In the moment if crisis the IMF comes in to save the country eg when there is a
sudden change due to your export and it is for short period. While the world bank
is for the longer term at low interest. These are the largest bilateral donors World
Bank is like the leader of the donors and others follow the suit. They are managed
by the boarder of directors and shapes out how they lend.
They have been changed over the past 15 yrs though the developed powers still
control the World Bank.
The world Bank was in its phase focused in the infranstructure and in the second
phase, encouraged the reduction of the inequalities.
The shift comes in : ie conditions such as policy reforms were applied but now
the government had the liberty to spend the money on programs of their choice.
Secondly, now the IMF and WB shifts away from the state role of state in market.
It now focuses on the free market idea. But why this sudden change: The WB and
IMF saw that the outcomes were not satisfactory ie there was no positive changes
in terms of development in the African continent ie the policies of the world Bank
was not working.
Also, the World Bank expertise blames the domestic policies of the African
leaders and hence there was a need to pressure these leaders to adopt new ones.
Washington Consensus, named due to the set of polies made in Washington and is
about economic librazation.
• Enhance exports
• Strengthen agriculture, this is because it is the export in the short term, also
because the poor people in the rural erea depend on it
• Attract, foreign investement in order to bring new competition and increase
• Reduce corruption.
Stabilization : • Stop the crisis and balance the economic imbalance that is caused by the
large imports and low exports ie try to bring exports and imports into
balance. This is done by devaluating the currency and this makes the
imports expensive and exports less expensive
• Cuts in public spending and increase tax revenue
Deregulation: eg Remove the import licenses and marking boards
Trade liberalization: encourage export of agriculture by reducing the tax. Also put
high tariffs on the things such as cars and reduce consumer goods.
The privatization: because they believed that they would be built on rational
though there is a risk that they would be social value lost
Openness to FDI( Foreign Direct Investment)
Privatization very slow and often highly corrupt
But why did the leaders agree, they wanted the money though in reality they did
not implement the changes that the donors wanted. Ie on paper the African leaders,
agreed to implement their values but in reality, they never did it.
Domestic challenges/ Resistance: No matter what the WB was saying but in some
circumstance, the population resisted and for fear of being thrown out, they don’t
implement them. Also because the devaluation of the currency makes things hard
for people and they might resist. And in the worst cases, the people are trying to
On one hand, rural areas, don’t suffer much as the urban ones.
Exams notes for pol 301.
Look at the readings and how they are connected to liberalism, and other
Look at the conflicts and how they affect the state ie do these war construct state or
destroy the state.
The IMF and development. Also look at the disease in connection with the social structure.
The impact of geography and how it have an impact on diseases, social structure
and also on agriculture.
Look at how ethnicity is related to class and how is formed.
Look also at the future of Africa ie what would the future of Africa might be, ie
you talk about the past of theAfrica, the present and then the future.
And in answering be specific, and be focused. And talk about the two sides. That
define both sides.
• First week: Bayart, Jean Francois: Key ideas: Extavergention, the paradigm
of York, the importance history continuity of Africa. According to Bayart,
Africa is mostly seen as the doomed continent characterised of AIDS ,
corruption , etc. This has made the rest of the world to keep isolating Africa
as Africa is seen as barbarian continent of people who are not capable of
logic and ruling themselves. Ask the professor why this theme of
isolation is dangerous to the economic and political impact of Africa.
One of the problems of this attitude is the assumption that the survival of
African depends on the Europeans. Also this attitudes lies the foundation of
colonialism. The exclusion ofAfricans in all angles of life.
The paradigm of the Yoke ie meaning that African are behind in
everything and isolated from the rest of the world has risen due to this
three factors: First the Yoke that has been imposed on African by the
West, the yoke that has been imposed by Africans to their own people
and lastly the hostile environment and the obstinate tradition have
imposed on a lost continent.
Davison: The black man’s burden ie colonialism and how it affected politics in
Africa. • Second week: Both two reading are important but this one is very important,
Courtney Jung: The desire of the people to be in groups and that the social
are constructed and are particular. And how she gave an example of the
man she met at the filling station. She also argues that once the identity is
constructed, it become politicised. Jung argues that the spread of democracy
has been accompanied by political association and divisions that are being
marked along the ethnic lines. Thus, the political participation in most
countries in driven and marked by ethnic, religion etc. She also writes that
ethnic has played roles in politics for three reasons.
Postcolonial era: played a great role in the postcolonial era.
Ethnicity was regarded as a form of political affiliation especial in
underdeveloped countries but this argument was dismissed
considering that ethnicity was also seen in countries such as Canada.
In some places, political identity has resulted into violence and hence
in the process and the promise of democracy, ethnicity is view with
The rise of democratic institutions have and also with the rise of
ethnic identity has meant that the interaction between democracy and
the ethnic changed too. Eg, the right to language is now employed to
groups and not individual. Ie nowadays people claims the right to
groups and not as in the past where most of the things were claimed in
the individual names.
She also looked at the psychology research that shows that people tend to do
anything for their in-group and that people tend to achieve social identity by
competing with the out-group. Identity can be constructed on small issues and ones
constructed people tend to be royal to their in-group. Thus, groups don’t need to be
different physically, or by language etc, they just need to be named. The identity
is constructed and particular since the objectives and the goals differ. She gave an
example of Zulu
And look what the connection in the reading with the settlers states. II: Lecture Two Outline
Ethnic identification and so-called ethnic conflict
- Ethnicity does not exist, except subjectively
- This does not mean that it is not consequential
Ethnicity [Weber]: “a subjective belief in common descent… whether or not an
objective blood relationship exists”
Need to dispel four core myths about ethnicity inAfrica
Myth no.1: There is such a thing as ethnicity
Ethnicity is constructed, fluid, one of multiple and overlapping identifications.
The term “ethnicity” is confusing as it is used to denote both
- a category of practice
- a category of analysis.
Myth no. 2: Ethnic relations in Africa are different - more primordial, more
violent than elsewhere.
1. Ethnicity is not unique toAfrica; a way of conducting politics
2. Both inAfrica and elsewhere, ethnicity only rarely leads to violent conflict
States and societies develop mechanisms for dealing with ethnic tension and
ensuring that it does not spill over into conflict. Myth no. 3: The current ethnic identifications are “age-old”
Ethnicity is historically and contextually dependent. Most ethnic identifications in
Africa are relatively modern phenomena.
E.g. Construction of “Tutsi’and “Hutu” identification in the Great Lakes region.
Myth no. 4: As societies modernize, they will move away from “primitive”
ethnic identifications to more “rational” identifications
Modernization theory thoroughly refuted on this; ethnicity has not disappeared as a
way of practicing politics.
Real question is: when does ethnicity become a politically valuable strategy to
- in absence of a strong/responsive state
- in absence of other cross-cutting cleavages
When may it become politically consequential?
- when are significant resources at stake
- in zero-sum politics
PBS Video: Frontline
The Triumph of Evil
The second reading was the role of the chiefs and how they become part of the
tax collection in Zambia. Also how this is tax is exercised. Also look at
Mamdani and how he talks about the SouthAfrica and colonisism there. • The third week: War and violence, and this would be good to look at the
causes of the conflicts in Africa, some people would argue that it is about
social structure vs agency, And also another debate is about internal vs
external and also greed vs grievance. Some of the war destroy the state and
Selvilin: and she is argument on the Congo, that how much the international
community thing of the conflicts and also the idea of urban bias. Ie they
forget the vast role of the rural areas and u might put this with Francois, .
Thus she is making the argument of the local actors in the conflicts and also
how she tell about the causes of the conflicts.
Rhino argument: the interaction of the rulers and the market. He argues that they
are some rulers that collapse the countries, that how the nature of the state in
Africa. Also look at how cold contributed to this and also how the IMF money was
used by the elites fir their own interests. This is an important article to combine
II: Lecture Three Outline
Security, war and military conflict
Origins of Insurgency
Insurgency in Africa has been particularly prevalent in Horn of Africa
and Southern Africa; less so in West Africa. Liberia and Somalia
destroyed by insurgency.
i) Role of domestic politics
Domestic politics versus international meddling
Domestic politics versus “structural” factors (ethnicity?)
Combination but most insurgencies seem to be driven by exclusionary
domestic politics ii) Motivations of the fighters
- Greed versus grievance: Economic causes of civil
- GREED NOT GRIEVANCE - in terms of Collier’s framework,
greed is economical and grievance is political
- State failure produces war, with Tilly’s argument, it was the
opposite, wars produces the state
Relative deprivation and greed, not grievance
· Argues that this is true because civil wars occur where rebel
organizations are financially viable
· The success of rebel groups thus depends on their opportunities to
“predation theory” - feasibility of predation is the main
determinate of conflict. Predation is an economic phenomenon,
Grievance as a mobilization tool, never the cause of war.
-diversity makes rebellion less likely, rebels have less of a connection
or ability to make groups based on identity
- limited wars --> total war --> ideological conflict --> totalizing
ethnological wars --> perpetual, unending, new war
- Collier’s political economy --> he is with the World Bank and so is
always looking to frame problems as monetary rather than political -
started the conversation
- The World Bank is not meant to interfere in the politics of a
country, so if a state is ‘failed’ then it must be apolitical
- This allowed the World Bank to interfere in the development
- In this framework, GREED is ECONOMICAL and GRIEVANCE is
Critiques of Collier’s theory? Dynamics of war, not causes of war argument? operational factors
confused as causes. opportunity for war as cause (predation).
- confuses causes and operational factors of war
Rational choice model of greed motivated and grievance-assuagement
behaviors [Paul Collier andAnke Hoeffler]
Statistical study of 40 years of civil conflict internationally:
Explodes the myth of ethnic strife. Ethnic diversity may actually
reduce the risk of conflict. Two important exceptions
majority ethnic group and sizable minority ethnic group
may contribute to drawing a conflict out
Points instead to role of economic factors, especially poverty and
natural resource endowment. Role of diasporas here.
Problems with pure economic models -> Mixed motivation model
Based on African case studies; provides evidence that very few
rebellions or insurgencies are “pure” models of either greed or
grievance; most are mixtures. Most African insurgencies employ a
complex mix of political indoctrination, physical coercion, economic
rewards and ethnic vocabularies to animate followers.
Categories of Insurgency
1. Liberation movements: heavily concentrated in Southern Africa; no
challenge to conventions ofAfrican statehood.
2. Separatist insurgencies: by contrast, these do threaten the structure
of state boundaries; hence very little (explicit) external support. 3. Reform insurgencies: a response to failing states; demands usually
expressed in national terms, not ethnic or regional.
4. Warlord insurgencies: poorly defined aims; largely associated with
personal ambition and the “greed” motivation; inability to establish
Commonalities despite these differences.
Why were African states willing to support insurgencies against their
host state has a different (antagonistic) notion of statehood from that
of the target state
mix of local rivalries and superpower involvement
• Week four: Settlers state, look what it is and how it differs from other
people. And remember how there are connected to the liberation army and
movement. And also the three liberal army ie first wave of independence,
minority regimes in South Africa and the recession wars in Ethiopia. Types
of these wars u can use the readings of Herbs. Worry not much about David
reading but look more on Rhino reading and also the majority rebel and
what he means.
Rhino stress the importance of the external supportersie internal vs
external argument. How the people fight against the regimes ie the struggle
for the people and also the relationship with the local people.
January 29 Monday, 2014.
The wars of rebellion and there were mostly fought against the settlers. It was
more deadier because its more like a civil war because the people you are fighting
see themselves as the citizens of that country. They usually start as a political movement to fight the colonial masters but as the
time goes it might get radicalised and have army. Very well orginised and very
clear of what they are against.
The first wave, of rebellition army, fighting against the colonial masters Eg
Muamawu in Kenya, This comes as the result of being denied to land ie the
settlers had taken so much of the land such the local people had none or a few land
to cultivate on. The maumawu did not have their own voice and it was a
movement that was immediately defeated and the telling of the story is always
biased as they said that the Maumawu were irrational. They had also no modern
guns, but rather home made. They were fighting under hard conditions and had no
centralised power. The settlers also tried and succeed in recruiting the local people
to fight against the Maumau. They also separated them and the key leaders of the
Gollillas were arrested. The number of the Kenya who and Guinne.
Second some are led by the white minority. Ie the settlers are determine to stay and
usually want to set their own terms. Angola, Zimbabwe, SA. This takes place
much later and after most of the counties had won the independence. Eg
Zimbabwe, look also at the reading for this day. Loss of the land and the black
farms are forced out of their own land, this leads to the reinforced economic
constraints for the blacks. Blacks were now died access to economic and hence
the only option they had was to be used as cheap labours. Destruction is the …
look at the Chimilanga uprising How did Mugabe start. The British had given up
while the settlers still wanted to hold on and similarly, the Black were divided as
some wanted to just take what they were denied by force while others wanted to be
more peaceful. White were now radical and the black were being reaction. The
settlers did not want the black to have a say but rather to establish a white minority.
Look also on the readings for this day. Mugabe vs the son of the preacher. Ie
ZANU supported by the China vs ZIPU supplied and supported by the Russia.
Who gets to shape Zimbabwe and this was resolved in London that saw Mugabe
And thirdly is about the cession eg Eretria and Ethiopia. Ie when u want to fight
for African freedom. Ethiopia, look for more . Focus on political and army. They
political movement were based on economic and other things such as gender, adulthood etc. Share the food to those who do not have it and the interest of the
people were addressed.
Why do people take up arms.
The chiefs sometimes chose to go to the settlers, or their own people or neither nor
either. The white / the colonial had also division eg the man on the sport and he
might be close to the people that he lives with. He is views are going to be
different from the guy who is in London surrounded by other colonial masters.
Look at the Jeff Hobbes and the relationship between the insurgent and the kind of
the state there are opposing. Combat and what it means to be that machines.
The collapse of the movement because of the weak movement, internal division
and the hierarchy, shapes the nature and the existence of the combat. The people
who fights against the state put into consideration all these. The SA was
discouraging the signing up of the arms. Look for more. You are concerned with
the ideology, political and economic capability of the state of that you are fighting
If you are fighting against the strong state, has the implication on the type of the
insurgent, eg if you have to survive, you have to have a motivation ideology that
people are willing to die for and also have the political support and strong army.
SA is a good example of that. The other thing was to steal enemies, torture them
and send them back. The tortured would be spies sometimes and intelligence.
Members also lost trust. The key to succeed in the rebelliton is the political
indcranation. Ie people need to believe that the cause that they are fighting for is
wealth and hence your movement can survive.
However, sometimes, your movement might be fighting the weak state. Eg Liberia,
Sierra Leone and DRC. They economic resources were all most collapse, no
international support, then your army will likely win. The last days of the
Mumbuto Saseko were characterised with this. The rabel who fight weak state
don’t necessary be well organised. Portugal and the political powers.
Look again on Ethiopia war and it looked like a convention war, they were
formidable military unity. Angola war and how they manage to win some of the Portugal army and hence
were capable of winning against the Portuguese.
How Kabila won against the Mobutu, its like when Mobutu saw Kabila coming,
Struggle and the post – struggle look at the SA
African Politics and Government
II: Lecture Four Outline
The Wars of Liberation in the Settler States
Not just a two-way relationship between the colonizers and the
colonized. Must pay attention to the divisions within each of the
categories. The relationship between the insurgents and the regime
that they are fighting may also be mutually constitutive.
1. Characteristics of the wars of liberation
2. Three categories of liberation armies:
i) first wave, leading up to decolonization e.g. Mau au in Kenya
ii) second wave of guerrilla struggle against white minority regimes
(principally in SouthernAfrica), e.g. ZANU and ZAPU in Zimbabwe
iii) the exceptional case of struggle for Eritrean independence from
3. Liberation wars can be analyzed in two ways:
a. Focus on the insurgent and the question of causes: What are the
grievances that drive people to take up arms for self-government?
Look within the civilian community to important political divisions
here; not a homogenous category.
b. Focus on the regime or administration:
- Consider divisions within the ranks of those who seek to thwart the
insurgents.Settlers may have different interests from colonial
officials on the ground who may have different interests from colonial
officials in the metropole.
- Consider liberation armies as a sub-genre of rebel movements. They
are often shaped by the kind of state that they are opposing.
4. Implications for the politics of these states:
How do the politics of winning liberation through armed struggle
translate into actual governance?
Alphabet soup of liberation armies:
Vs British rule in Kenya: KCA, “Mau Mau”
Vs Rhodesian Front (led by Ian Smith) in Rhodesia (later Zimbabwe):
ZANU (Zanla –led by Robert Mugabe; PRC support) and ZAPU
(Zipra – led by Joshua Nkomo; Soviet support)
Vs Derg regime in Ethiopia: TPLF [Tigrayan], EPLF [Eritrean] Vs apartheid South Africa: PAC (Poqo; PRC support) and ANC (MK
– led by Nelson Mandela; Soviet support)
Vs. Portuguese in Angola: UNITA (led by Jonas Savimbi; South
African and US support) and MPLA(Cuban and Soviet support)
Vs Portuguese in Mozambique: FRELIMO (led by Joaquim Chissano)
and RENAMO (Rhodesian and SouthAfrican support)
Vs apartheid SouthAfrica in Namibia: SWAPO (led by Sam Nujoma)
Argument by Reno William:
The majority rule against the white minority relied on the support of the external
factors, for their success. This was for financial and logistic support. Also the
ideological would be used to gain support from the external factors. Eg Zapu and
how it shaped her ideology in order to reflect those of Nyerere and that of Kennedy
in Zambia. The SWAPO (South West Africa People’s liberation organization) was
strengthened by the UN support, from training to mobilization. Also the base for
fighting in these majority rebel group was put in the neighbouring countries.
• Week five: South Africa, is it the model for Africa or an extreme example
for the settlers state. How is SA different or the same. U might compare
this with other countries such as Zambia. The struggle for the land control.
Maria argues the formation of the state but again the important reading
here is Mudani and the indirect rule. He argues that South Africa was not
different from other countries, and this actually gives the idea that forming
SA produce the identity and also he looks at the legal means that were used
to make the identity. Look at it more closely and also how the race start
difference power in terms of horizontal and vertical power. Ie the whites in
top, send by the Indians and the last black.
African Politics and Government
II: Lecture Five Outline
SouthAfrica as anAfrican State Cf. Mahmoud Mamdani
“Typical” in its distinction between customary and metropolitan law
Unique in the structured coincidence of race and class
Basic indicators: despite its relative prosperity, the country has terrible
human development indicators, due to high levels of inequality and
legacy of apartheid.
1. The Set Up
1910 Rule by decree. Establishment of Union of SouthAfrica.
1927 Customary rule which generalized, for the first time, a dual
legal order throughout SouthAfrica.
2. The StruggleAgainst Apartheid
1948 National Party came to power and institutionalised apartheid
Population classification (Population RegistrationAct)
Physical separation of people on basis of race and ethnicity (Group Areas Act, influx control, establishment of Bantustans/
1912 African National Congress (ANC) founded; profoundly middle
class and moderate
1944 establishment of theANC Youth League [Nelson Mandela]
1955 Adoption of the Freedom Charter
-> split with the Africanists and the formation of the Pan Africanist
Congress (PAC) and the Azanian People’s Organisation (AZAPO)
Increasingly violent repression and struggle
1960 Sharpeville -> launch of armed struggle
1976 Soweto and the launch of the youth uprising.
1983 Introduction of tricameral parliament which attempts to reform
the system but continues to exclude Africans-> formation of the
United democratic Front and period of protracted urban upheaval
1989 PW Botha is succeeded by FW de Klerk
27 April 1994: SouthAfrica’s first ever democratic elections
3. Fourteen Years of Democracy
i) HIV/AIDS ii) Economic growth and addressing poverty
RDP and the attempt to redress welfare imbalances; The pension
GEAR and macroeconomic management
Affirmative action and black economic empowerment
iii) The establishment of security, peace and order
resolve the political crisis
deal with crime
Threat of regional disorder emanating from Zimbabwe
Start of class:
Myriam Makeba, Enregistrement public au Theatre des Champs
Vusi Mahlasela, Silang Mabele
Lyrics for Vusi Mahlasela’s “Weeping”:
I knew a man who lived in fear
It was huge, it was angry, it was growing near. Behind his house, a secret place
Was the shadow of a demon he could never face.
He built a wall of steel and flame
and men with guns to keep it tame
and standing there he made it plain
that the nightmare would never ever rise again
but the fear and the fire and the guns remained
It doesn’t matter now, it’s over anyhow.
He tells the world that it’s sleeping
but as the night came round
I heard its lonely sound;
it wasn’t roaring, it was weeping.
And then one day the neighbours came;
they were curious to know about these guns and flames.
They stood around outside the wall
but of course there was nothing to be heard at all
“My friends,” he said “we’ve reached our goal:
The threat is under firm control.
As long as peace and order reign,