Africa's Third World War: Seeking Its Own Pax

Josephkoye

Africa's Third World War : Seeking Its Own Pax 

If the Second World War convulsed the global centres and threw up the United States from the West and USSR from the East - two regional and global superpowers, that currently sustain, save for China,  then Africa needs a third World War , at least , first , in principle , to be able to emerge from its doldrums  and snail -speed development.

 The Second World War liberated Africa,  other parts of the world and India politically . Thus , the Third World emerged after WW2 . The formation of the United Nations after that gory global fight put pressure on countries like Britain, France,  Germany - in short,  the the colonists - to grant political freedom to their colonies, as stated in the Atlantic Charter of 1941, when President Roosevelt and Churchill met aboard the American cruiser,  Augusta,  off the coast of Newfoundland.

 Britain had become exhausted financially and militarily,  while France had been battered into submission by the German forces . Western imperialism and domination had been dealt a great blow. The French Empire was reeling from its humiliation, forced down its throat through the signing of the Armistice by the Germans . And the British flag had become shredded and no longer aloft . Calls for self-government were becoming louder. And, encouraged by India's vociferous cries and fierce resistance, African nations soon joined the din . In this sense , India's resistance to British rule inspired Africans to demand self-government . 

 India's founding fathers, like Jawaharlal Nehru and Gandhi were dithering, and at times, were undecided about India's  nuclear capacity as a policy for political relevance and sub-regional leadership. It was torn between  Gandhi's passive resistance and Nehru's non-alignment postures. For Africa, it was dismissed as a passing interest and only viewed obliquely. Subsequent outcomes proved that India's destiny was to go nuclear.

 In 1974, India detonated its first nuclear device ,consolidating its place as a Third World leader. Since then, India  has gradually moved upwards in technological development. Conversely, Africa is still stuck in the sands of technological backwardness and political instability.

 When that British science fiction author H..G. Wells coined the term ATOMIC BOMB, in his 1914 novel, THE WORLD SET FREE, on the eve of WW1, I am tempted to say he was unwittingly urging Africa to pursue its own nuclear development policy. In the book, he had predicted a nuclear apocalypse, followed by global utopia, led by Europe. His vision of a nuclear apocalypse was tepidly echoed and achieved when the US, provoked by belligerent Japan, released atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This gesture, in a very great and symbolic gesture, exalted the US as a superpower.

 By pursuing its own nuclear power, Africa will join the league of other nuclear powerhouses of the world.

 The atom, as destructive and pervasive as it is in action, paradoxically,  has brought about peace in the world. Since the US released it, as stated earlier, on two Japanese cities during WW2, with grotesque consequences, other holders of nuclear power have sheathed their atomic swords,  apart from Vladimir Putin, whom after his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine,is threatening the West with his nuclear arsenals,  by putting them on high alert. Apart from that, other nuclear holders are treading softly. They are now afraid of one another because of the collateral consequences of nuclear warfare and its concomitant mantra and acronym -- MAD - mutual assured destruction.

 If Africa, led by Nigeria, develops nuclear capacity to the levels of any of the First World nuclear holders,the world will, first be jolted ,and will sit up to recognize it, the most centripetal of all continents, as tour de force in nuclear politics. By this,  Africa will emerge from her shadows and shyness to take its place - a place it has been eternally denied throughout history . 

  Africa was robbed of its virility, its youth and destiny on the whim of the greed of Europeans over a 400- year period in the hideous Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, where some 20 million virile Africans were carted away to the Southern parts of the US . These slaves, in their demographic and cultural upheavals, helped to develop the new civilization of the West.

 Coming hard on the heels of the end or abolition of the slave trade was colonization. Britain,the leading abolitionist nation in the world was quietly preparing for its own imperialism in the guise of Pax Britannica - keeping peace in Africa and elsewhere under the auspices of British initiatives. As it was disarming the natives and supposed barbaric tribes of remote Africa, and entrenching colonialism there, it was baring its fangs, preparing for world wars elsewhere. 

 If Africa had developed a modest nuclear capacity, it would have, I believe, been able to reduce, or at least moderate the recent tensions between the West and Russia, occasioned by the latter's invasion of Ukraine.

 How can Africa develop a clear-cut nuclear programme without the impingements of what ails her, like social and  political corruption, xenophobia, tribalism, religious cleavages etc.?This is a question that will dog intelligent minds for years to come. And, can Africa concertedly pursue a single-minded nuclear programme? Or, will individual nations go solo on their nuclear aspirations?

 I will attempt to answer these two questions in the light of Africa's current political, social and economic ills. 

 For the first question, Africa is rich in uranium reserves. This resource abounds and is wasting away on the continent. Countries like South Africa, Niger, Nigeria, Congo DR have plenty of this resource. Niger, for instance, has the 4th largest deposits of uranium in the world. This is a ready source or repertoire for Nigeria, apart from its own reserves.

  What is required of Africa therefore, is the political will or courage, if you prefer, of these countries with nuclear potentials to push this nuclear policy thrust to the top of their political agendas. If these governments can play this political game well and sell this idea to their people, then half of the job is done.

 Nigeria should have led other African nations to develop nuclear capacity in the 1970s and 80s ,but it was bedeviled by political instability- triggered by irresponsible, long periods of unproductive military banditry, as in the words of Ali Mazrui. But it is not too late for Africa's biggest country to champion Africa's nuclear programme. Nigeria should not be discouraged by South Africa's total denuclearization between 1989 and 1990. It was the first country in  world to fully denuclearize.

 If Nigeria can successfully develop its nuclear policy and launch a nuclear device, then other African countries will be galvanized to follow suit, at least ,to conceive the idea in the main.

  To the second question, Africa can jointly develop a nuclear programme if it jettisons its issue of fragmentation, that has spawned disgusting tribalism and xenophobia across the continent.

 A new class consciousness for political relevance and economic liberation must be pursued with more single-minded efficacy than the Negritude ideology of the 1960s was pursued. For this programme to be born without political miscarriage, Africa's irresponsible leaders must give way  or be taken out. And, the new leaders must cut their excesses and pacify the continent. In essence, Africa must search for its own pax - PAX AFRICANA . Self-pacification is very necessary for Africa to develop politically and economically. 

 In pacifying itself, Africa must ,as a matter of urgency, through the African Union, develop a high-powered military command to intervene in troubled spots, on the one hand, and unseat repressive and/ renegade regimes on the other hand. I am no under illusion that unseating autocratic leaders is a tall order within the African political space. Nonetheless, it is a scenario that responsible and concerned African leaders should seriously consider. The idea should not just be dismissed as romantic idealism. After all, Julius Nyerere invaded Uganda and overthrew an accident of history in the person of Idi Amin in the absence of an African interventionist body.

 The spirit of Nyerere must enter, animate and transform African leadership under a collective initiative or pan-African idea ,such as the AFRICAN HIGH COMMAND.

 Without Africa pacifying itself by getting rid of tyrants, no progress will be made on the continent as far as human development goes and corporate welfare is concerned.As a result, Africa will eternally remain under-privileged,and wealth disproportionately distributed.

 The AFRICAN HIGH COMMAND should be jointly headed by Egypt from the Nile because it has the strongest military in Africa, Nigeria, from the West because of its human and natural resources, and its experience in peace-keeping efforts all over the world; and South Africa from the southern part of Africa. I shall call these trio -  THE NEW TRIUMVIRATE. It should have three headquarters that will be headed by General Commanders. They will operate independently  in troubled spots simultaneously, or in unseating dictators. I have proposed this simultaneous action in order to create a sense of checks and balances for the high commands. In effect, they can check one another's excesses  or non-action. They will all function under the auspices of the African Union. All member states are to contribute troops as special commandos, trained in reconnaissance, target acquisition,  rescue, counter-intelligence, counter-terrorism, kidnapping and other high impact military functions.These commandos should be the most elite military special operators on the African continent, and should be at par with the United States'  Marine Recon, Green Berets, that helped to train the Madagascar's military on counter-terrorism, and the Delta special operators.

  Financially and materially, it is the responsibility of all member states to bear the costs of operations,logistics and maintenance without resort to outside help. Africa is rich enough to make itself militarily potent. Looking for outside Africa for support will likely breed interference and encrust the operations of the commands with imperialist agendas.

  As Africa seeks to pacify itself  and develop its nuclear programme, it should develop home-grown technology and make it sophisticated for contemporary times, seek technology transfer from either bilateral or multilateral trade and diplomatic partners. 

 Also, it should scout for the best minds, designers anywhere in the world. The liberalization of technology has provided the necessary lever for Africa to launch its own nuclear programme and develop other capacities. 

 The first purpose of its nuclear programme should be for its energy needs. There is a yawning energy infrastructural gap in much of Africa. Nigeria can do so much with such clean energy as nuclear energy to provide sustainable power for its over 200 million people - most of whom have little or no electric power at all.

 After this, Africa should pursue nuclear weapon programmes in 3 phases : short term - one to three years;  midterm- three to five years, and long term - ten to twenty years.

  With the development of this nuclear capacity for warfare, Africa will be preparing itself against pondering interference from overbearing imperialists, who have reduced it to its current state of underdevelopment. If Ukraine had not denuclearized, rascally Vladimir Putin would not have ever nursed the idea of invading it, first in 2012, and then in 2022.

  The atom in the hands of Africans will be the lever between the First World and the Third World. With it, Africa can further expand and stock its arsenals, and prepare for a Third World War.  After all, Germany and Japan - two erstwhile very belligerent nations, in part, triggered the First World War in 1914 ,and continued their saber rattling, which culminated in the Second World War in 1939. Hitler in his megalomaniac posture, was trying to make Germany a superpower, annexed much of Europe and planned to take possession of the rest of the world. Britain and France, on their part, were desperately trying to consolidate their positions and hold on their spheres  of influence. But it was America's detonation of the atom on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as stated much earlier, that changed the course of the war and shifted the balance of global power . This is why I argue that Africa should develop its own nuclear capacity. First for peaceful means, and second, for military purposes . 

 Having developed nuclear capacity,  with its proximity to Europe via the Mediterranean Sea.  Africa can launch its own World War that would bring the world together into the Third World War. If this happens H.G.Wells' vision of a global apocalypse will be achieved and Africa can,  at last,  have its utopia. 

 But does Africa need to launch a Third World War with its new found nuclear playthings and create mushroom clouds over the world political horizon? Not necessarily. But the knowledge that Africa has developed its own nuclear capacity will send chills of fear down the spines of other holders of nuclear arsenals, who are the apostles and champions of non-proliferation and denuclearization. Hypocritically, they labor to disarm other holders of the atom while they keep it for themselves. 

 If per accidens or design, Africa initiates a Third World War,  using its nuclear capacity, then the  balance of global power will shift eternally from the  Northern Hemisphere to the Southern Hemisphere - to the epicenter of the earth-  where Africa is. A place Africa naturally occupies, but which it has been historically denied  in social, geographic, military and economic terms

0 件のコメント