Africa in Chaos (review)

Many theorists throughout the world have struggled to explain the cause of the unprecedented crises in sub-Saharan Africa. George Ayittey's Africa in Chaos is one of the leading contemporary texts that strives to explain the causes of sub-Saharan Africa's political, economic, and social underdevelopment from an internalist's perspective.

The text holds that postcolonial Africa's social crises result from internal states' corruption; which suggests that the states are not capable of managing themselves and, consequently, the author proposes that the solution is internal rather than external. This volume, popular for its informative content and significant case studies, presents a valuable tool for contemporary African studies.

Although informative, the book's theoretical approach and content are weak. This makes it ineffective for analyzing contemporary Africa within the context of the present New World Order. In other words, the book only partially analyzes Africa's situation. Ayittey excludes crucial external factors, such as globalization, computerization, and free-boarder cyberspace.

The author argues that the underdevelopment of Africa is caused by internal, rather than external, factors: "Misguided leadership, systemic corruption, capital flight, economic mismanagement, senseless civil wars, political tyranny, flagrant violations of human rights, and military vandalism" (p. 44). According to Ayittey, Africa's underdevelopment is due mainly to the governments' control of the economy and the political system. The defective political system of sultanism, and the defective economic systems of statism are the ills of the African state (p. 49). Usually, leaders have become presidents for life by disallowing multiparties, and have underdeveloped the newly independent states by nationalizing private properties (p. 113). Heads of state, who rule with an iron fist, usually establish governments based on executive dictatorship. Ayittey holds that this leadership is responsible for ruining the states. He blames poor and corrupted leadership for Africa's underdevelopment.

Ayittey's theory contrasts with that of the World System school of thought, which attempts to analyze the economic and political crises of sub-Saharan African states within the context of the New World Order. According to this theory, espoused in Global Inequalities (1998) the economic and political crises of sub-Saharan Africa are the consequences of unbalanced partnerships of multinational corporations with African states and the application of computerization as a mechanism to advance the global economy (Bradshow and Wallace 1998: 48). The rapid advancement of technology and access to electronic links throughout the world translate into advantages for core countries and multinational corporations. For example, a multinational corporation can become a business partner with multiple developing nations to produce goods that extract other raw materials (Bradshow and Wallace 1998: 50). In his article "Let Nature's Harvest Continue" (1999), Wangari Maathai gives an example of how the multinational corporation Monsanto is able to increase its profits by using its technological and financial powers over its partners (Maathai 1999: 529-31). According to Maathai, Monsanto genetically engineers seeds that are sold to their partnering nations. The farmers of these nations then become dependent on buying seeds from the corporation (1999: 529). The noncore nations do not have the technology to compete fairly.

Similarly, World System theory states that Africa's underdevelopment is the result of unequal regional partnerships between multinational corporations (MNCs) and multiple developing nations. This unequal partnership is one of the contemporary indications of globalization, and reflects a lopsided accumulation of wealth in the global economy. World System theory also argues that, to a greater extent, MNCs are advantaged because of their preestablished technological advancement and economic power over their partners, which are the developing nations (Weatherby 1997: 30). When comparing the yearly gross sales of some MNCs with the GNP of some partnering developing nations, we find that the business association has disadvantages for developing nations. For example, "General Motors makes $32 billion, Ford Motor Company $100 billion, and General Electric $62 billion, which equals the approximate GNP of some of the partnering African nations" (Weatherby 1997: 36). Thus, the World System school concludes that...