Anonymous

Numerous communication debacles have not gone unnoticed since the swearing in of president William Ruto. The first fiasco was the diplomatic dilemma Kenya got embroiled in, the first few days of Ruto’s presidency. It essentially began with the president recognizing the presence of the president of Sahrawi Republic during the swearing in ceremony after which a visit by the Moroccan foreign minister Nasser Bourita forced the government to rescind the decision and promising to wind up the visit by Sahrawi delegation. This information which was posted on twitter was later deleted and the government once again stood with their earlier decision of recognizing Sahrawi Republic in line with the AU official position. As of September,2022 only 45 of the 193 countries of the United Nations recognized Sahrawi Arab Republic as a country. The disputed region is mostly controlled by the Moroccan government. This first incident created an undesirable precedent as the government settled. It was the sign of many such communication mismatch to occur.

Communication by prominent government officials such as the cabinet secretaries has also been ceaselessly out of order. Various government officials have had to withdraw their earlier statements after it didn’t go well with the general public. The education cabinet secretary Dr. Machogu and Aisha Jumwa, public service, affirmative action and gender cabinet secretary have within a short period found themselves reversing their declarations made just days earlier after being ceremoniously sworn in. These were what most political analysts regarded as roadside pronouncement befitting only of political roadside rallies. Dr. Machogu announced the stopping of government subsidy for university education while Aisha Jumwa promised to increase the salaries of all civil servants. This kind of gratuitous rhetoric has been preponderant in this new administration.

In the thanksgiving ceremonies held by president William Ruto,he has been faulted for continuously promising to carry out unfeasible projects in the areas where the ceremonies are being held. The number of these appealing promises are increasing day by day while the campaign pledges seem to have been abandoned sooner than expected. The deputy president Rigathi Gachagua has also been persistently castigated for being unprofessional in delivering speeches and continuously attacking the former president Uhuru Kenyatta and former prime minister Raila Odinga as well as incessantly lamenting about the situation back then. All these points to the lack of or incompetency of the government communication sector to effectively carry out their duty. The last and the latest example is related to the issue of GMOs. The trade investment and industry cabinet secretary made very amateurish remarks regarding GMOs and this has ignited a debate in the social, political and economic circles. The statement was not befitting of a government official whether it was meant as a joke. A cabinet secretary saying that nothing is wrong with adding GMOs to the long list of things that compete to kill Kenyans was unheard of. This was a new low as far as communication is concerned.

All these communication failures point to the glaring issue of a lack of a sound communication policy within the higher echelons of power. It can also be as a result of the incompetency of those tasked primarily regulating government communication. Every government department has a communication sector whose sole duty is to streamline what comes out of our institutions and our leaders. The communication by top government officials should be streamlined in a manner that is ethical and professional. The communication should also be synchronized with government policy and sustainable development plans. In summary government officials should speak with one voice. Remember government officials are the face of a country and its top ambassadors. The case of Sahrawi Republic almost blew up relationship between Kenya and Morocco and could have become a diplomatic catastrophe for Kenya as a country. Such should be quickly remedied through efficient communication and future cases prevented to through timely and systematic communication.

A communication policy outlines important aspects of communication for any organization. Questions like who speaks for the government? What types of information should be divulged to the public? And the channels and modes to be used are all answered by the policy. These cases could have been avoided if there was a strong national communication policy in place. Although Kenya Information and Communication Act provides for information to be provided for Kenyans online,it is imperative that important information is not passed through the social media. Lastly, leaders should be thoroughly enlightened and informed on the intricacies of public interaction and information sharing.

Russia has temporarily suspended the grain deal negotiated by Turkiye and the United Nations back in July. The abrupt suspension does not however come as a surprise to many since the Kremlin had been constantly warning that it might arbitrarily take the unilateral decision of suspending the deal indefinitely. The complaints included the fact that the other part of the bargain in Russia’s favor was not being carried out and many of the countries Russia consider hostile to them were benefitting instead of the poor nations facing hunger due to famine. This has been consistently said by the Russian regime for quite sometimes. They insisted that the deal was negotiated in favor of millions in middle east and Africa who were faced with dire consequences of climate change. The last nail on the coffin of the agreement was the latest attack on the Black Sea fleet of the Russian Federation based at the Sevastopol port by Ukrainian unmanned vehicles. The Sevastopol port is the only warm water port Russia has as the rest of their ports freeze during most parts of the year. This an unexpected attack further exacerbates the already tense situation.

Western leaders and institutions have strongly condemned this move by the Russian regime. Most of them have consequently blamed Putin for weaponizing food in his war. The main narrative is firmly banked on African countries starving because of this decision by Russia. Most western media have also aggressively proffered this narrative in their news bulletin and debates. However, is it the truth? The grain deal has been active since July when it was signed by Russia, Ukraine and Turkiye and approximately nine million tonnes of grain has been exported out of Ukraine ever since. The question is just about how much of it has found itself in Africa or the middle east. The Ukrainian data shows that a bigger percentage of grain during this initiative has gone to rich countries in Europe. The United Nations acknowledges that less than 30% has gone to poor countries in Africa and middle east while more than 60% has made its way to rich countries mostly in Europe. Russian president Vlamir Putin however estimates the number to be around 3-5% only to Africa and 80% to Europe. The truth is the first casualty of war and we might not be able to verify which information is true but one thing is certain; poor countries were not the main destinations for the Ukrainian grain. They were just a pawn used to ensure that the Black Sea corridor was opened while grain went the other way. Countries which faced hunger are still facing it regardless of the situation in the Black Sea corridor. The most astounding aspect of it all is the fact that Africa is at the top of the agenda in terms of hunger but grain doesn’t reach them.

As an African my problem is with the degrading position the continent has been relegated to. Africa is used negatively so that the rich countries can acquire the grain to arrest the prices of their commodities while it doesn’t benefit the poor. The grain deal was opened mainly for the sake of Middle Eastern and African nations as Putin puts it in his speeches but have the continents really benefitted? It was a farce and it still is. The narrative is profoundly portraying Putin as a liar but in this can we say that he is lying?. Africa was used and it’s being used again. Furthermore,the Russian Federation has promised poor nations around 500 metric tonnes of free wheat in the next four months. It is a reaction to stopping the grain deal so that the poor can get it directly. It is time the west live upto their self-imposed commitments and refrain from using other people for their own aggrandizement.

What next for the grain deal? The deal will certainly be brought back after renegotiation. The Kremlin will demand that the other half of the deal be met and grain be delivered more to the poor countries in Africa and Middle East. One factor which is not certain is the exact time of this second deal. Turkiye president Recep Tayyip Erdogan has promised to negotiate with both parties to ensure the continuity of food exports from both countries. When food products from both countries is allowed in the market then global inflation might be arrested. Let it be known that Russia is a bigger food basket than Ukraine and blocking its food exports is detrimental to the world. Lastly, Africa’s name should not be used for blackmail and cheap propaganda. A lot of exaggeration is employed when engaging the continent. It is a continent of 54 countries and most countries are better off and only a few like Somalia are actually in a bad state. Moreover, Africa’s diet is diverse and wheat and it’s products is at the tail end of it. Stop propaganda and blackmail of Africa.

From its inception in 2013, the Belt and Road initiative(BRI) has provided the much needed infrastructural financing to most poor countries in Africa, Europe,Asia and the Pacific. Chinese state-owned banks have invariably bankrolled the development of these significant infrastructure through loans to countries where infrastructure was virtually non-existent and to some where it was in a moribund state. These tremendous infrastructure include roads,ports, railroads and even the hospitals as well as housing facilities. There is no denying the fact that Africa as a notable beneficiary has received an astronomical facelift in a short period of time. There are roads where there were none,rail infrastructure has suddenly become ubiquitous and massive ports are coming up. However,this strategy has come under intense criticism by some foreign entities who consider it the use of “debt trap diplomacy.” According to most of the critics,”debt trap diplomacy” is a scenario where the Chinese government is purportedly trying to ensnare and trap the poor of the poorest in a never-ending cycle of debt. It also fundamental part of the soft power policy Of the Chinese. Of particular interest is that most of these criticism comes from the west who are arch nemesis to China in the rat race for global economy domination. So it’s better to debunk and know whether what is out there in the media is either the truth or propaganda instigated by the Chinese competitors.A closer look of Chinese investment in Africa particularly during the Belt and Road initiative period shines a light upon the whole Chinese adventure in Africa. The development projects in infrastructure have improved face of Africa massively. Roads have improved,ports, airports,dams and even skylines have sprung up in places where there not before. Most Africans are not bothered by the increase of Chinese in continent since change has been evident. There presence of Chinese has brought with it more goodies than several decades of European influence in the continent. The subsequent evidence of growth in infrastructure which is crucial for overall economic growth has bolstered the relationship between the two countries. A study by Afrobarometer has revealed that 63% of Africans feel the presence of the Chinese has been somewhat positive compared to 60% of the USA. Putting it into context,the USA has been rich all through and has been present in the continent for decades with no positive changes.

A closer look of Chinese investment in Africa particularly during the Belt and Road initiative period shines a light upon the whole Chinese adventure in Africa. The development projects in infrastructure have improved the face of Africa greatly. The value of China-Africa trade has increased rapidly to 22 billion US dollars. A research done by Statista has shown that China constituted about 16% of all the Foreign direct investment (FDI) coming to Africa in the period between 2014 to 2018. It has dwarfed all the others, followed at a distance by the USA and France each at 8%. The presence of Chinese has brought with it more goodies than several decades of European influence in the continent. The subsequent evidence of growth in infrastructure which is crucial for overall economic growth has bolstered the relationship between the two countries and between individual African countries. Development of infrastructure has improved intra-Africa which has been an Achilles heel on the development of the entire continent. A study by Afrobarometer has revealed that 63% of Africans feel the presence of the Chinese has been positive compared to 14% who consider it negative or somewhat negative. Putting it into context,the USA has been rich all through and has been present in the continent for decades with no positive changes. The available data shows that Sino-African relations have been beneficial to all the parties involved.

Claims that debt trap diplomacy is being used China to trap poor countries are unfounded and contrary to the available facts. Chinese loans accounts for only 12% of the $696 billion external debt owed by African countries while western private lenders account for 35%. This show that the constant rants by western media and institutions about Chinese “debt trap” are just propaganda instituted by the fact that Africa finds itself the center of domination struggle among different powers. Chinese loans carry with them lower interest rates as compared to the high rates of western lenders. Average interest rates on loans for Africa by the Chinese is 2.7% while the average interest rates for loans from private western lenders is 5%. From these data one can get a glimpse of who really are helping the continent move forward. Africans feeling that China is a better partner do so because of the evidence of growth since China first widen the scope of their involvement with the continent. The BRI is not actually the first intervention and entanglement between Africa and China. China has maintained close contact with the continent since around the fifteenth century when Admiral Zheng He of the Ming dynasty reached Malindi in his historic voyages. In 1971,26 African countries supported China in its quest to take over the UN seat from Taiwan. Chinese influence is thus motivated by friendship,trade opportunities and diplomacy.

Dambisa Moyo,in her book titled,Dead Aid which was published back in 2009 before the conception of BRI says that one of the ways to move Africa out of its current state is through intensive use of foreign direct investment. This is what China is using as part of it’s playbook in funneling investment to developing nations. Foreign direct investment curtails the ability of corrupt leaders to swindle development funds for their own use. On the contrary, foreign aid which has been used over and over again producing same piteous results by western world has led to the economic deterioration and increase in poverty all around. Political elite use borrowed money for their own benefit and comfort. They use development finances to buy expensive property in the developed world. A good example is Mobutu Ssese Seko,the former dictator of DRC. He swindled the country around $15 billion which was given as foreign aid. Foreign direct investment policy used by the Chinese ensures that there is value for loans. Dams,roads,rails, airports e.t.c. But what does the western world show for their presence?

China does not force any country to take loans from them. There are many institutions and government who are in this loan business. Any country can take loans to finance their development programs from any entity they deem fair. The majority of African countries taking loans from China shows that they view China as a worthy partner when it comes to development investment. The Chinese do not try to impose their will and policies on loan recipients whereas western world loans come with conditions which affect negatively the countries involved. Currently, countries like Kenya and Haiti are forced to abandon subsidy program which was helpful to the citizens of these countries. Life becomes unbearable and anti-government protests ensue which creates instability and lawlessness. Criticisms labelled against China are also worth noting but the blame must fully lie with the recipient country. Chinese loans are shadowed by absolute secretiveness with few people knowing about them because Chinese economy is a closed one. Very little data and information escapes to the public. Any country which doesn’t fancy this must stand up to it and demand that the deals are openly accessible. If the leaders don’t put this issue forward then who would they blame for their incompetence?

The Chinese are far from perfect but it is no denying the fact that their intervention has been positive to the continent. Just one month ago,the Chinese government decided to waive loans from 17 poor countries in an effort to unburden their financial constraint situation. All these efforts point to the fact that they are really trying to foster development among poor countries. The geopolitical world is full of countries trying to get the best deals for their citizens so good leaders must also stand firm with their citizens. Criticism must be substantiated and not be solely based on political propaganda.

America’s story might be that of killing three birds with one stone if analysed keenly. The prevailing world view is that the American hegemony on the world stage is speedily waning. Some analysts predict that the end of Russian invasion of Ukraine might coincidentally bring the US empire to its knees because of the heavy financial support they frequently provide to Ukraine if Ukraine doesn’t win. American financial, military and humanitarian aid to the Eastern European country has increased abundantly to the tune of $50 billion in the last eight months. This has been seen to tremendously increase inflation and have a pernicious effect on the general cost of living in the country. The unpleasant prediction comes on the backdrop of numerous falls of various empires being instigated by high cost living, inflation and similar deleterious conditions which unfortunately plague America today. Pessimistic analysts continuously predict that this might be another messy falling of a great world power. Empires like the Soviet Union and the French under Louis fell mostly due to high cost of prices and high inflation compounded by mismanagement of the economy. However,this might not be case with the United States due to a number of factors; democracy, extreme levels of nationalism and craftiness of American leaders. Emphasis should also be placed on the fact that we live in a different time compared to the old-fashioned world during the french revolution and the fall of other empires.

America’s leaders and foreign policy makers were markedly aware of the threats that faced their place in the world dominance. They singled out the rise of China as the main threat followed, Putin’s Russia and a united Europe. Other parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America are still at a distant past in terms of economic and military strength and posed no significant threat to Uncle Sam’s land, for now. To solve two of these threat involved a risky fete of poking a nuclear powered bear. Russia’s nuclear arsenal exceeds the US, albeit narrowly. As of 2022, Russia possesses the largest stockpile of nuclear warheads in the world amounting to a total of 5,977; the second-largest stockpile is the United States’ 5,428 warheads. The tactics used by the USA comes directly from the CIA playbook, orchestrating a coup to oust the pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 and replacing him with a US puppet. To make matter worse,the US increased its footprint in Ukraine, Russian neighbour something which is unacceptable to any Russian leader. Why is Ukraine a red line for Russia? Ukraine lies in the North European plain which encompasses large parts of Poland, Germany, France, Belgium, Netherlands and nearly all of Ukraine among other countries. Attacks towards Russia from this direction are virtually impossible to defend against because there’s no place to fallback to. It is just a flatland which stretches endlessly for miles. Any power including the US attacking Russia from this direction will certainly achieve great success. Everything done by the US from 2014 coup to the alleged biolabs was to provoke Russia to a war so that it might curtail its development and maybe defeat it completely. It is always a long game and there’s always certain more than meets the eye.

Next step was the involvement of all the major powers in the war and gaining support of all nations against aggression. This might not have been achieved fully due to the fact that the US already have a number of enemies acquired from the past. China, India,Iran, Venezuela and a number of of Asian, African and Latin American countries stayed away from condemning Russia or directly supported Russia. However, incorporating the European union in supporting Ukraine means that the United States succeeded in coercing one threat against the other. After the war,both European nations and Russia might be wrecked economically and damaged significantly. The same history might be repeating itself just like after the second world war. The economy of Europe has been successfully ruined by the US after coercing them to wean off Russian gas and oil and to consequently buy from the US, although the US sells four times higher than the Russians. Wrecking European economy is already counted as a success,the war might weaken Russia and leave US without a worthy adversary except China. Restrictions against Chinese import of semiconductor equipment and components from USA might do the trick since China has not fully mastered the technology. China seems to be giving the US sleepless nights. It’s a game of thrones.

Cracks are gradually beginning to appear between the US and its allies. The Germans and French have realized that they may be real losers in this war. While the top leadership of the European union is trying to restrict interactions with China,the German chancellor Olaf Scholz has officially confirmed that he will be leading an entourage of a trade delegation to Beijing in December. This might have tremendous repercussions in the already frosty relationships in EU. Another crack slowly appearing is the rift between France and Germany when it comes to Russian gas price caps. They seem not to agree on the way forward after several meetings. Failure to agree on time may spell doom for EU countries during the coming winter. Countries may have to be forced to go it independently. Lastly, the French president Emmanuel Macron has publicly accused the US of charging the EU exorbitant prices for its liquefied natural gas. This has consequently raised the prices of gas high in their countries causing unrest among citizens. These cracks might be a problem for the US in the long run and might deter it from achieving its overambitious goals.

There is a high likelihood that the US might miss out on its goals,albeit achieve it partially. Russia might win in the end and annex huge swathes of lands in Ukraine. The coming midterm elections in November may also prove difficult for the democrats because of the high cost of living and inflation which is mostly blamed on their policies. If the democrats fail then Ukraine will be a lost cause. But then the US government should not beat themselves so hard. They should rejoice in the idea that the goals are already partially achieved. The EU is wrecked, Russia is slowed through the war and China might also find it hard without a reliable semiconductor industry. They should however take important lessons from history. No empire that exists can exist forever.

Crucial lessons can be learnt from Russian president Vlamir Putin and Chinese president Xi Jinping. One common thing about these leaders is their love for their own people. Sometimes one can put all the prevalent prejudice aside and amply acknowledge what they have achieved for their people. After befittingly removing millions out poverty within a short span of time,China now seriously focuses on building a formidable army which will rival all the other powers. It still baffles western leaders and scholars how China achieved so much yet so fast. Russia on the other side is still a world leader in production of most agricultural products such as fertilizers, grains and tractors. It’s the closest to self-sustanance a country can ever be. Although they have their own flaws too since no one is perfect,to their people they are noble. This can be reciprocated in many African countries with a view of empowering their people and regions. African people are as industrious and remarkably innovative as any other people in the world. Where then is the problem? Why does Africa always lags behind?And is it that is needed to haul them completely out of their pitiful and dire situation?

As I have repeatedly said before,what African countries need are benevolent dictators and a patriot population with a view of developing their countries. This is what Dambisa Moyo also advocates for in her book,Dead Aid. These coupled with a strong sense of nationalism might come in handy in helping Africans to take their right place in the world politics. Xi Jinping once said that a people cannot depend on another race to save them. Africa doesn’t need to play a subservient role in the world. Nobody wants to play a second fiddle. The history of Europe in their most formative eras,is full of repressive and despotic authoritarianism which propelled them to prosperity. Their benevolence supported slavery and expedition which was instrumental in their sudden rise in unprecedented prominence. The “from rags to riches” story might only come by for Africa if this kind of leadership is positively embraced. Rwanda has been consistently praised by many after they turned around what is widely regarded as a bleak past into a promising future. Their economy is growing rapidly and cohesion among various communities is strong. How did they achieve all this within two decades? The answer lies with their president Paul Kagame. Western media, institutions and leaders regard him with the same view as that of a dictator but Rwandese citizens know how much he has turned the situation around. The same cannot be said of other countries struggling to give democracy a place in their midst. Others which are vehemently trying to impose democracy are marred with corruption, tribalism and nepotism. A good example is Kenya where the fledgling democracy has not been of any help to millions who struggle to eke out a decent living with all odds against them. Corruption is rife in every sector of the economy. It will be better to ask Africans themselves at the lower rungs of the society where most of them are, what they will prefer,a democracy or economic stability with authoritarian leader at the top? Research has shown that countries with authoritarianism in the African continent are doing better than those with an illusion of democracy.

History teaches us that benevolent dictators will at some point change and be bad like Mobutu Ssese Seko. He started out very promising but ended up very corrupt and cruel. However,it is important to note that there are many other malignant factors which also played a big role in altering his behavior. Many Kenyans will argue that life was better during the 24 year rule of president Moi than the last three democratically elected leaders although he was autocratic during the latter parts of his reign. Things were rosy and employment opportunities abounded. Unless when the tail end of his rule during the onset of democracy is factored in. Many state corporations were privatized and thousands lost their jobs. Corruption became a culture. I would argue that with democracy corruption gained a foothold and became prominent. This process was created and masterminded by the international Financial organizations like the world bank and the IMF. It was never the same again. Countries with benevolent dictators are doing so well than those with a nascent democracy. My message is clear. I’m not trying to demonize democracy. The developed world did not just wake up one day and right there they had democracy. It was a painstaking process passing through the other forms of governance such as communism to reach where they are. Actually, democracy was something of an accident. They were not searching for it. So,to put it into a context,there are innumerable processes a continent should go through before reaching the democracy stop. Skipping any of these might prove to be deleterious to a people or a country as can be vividly witnessed in Africa. It is a form of soul searching. The analogy of a child might come perfect for this case. No child can born and instantly run. They have to go through a lot of sitting, crawling and so on. Democracy comes by itself once a country has reached economic emancipation and empowerment without which it is just an illusion. For now Africa needs leaders like Kagame who are labeled as dictatorial.

In 1907, after consolidating a lot of power silently,then president of the United States Theodore Roosevelt sent out a fleet to circumnavigate the world. The fleet which came to be widely recognized as the great white fleet was sent out to showcase the rise of a new empire. The new empire was the United States of America. It tentatively arrived at the world after decades of tedious struggle to consolidate all the power in most of the Americas. The fleet had 14500 personnel and 16 battleships. To say the least,the great white fleet mission was a resounding success returning to the US in 1909. It transversed all the oceans including the Pacific, Atlantic and the Indian ocean. Its policies and methodologies were reminiscent of carrot and stick. Just as Roosevelt used to say, it’s better to speak less and have a long stick. Carrot and stick is a mixture of force with a tincture of diplomacy. Those who were too rigid to be coerced were shown the stick and so in 1909 USA emerged from the shadows as a world power.

I brought this up to jog your memory about the prevailing situation of. Just the other day, North Korea launched a medium range missile across the North of Japan. The world was rattled and rightly so considering the provocative nuclear saber-rattling currently taking place between Russia and the US. It really worried the US and its allies in the region like South Korea and Japan. The response was conducting military drills in the South China sea. Drawing an anology from the US story,it is clear that this posturing was just like a little advertising campaign. North Korea was simply announcing their arrival at the world stage as a nuclear power. They were announcing their arrival as a power or force to recon with and what is a better way to announce than by launching a missile across Japan-a US ally. Those worried about escalation should calm their nerves. The announcement was a one off event and it’s clear that the message was resistance because of their nuclear ambitions. North Korea is among the most sanctioned countries in the world due to their nuclear ambitions. Despite all the propaganda campaigns against them and the economic sanctions,they still reached their goal. The other missiles launched were in retaliation to the US conducting military drills together with Japan and South Korea. Of course they were not across Japanese territory.

The distance reached by the missile was as terrifying as the direction of it’s trajectory. The intercontinental ballistic missile might reach USA when launched inside North Korea. This fete the other powers never thought North Korea might reach. North Korea might be a dictator but their military capacity will grant mutual respect from other powers. They might not be at the same level with the others but their nuclear capacity cannot be taken for granted. They will be revered by others. This is the way to go for the downtrodden countries. Their missile launch across Japan will have no peace-threatening implications.

Foreign media reporting of Africa depicts the continent as being the center of some kind of power struggle between foreign countries. Some say that Russia is ousting France from it’s former colonies while others beg USA to fill gap left by France so that it’s not filled by Russia. This biased view is selfish and discriminates against Africans. It presents Africa as timid, foolish and naive and needs decisions to be made for them by others. It is a patronizing attitude towards Africa just as it was during slavery and colonialism. The coups and counter-coups in Mali,Chad and Burkina Faso are seen as influenced by Russian propaganda and has Russian footprints all over them. Is it true that Africans cannot make their own choices in the 21st century? Is this the reason why the US Congress has to pass a bill to restrict African interaction with Russia through threats? Is this why the European union has stopped the construction of a pipeline from Tanzania to Uganda? It is true media channels still view Africa as that small child that needs to be guided and constantly shown the way. This patronizing characteristic of developed countries to Africa is quite worrying. It’s some sort of cold war 2.0.

This applies to all media be it Russia,China,Europe or the US. Their efforts are directed towards events happening in Africa with a predetermined opinion which passes to them as the truth. An article asking US to increase its presence in west Africa to counter Russian impact tells more about the colonisation mentality of the writer than about the situation in the ground. It emphasizes the fact that Africa is still firmly in the grip of the colonizing power and the purported independence was just a sham. It was a blindfold to the people. An illusion that you are free but in the real sense no one is free. How can Africa develop when media is used to portray is as some battle field for great powers? Although occurrences like the war in Ukraine have been basically cementing the cold war mentality,the media biased portrayal of Africa has made it worse. They have been the driving force for the narrative.

The biasness does not stop with the cold war. It has been a system put in place to eternally degrade the status of the continent. The collective reference to Africa in bad light about tragedies occuring in single countries has deepened the negativity. Famine in the Horn of Africa or instability in Mali is referred to as Africa while negative news in parts of Europe are classified with the specific location it emanates from. The overall effect is a mental picture in the minds of many depicting Africa as the dark continent and proliferation of racial abuse and attacks towards black people in Europe, Russia and Asia. Racism continues to become a menace and the media unwittingly strengthens it through biased portrayal. Negative news in Africa area greatly exaggerated and given much of the airtime. Some would argue that it is needed to solicit aid and immediate response to the tragedy in question. But has that really happened? No one particular country wants to help to put these tragedies out once and for all. It is not that these issues cannot be dealt with with finality. The financial implications are huge and must be maintained. The aid industry is booming.

For a long time I have been flabbergasted by foreign media analysis of Africa situations. They jump to conclusions without second thoughts. They always know what is best for African countries and their population even though some have never set foot on the continent. Their analysts are comfortably tucked in their offices in New York,Paris, London or Moscow discussing events happening thousands of miles away. They purport to have unquestionable accuracy on these matters. When Kenyan elections were peaceful earlier this year,the media were disappointed as there was no news for them. Why don’t they also broadcast the positive information about the continent? The same energy and effort employed when broadcasting negative news from Africa should also be put in place when transmitting positive news. It is because of foreign media that most foreigners who have never visited Africa will think of wars, epidemics, famine, malnutrition and wildlife when questioned about their knowledge of the continent. Is that all? Is Africa that much desolate? Are there no beautiful aspects of this continent? Nonetheless, until the lions learn to write, history will always glorify the hunter.