We Need To Talk About Africa
Prelude: I conducted research on Africa. I looked at foreign investment — public and private, diplomatic missions, and realities unfolding across the continent. I was familiar with African politics and development before this week but, every documentary I watched, every article I read, every investment firm I learned about just made me want to state that Africa Doesn’t Need Your Optics, It Needs Ownership.
I. Africa Is Not a Monolith
Africa is home to a wide range of governance systems, some democratic, others authoritarian, and many that operate in between. Ghana and Botswana have built relatively stable democratic institutions, while Eritrea and Equatorial Guinea remain deeply autocratic. Countries like Ethiopia and Rwanda maintain strong centralized leadership with their own development paths, shaped by historical and political context. These varying governance structures shape everything from how foreign investments are managed to how development programs are implemented and received. What works in Namibia may fail in Sudan, not because of incompetence, but because the political DNA and institutional cultures are fundamentally different. It holds thousands of ethnic groups, languages, and knowledge systems. Yet foreign investors, diplomats, and international institutions often treat it as a single economic zone, one template, one strategy, one direction. This mindset not only erases complexity; it produces development efforts that fail to take root. Any strategy that doesn’t begin with regional, political, and cultural specificity is destined to collapse.
II. Foreign Powers See Africa as a Tool, Not a Partner
Development projects across the continent are being driven by outside interests: resource extraction, strategic positioning, and market expansion. The Lagos-Calabar rail project, backed by Chinese financing, has raised concerns over transparency and debt sustainability. The UAE’s heavy investment in Red Sea ports like Berbera, while framed as economic development, serves clear geopolitical and military interests. And even high-profile climate projects, such as reforestation initiatives in the Sahel, are often designed with donor optics in mind rather than long-term viability. These ventures prioritize the headlines they generate abroad over the needs they are meant to address at home. The underlying assumption is clear: Africa is where foreign powers come to take, not collaborate.
III. Capitalism’s Obsession With Growth Fuels the Exploitation
Since the end of WWII, the world has run on a model of endless economic growth. In Africa, this has translated into a rush for mega-projects dams, mines, oil pipelines — often backed by foreign capital and executed with little regard for local impact. The result is environmental degradation, forced displacement, and cultural erosion. Communities are uprooted to make way for highways that lead to nowhere, and ecosystems are permanently altered in the name of progress. Growth, as defined by external metrics, is prioritized over sustainability, stability, or sovereignty. That logic has created a global scramble for influence, markets, and resources — especially in Africa. This competition is artificial, built on the myth that growth has no limits. In reality, it tears through landscapes and cultures to win a popularity and profit contest that benefits no one but those already in power.
IV. Real Development Means Investing in People
Africa has the youngest population on Earth. Yet foreign-backed development continues to overlook the urgent need for quality education, skills training, and job creation. Too many projects focus on physical infrastructure or headline-grabbing innovations while ignoring the systems needed to support a thriving workforce. Youth across the continent are being left behind, equipped neither with the tools to compete globally nor the means to build locally. Investments in vocational programs, teacher training, higher education access, and sustainable job ecosystems would do more to shape Africa’s future than any single megaproject. Without this, the continent risks losing not just time, but an entire generation of potential. What Africa needs is not Akon City or vague innovation zones; it needs schools, hospitals, roads that connect, and systems that work. Development must serve people, not portfolios. It must uplift tradition while preparing youth for a globalized future.
V. Foreign Powers Are Undermining Their Own Goals
The irony is brutal: states say they want long-term partnerships, but their actions suggest otherwise. The U.S. has continued to prioritize military partnerships over civil society support in regions like the Sahel, with limited success. China, despite massive infrastructure investments, has left countries like Zambia struggling with debt and under-maintained projects. France’s interventionist legacy in West Africa, framed as security assistance, has repeatedly inflamed anti-colonial resentment. These contradictions reveal a pattern: what is framed as partnership is often a one-sided transaction that leaves African nations worse off. Yet they gut the very environments and communities they rely on. The DRC is mined into oblivion. The Sahel is destabilized by foreign-backed security deals that collapse. You don’t build foundations by destroying them. The result isn’t progress — it’s a ticking geopolitical time bomb.
VI. Global Governance Is Just a Performance
All the summits, initiatives, and declarations amount to branding exercises. From the Africa-France Summit to the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit, international forums are more concerned with optics than substance. Declarations are made, funds are pledged, but follow-through is often minimal or redirected toward donor-country priorities. Investment commitments morph into PR moments, not long-term strategies. These spaces are designed to showcase strategic alignment and ‘shared values,’ but rarely do they empower African leaders to lead the conversation.
Get Rushil’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
The African Union and regional bodies like ECOWAS or IGAD are frequently sidelined in favor of bilateral agreements that reinforce dependency. Even development institutions like the World Bank and IMF maintain structural programs that prioritize economic performance metrics over lived realities. It’s governance for showcase, not for people. The entire system incentivizes looking effective over being effective. And even those who seem sensible are caught in a machine that punishes nuance, rewards performance, and forgets that governance should serve the governed.
VII. Africa Needs Ownership, Not Oversight
If the world wants to benefit from Africa’s rise, it must first let Africa define it. There are already models for what this looks like. Rwanda has demonstrated how state-driven development with an emphasis on local stability can yield results, even as it faces criticism for centralized control. Senegal’s rejection of certain land deals that endangered community access to vital resources shows how local resistance can reshape development terms. Kenya’s growing tech sector thrives not because of foreign input alone, but due to local entrepreneurship backed by targeted infrastructure. These examples aren’t perfect, but they prove that when African nations lead, development becomes more grounded, more accountable, and more sustainable. That means respecting local knowledge, prioritizing people over resources, and dismantling the belief that anyone outside the continent knows best. Development is not a donation. It’s a relationship. And the era of dictating from afar must end now.
