or a self interest in not ever risking going to to prison (for me it's both).
In my industry every few years the Feds make a couple arrests for bribing government officials in Africa.
One reason China does ok as they are fairly laid back on that stuff.
It's not just because gift giving is an accepted practice in China. It's because they are very flexible.
They are VERY willing to offer you a service at any price range you want. American businesses in particular are not so flexible on price and standard.
One popular way of stealing funds is awarding of road contrasts. The German company Julius Berger makes solid roads that lasts for at least a decade.
Typically, or rationally, Berger should win every road contract. However, the officials do not want a road that would last for ten years because it'll cut their lucrative source of income.
They are VERY willing to offer you a service at any price range you want. American businesses in particular are not so flexible on price and standard.
One popular way of stealing funds is awarding of road contrasts. The German company Julius Berger makes solid roads that lasts for at least a decade.
Typically, or rationally, Berger should win every road contract. However, the officials do not want a road that would last for ten years because it'll cut their lucrative source of income.
What in the world.. I would expect better..
Africa is not a country, you can't speak about it as such. The North, West, East and South are as different as any two random countries in the world and within each there is even more diversity.
South Africa is a first world country, Nigeria is a crazy mix of poverty and development, Kenya is bursting with technology innovators taking their first steps, Burundi is barely hanging in there.
You can't use the term Africa and make any general statement about it, it is just too damn big and varied. Most people just have no concept of the scale there, but I always love pointing people to this map to help: http://static02.mediaite.com/geekosystem/uploads/2010/10/tru...
Yes there is tremendous opportunity in various countries there, and yes, they come with caveats, but please, let's stop treating an entire continent as if it was a country.
Africa is not a country, you can't speak about it as such. The North, West, East and South are as different as any two random countries in the world and within each there is even more diversity.
South Africa is a first world country, Nigeria is a crazy mix of poverty and development, Kenya is bursting with technology innovators taking their first steps, Burundi is barely hanging in there.
You can't use the term Africa and make any general statement about it, it is just too damn big and varied. Most people just have no concept of the scale there, but I always love pointing people to this map to help: http://static02.mediaite.com/geekosystem/uploads/2010/10/tru...
Yes there is tremendous opportunity in various countries there, and yes, they come with caveats, but please, let's stop treating an entire continent as if it was a country.
South Africa seems to be having a lot of trouble lately, of a sort that doesn't comport with most people's understanding of 'first-world' country.
https://www.google.com/search?q=south+africa+trouble
https://www.google.com/search?q=is+south+africa+safe+for+whi...
https://www.google.com/search?q=south+africa+violence
Accounts of Johannesburg:
http://imgur.com/BO5YwQl
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuNYOwKlDIE
https://www.google.com/search?q=south+africa+trouble
https://www.google.com/search?q=is+south+africa+safe+for+whi...
https://www.google.com/search?q=south+africa+violence
Accounts of Johannesburg:
http://imgur.com/BO5YwQl
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuNYOwKlDIE
Racist 4chan screenshots, really?
South Africa is a complicated country, but it's not like the "first world" (US in primis) is completely void of huge ghettoes and racial issues.
South Africa is a complicated country, but it's not like the "first world" (US in primis) is completely void of huge ghettoes and racial issues.
I really don't understand the cherry picking of arguments. Someone posts 6 links and you have a problem with one. So what?
Anyways south Africa is definitely not a first world country. Gdp per head at ppp is 13k[1]. This is substantially poorer than countries like Turkey and Thailand that are often considered third world.
Middle income though? Sure.
[1]http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?order=...
Anyways south Africa is definitely not a first world country. Gdp per head at ppp is 13k[1]. This is substantially poorer than countries like Turkey and Thailand that are often considered third world.
Middle income though? Sure.
[1]http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?order=...
That was just one striking on the ground account, the recounter didn't seem 'racist.'
You can find plenty of other info from more respectable sources. Albeit more staid in presentation.
http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2015-12-09-the-da...
You can find plenty of other info from more respectable sources. Albeit more staid in presentation.
http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2015-12-09-the-da...
Why did stable governmental structures evolve in the west that allow citizens in those countries to enjoy greater prosperity?
Why is it that citizens with relatively stable but more authoritarian governments, in the far and middle east for example, seem to enjoy less relative prosperity than the west? (save singapore)
What makes singapore special?
Is the greater prosperity enjoyed in the west simply a function of the characteristics of the people living in the west?
Are the types of governments found in various regions simply a reflection of the people living in those regions?
(I don't mean a one to one reflection, I don't think everyone living under a ruthless dictatorship have themselves the characteristics of a ruthless dictator, but are they simply more tolerant or accepting of this societal arrangement?)
Why is it that citizens with relatively stable but more authoritarian governments, in the far and middle east for example, seem to enjoy less relative prosperity than the west? (save singapore)
What makes singapore special?
Is the greater prosperity enjoyed in the west simply a function of the characteristics of the people living in the west?
Are the types of governments found in various regions simply a reflection of the people living in those regions?
(I don't mean a one to one reflection, I don't think everyone living under a ruthless dictatorship have themselves the characteristics of a ruthless dictator, but are they simply more tolerant or accepting of this societal arrangement?)
It took the west a long time to figure out the stable government structures. I saw one theory that civilisation started around the Med because it was easy to get about by boat and was slow in Africa because it was pretty hard to get about before jet aviation. I figure that now they've got internet they'll catch up.
Hans Rosling's thing is interesting showing Africa catching a bit towards the end https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
Hans Rosling's thing is interesting showing Africa catching a bit towards the end https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
Interesting video, but the two axis graph he presents is not a particularly good method for understanding the development of the world. Especially when one of those axes is average life expectancy from birth, which is mostly an illustration of the fact that we figured out how to significantly reduce infant mortality. Yes we figured that out likely due in part to the growing prosperity in society but there are I believe better ways for understanding development and prosperity around the world.
Maybe some nations just express their prosperity in different ways. For example the awe-inspiring artifacts of the ancient cultures in Europe and other areas. While maybe ancient cultures in the South Pacific were content to just chill on the beach, or cross the seas, or on Easter Island, do that Easter Island thing.
It took the west a long time to figure out the stable government structures.
What do you mean by that?
Those 'cultures around the med' were basically the longest lived in the history of the world. In many ways they are still living.
Europe has enjoyed great prosperity in for over 2500 years. Waxing and waning in terms of breadth perhaps. But not hard to find throughout the historical record.
Maybe some nations just express their prosperity in different ways. For example the awe-inspiring artifacts of the ancient cultures in Europe and other areas. While maybe ancient cultures in the South Pacific were content to just chill on the beach, or cross the seas, or on Easter Island, do that Easter Island thing.
It took the west a long time to figure out the stable government structures.
What do you mean by that?
Those 'cultures around the med' were basically the longest lived in the history of the world. In many ways they are still living.
Europe has enjoyed great prosperity in for over 2500 years. Waxing and waning in terms of breadth perhaps. But not hard to find throughout the historical record.
I mean that in the UK say, we only moved to a constitutional monarchy and had a bill of rights in 1689. And there have been glitches like Hitler and Franco coming to power. Europe has only really been stable and fully democratic government structure wise since Franco died in 1975.
> What makes singapore special?
Competent mostly benevolent ~dictatorship for ~50 years? :)
Competent mostly benevolent ~dictatorship for ~50 years? :)
Not so long ago, Singapore was a swampy backwater with no natural resources while Zimbabwe/Rhodesia was an agricultural powerhouse rich in natural resources. Was Lee Kuan Yew just way more competent and benevolent than Robert Mugabe?
4 billion by the end of the century, if current trends continue. It is however likely that Malthus will intervene before then. Depending on exactly what you're selling, you may or may not want to be anywhere nearby (including Europe, it looks like) when that happens.
http://www.citylab.com/design/2014/09/africas-population-wil...
http://www.citylab.com/design/2014/09/africas-population-wil...
Certainly you're familiar with The Population Bomb from 1968[1], predicting mass starvation by the '80s.
Africa is huge, and 4 billion could live there. But will there be mass starvation? If they got to 4 billion, then I'd say not ;-)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb
Africa is huge, and 4 billion could live there. But will there be mass starvation? If they got to 4 billion, then I'd say not ;-)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb
Only if climate change doesn't render Malthus redundant by turning the planet unlivable well before the end of the century as it looks bound to happen. You at least won't be be able to put the blame for that on africans...
Also current refugee crisis in Europe is caused to a large extent by people fleeing political crisis in the middle east, a significantly wealthier region than Africa. The trickle of african migrants that was reaching Europe illegally via the mediterranean has always been overly exaggerated numbers-wise. It's a sad reality for those who see no option but to risk their lives that way, but I doubt Europe will ever have anything to fear from boat immigrants from Africa like you seem to suggest.
> It is however likely that Malthus will intervene
Malthus isn't an inevitability. Strong institutions that balance local-responsiveness and long-term-planning could have prevented things like the Irish Potato Famine.
Malthus isn't an inevitability. Strong institutions that balance local-responsiveness and long-term-planning could have prevented things like the Irish Potato Famine.
It's a shame the West abandoned Africa to the warlords and tribal supremacists.
Think of what Africans could've accomplished with consistent, basic decent governance from the top, over the last ~50 years. Hong Kong, anyone?
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. White guilt is a staggeringly destructive impulse. It makes me sad.
Think of what Africans could've accomplished with consistent, basic decent governance from the top, over the last ~50 years. Hong Kong, anyone?
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. White guilt is a staggeringly destructive impulse. It makes me sad.
Clearly one way of looking at that is "abandoned after having extracted millions of Africans (as slaves) and significant amounts of raw materials". While plenty of guilt for the current state of affairs lies at the feet of Africans running corrupt governments and industries, most would agree that the West set the stage. That said, it's hard to know if the people who are suffering under the current conditions would or wouldn't be willing to consider outsourcing the running of things (or perhaps that's what China is offering, in fact).
"Set" as in the present verb: "the West" is still very much meddling in African politics, France in particular routinely engages in direct military terms all over the continent.
France in particular routinely engages in direct military terms
How much of it is of the sort described in the article, of securing safe passage for french citizens out of Cote d'Ivoire because a civil war was breaking out?
How much of it is of the sort described in the article, of securing safe passage for french citizens out of Cote d'Ivoire because a civil war was breaking out?
From wikipedia: "French forces returned to Côte d'Ivoire in 2011 to remove the Ivorian president. In the same year, France played a pivotal role in the 2011 military intervention in Libya against Muammar Gaddafi. The year after, France intervened in Mali during that country's civil war"...
>Think of what Africans could've accomplished with consistent, basic decent governance from the top, over the last ~50
What I'm about to say is a mixture of facts and pure speculations.
There was a Ghananian president called Kwame Nkrumah. He wanted a unified West Africa. If you check the dates of independence of many west African countries, you'll notice they revolve around the 60s. A Judge in Ghana told me that Nkrumh was the cause.
He set up schools training "revolutionaries," teaching them governance and how to fight. And this hastened their independence - Nigeria was one.
His plan was a united Africa where the countries trade amongst each other. And would not be forced to accept rates dictated by the west for their produce.
Unfortunately, before he could effect lasting change he was overthrown. And he ran to Guinea where he was made a co-president. (I see the CIA's hand here (IMO))
It's not like governments only know how to loot. A chief source of problem is the rapid change of policies. A new government used to mean a completely different environment and rules for businesses.
So, you have one step in one direction and then the next government moves two steps in the opposite direction. Partisian thinking is just ridiculous.
Another big problem is tribalism. It's so big a problem that I'm chuckling right now. A person is often elected for no other reason than the tribe the person represents. The current Nigerian president is on that seat for that very reason.
According to people I've Nigerians I've talked to, there would have been a killing rampage by the Hausas if the current president didn't win.
What I'm about to say is a mixture of facts and pure speculations.
There was a Ghananian president called Kwame Nkrumah. He wanted a unified West Africa. If you check the dates of independence of many west African countries, you'll notice they revolve around the 60s. A Judge in Ghana told me that Nkrumh was the cause.
He set up schools training "revolutionaries," teaching them governance and how to fight. And this hastened their independence - Nigeria was one.
His plan was a united Africa where the countries trade amongst each other. And would not be forced to accept rates dictated by the west for their produce.
Unfortunately, before he could effect lasting change he was overthrown. And he ran to Guinea where he was made a co-president. (I see the CIA's hand here (IMO))
It's not like governments only know how to loot. A chief source of problem is the rapid change of policies. A new government used to mean a completely different environment and rules for businesses.
So, you have one step in one direction and then the next government moves two steps in the opposite direction. Partisian thinking is just ridiculous.
Another big problem is tribalism. It's so big a problem that I'm chuckling right now. A person is often elected for no other reason than the tribe the person represents. The current Nigerian president is on that seat for that very reason.
According to people I've Nigerians I've talked to, there would have been a killing rampage by the Hausas if the current president didn't win.
If the people choose independence, for better or worse, there's nothing that the west could have done about it. What do you suggest, that colonialists crush the independence movements to keep governing? That would fly in the face of what one could call basic decent governance. Not to mention the intention of the colonizers which very arguably was to extract value for themselves first, and then maybe help africans accomplish something somewhere down the list.
The British which colonized many West African countries did something worse than quenching the independence movement in Nigeria.
From History books I've read and talks with the older guys, the British pursued a divide and conquer approach to keep the country dependent for a long time.
The Western part of Nigeria had the highest rate of education (still does). The Easterners were more interested in business than in school or politics. And the Northerners had the worst education rates, procreated regardless of resources to take care of the children but were very obedient.
So the British pushed for them to enter the military. And they did enmasse. Till date, the military training facilities still exist only in the northern states.
The string of coups, looting and stupid policies that dragged the country down were done mainly by the Northern born heads of states e.g. Buhari, Abacha, IBB. They are interesting reads btw.
"Together we stand, divided we fall" I believe is a lesson these countries need to internalize FIRST, before any meaningful progress can be achieved. And this bonding is easy to achieve.
"Nothing bonds like having a common enemy." - Blair Warren.
US presidents have always done a good job of providing a clear enemy. For their founding, the enemies changed at different times. From the Indians, to the black slaves, and finally to the British.
Later, it was communism. The time when the USSR was the enemy resulted in a lot of innovations and development (internet, satellite launch, moon landing...) for the country.
From History books I've read and talks with the older guys, the British pursued a divide and conquer approach to keep the country dependent for a long time.
The Western part of Nigeria had the highest rate of education (still does). The Easterners were more interested in business than in school or politics. And the Northerners had the worst education rates, procreated regardless of resources to take care of the children but were very obedient.
So the British pushed for them to enter the military. And they did enmasse. Till date, the military training facilities still exist only in the northern states.
The string of coups, looting and stupid policies that dragged the country down were done mainly by the Northern born heads of states e.g. Buhari, Abacha, IBB. They are interesting reads btw.
"Together we stand, divided we fall" I believe is a lesson these countries need to internalize FIRST, before any meaningful progress can be achieved. And this bonding is easy to achieve.
"Nothing bonds like having a common enemy." - Blair Warren.
US presidents have always done a good job of providing a clear enemy. For their founding, the enemies changed at different times. From the Indians, to the black slaves, and finally to the British.
Later, it was communism. The time when the USSR was the enemy resulted in a lot of innovations and development (internet, satellite launch, moon landing...) for the country.
China is massively investing in Africa, and there is a growing political tension for that :-(
Maybe they are more interested in African raw materials than Africa as a market?
It's beyond that. I read about the origin of the world "third world countries." It so happened that the original meaning wasn't "poor countries" but countries that did not align themselves to the two great powers at the time.
First world were the NATO group while the second world were the rusians and their alies... See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World
Africa is growing economically, and I think China sees Africa as an economic insurance. E.g there are people in the US who want US to block imports from China.
Additionally, I think they want to take over the role of US as the guardian so to say. It's a step towards making their own currency the dominant international currency instead of the US dollar.
First world were the NATO group while the second world were the rusians and their alies... See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World
Africa is growing economically, and I think China sees Africa as an economic insurance. E.g there are people in the US who want US to block imports from China.
Additionally, I think they want to take over the role of US as the guardian so to say. It's a step towards making their own currency the dominant international currency instead of the US dollar.
Africa has never been short of potential, but that doesn't mean it will live up to it in our lifetime.
In western countries it's almost unimaginable to not be able to rely on banks to store your money safely. They are typically the most conservative and reliable institutions among the chain of various business services you'd have to deal with as an entrepreneur. Without this critical underlying consumer-level infrastructure in place I'm in no hurry to be a pioneer there.
Despite my friends making similar claims about the endless low-hanging fruit opportunities there to make money.