By Toyin Falola
For a long time, the response of Africans to leadership paralysis that is almost consuming the continent has been very reactionary and not necessarily proactive. With no exemption of any African country in particular, the crops of leaders that one would find at every position of leadership are individuals with sufficient demonstration of unpreparedness as they either have demonstrated no creative approach to the myriads of challenges confronting the continent or they are predominantly ideologically helpless in solving them. Their futile attempts to project some effectively planned strategies to tackle their existential challenges have indicated that they either do not have a mind or are grossly inefficient in handling the task ahead of them. Usually, what happens is that they believe in a one-size-fits-all approach. Therefore, they have traditionally dedicated themselves to extracting practices adopted elsewhere, disregarding the contextual import of such ideas. In essence, most African countries continue to find themselves in the intractable challenges that are byproduct of the superficial political aesthetics of others and do not invest in thinking their way out of the problems that face their people. They are an incurable believer that Africans are themselves deficient in independent thoughts and cannot produce refined intellectual ideas that would be used to salvage their internal challenges. But then, this trend would not go on forever.
Now that some foresighted African leaders are putting their thoughts together to create such an academic institution as the African School of Governance, it reveals their awareness about the underlying duties that have been abandoned for a long time due to the inability to face the challenges head-on. They concluded that giving reactionary solutions to Africa’s challenges would only tilt another way for the misdirection of African youths for many generations. Such youths, I’m afraid, would only be competent in following the Global North in whatever decisions they take, not minding if the universalist decisions and solutions can address their local issue.
Refined intellectuals like Professor Moghalu, who has been appointed as the maiden President of the ASG, promise to introduce a profound style of handling intending African leaders who would eventually occupy important positions where ideas and values to be used in governance would be theirs and not parodied along their colonizer’s paths. Over the years, it has become common knowledge that anyone who has economic power, questionable as the source of their affluence, always contests for political offices where ordinarily refined ideas are needed to maximum impact. It does not matter if they are utterly bereft of values and initiatives that can provoke cutting-edge and remarkable progress; what is prioritized is that they are given the mandate to represent even when they do not know how.
This is the foundation of the motivation that pushed these outstanding individuals to develop the initiative that brought ASG into existence. Across many African countries, especially in modern times, unconfirmed information suggests that people who have amassed through diabolical sources are either found picking interest in political positions or make themselves kingmakers who sponsor others that would occupy these positions. If this is the case, which is highly likely, one cannot but wonder where the future of African politics would be driven. This suspicion and anxiety cannot be necessary considering the discovery that in places where these individuals of questionable moral character find themselves in political offices, they have done extensively well to major in inanities and then minor in frivolities. Where other countries are making impressive leaps to overcome economic, political, climate and sociocultural challenges, these individuals are either neck-deep in pursuing policies that reinforce their nefarious inclinations or ones that do not benefit ordinary people. For instance, some countries have legalized the idea that political officeholders are immune to accountability actions when they have violated the offices where they are meant to protect the public interest. Regardless of the amount they have embezzled, it seems they cannot be called into question by the necessary security agencies to protect them. This is odd. The economically powerful countries of the world do not attain this feat through this deplorable process.
Professor Moghalu and I think many people across the world believe that the foundational problem that faces Africa is a leadership problem because not only does everything that concerns a nation go directly to the table of the leader, but it is also true that the ability to initiate innovative programs and policies, with the accompanying power of implementation, resides with the leaders. And then, any leader who develops anxiety towards a politically and economically liberated citizen would always be bereft of ideas that could ordinarily transform the collective society. In their inchoate desire to be regarded as an authority or cling to power as long as possible, they would be disconcerted by the thought that the groups of people they otherwise lord over would become liberated and then undermine their authority. That feeling indicates their inability to evolve and understand the dynamics of things in their time. Although they could become very successful in this domain, they would create a generation of people who have no idea how to move their nation forward. And regardless of how an individual remains and dies as a powerful individual when problems come knocking, they would not be insulated from the consequences of their limited foresight. A troubled citizenry in chaos does not differentiate between influential and less powerful people. When they strike, they would ultimately do so with disregard for anyone’s status. Professor Moghalu admits there are system-designed economic challenges, but he reiterated that they won’t come in a situation with purposeful leadership.
Something important to note in the conversation between Professors Moghalu and Nimi Wariboko is that both must examine what is fundamental for a leader to do when they come to power. To Wariboko, systemic foundations are nonnegotiable in changing people’s attitudes to social and political responsibilities, but Moghalu takes a different approach. We have been familiar with the contrasting views. Some individuals believe that by having the right leaders in the correct position, the people’s actions will be influenced. To be honest, such ideologues are accurate because when people of good moral character are placed in leadership positions, they use their ethical principles and strength to provoke a change. However, that thinking is defeated by the understanding that people’s moral character barely affects the company, groups, and the body of people they work with. Leaders are naturally expected to work with an endless number of people with whom they often do not share personal relationships. Even if such a leader has a glistering moral identity, they cannot determine what happens in different ministries, departments, and aspects of leadership where very sensitive decisions would be made and would affect the collective progress of the people. More importantly, you cannot guarantee that good leaders will always come to power every time. If this one is good, the following five successors may not have a similar moral view.
Interestingly, systemic changes can happen when the right systems are installed among people. Systems from time have often been compelling in shaping a people’s character to responsibilities. It has been recognized as regulating people’s behavior even when they do not want to. The reluctance of leaders in Asian countries, especially China and maybe North Korea, to steal public money comes from the awareness that the consequences of their actions are immediate. Rather than shielding the corrupt ones among them and preventing them from answering to their actions, they have systems that would generally make them accountable and show them the consequences of their actions. Does this mean that they do not have corrupt officials amongst them? No. Does that mean abuse of offices would not be found there? No. These would be encountered at a minimal level. In essence, it is very fundamental to install the right systems and empower them to make decisions that they consider great for the advancement of society. While this is germane, it is also essential that they install people with admirable moral principles in offices who would also not compromise the ethical standards of the system and not soil its integrity.
This is the final report on the interview on “African Leadership” with Dr. Kingsley Moghalu on January 19, 2025. For the transcript:
