It is vital to debate economic, political future of Africa

It is nearing impossibility to discuss and debate the true economic, political and social development of Africa.

The continent is fragmented into several smaller countries. Upon creation, this division gave false hope and enabled some countries to see themselves as superior or more affluent than others.
 
For example, Burkina-Faso and Mali, which was a latent body of international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), The World Bank distorting and concealing the facts of their true geological studies and untapped potential?

To dominate and consolidate power, the West places selected, not elected leaders in some countries. In reality, the Opposition does not exist. The African people have become hostage to the African dinosaurs and corruptors.

The new Africa was born from the balance sheet of the West and European elite and ruling class.
The year1800s, is the official period of turning Africa into a conquered and fully encompassed territory.

In 1884, the tragic fate of Africa was formalised, this time permanently, thanks to the complicity of certain sons of Africa and the ignorance of our ancestors.

This domination of Africa by the West, and more specifically by the French colonisation, was never to be considered as the cementation of independence by the French, but just the annexation of Africa into the Western world and the French Treasury.

It is time to consider the territorial limits drawn by colonisation as being void. Over time, the geographical lines of Independence will be redrawn into one single continental country and five sub-territories:

West Africa, Central Africa, East Africa, North Africa, and Southern Africa. For example, West Africa could have Abidjan as its capital and each country will become a State of this new redrawn geographical entity that serves as a purposeful revenue stream for the Western elite.

What could be the political reasons that could lure these countries to abandon their sovereignty to adopt a collective sovereignty?

For French-speaking countries, the reason could be the potential abolishment of certain defence agreements between the French army and French-speaking countries.

The current defence agreements serve the interests of the French military and new agreements would allow the French to have further access to territories not currently permissible.

For example, Ivory Coast could consent and gift land to the French military, which would be available to the local inhabitants for cultivation of different varieties of food, which would allow the country to be self-sufficient in terms of food with the exportation of the surplus.

We illustrate how the West manipulates Africans at will. First, the case of Togo in 2005 during the succession of president Faure Gnassingbe. President Olusegun Obassadjo of Nigeria, who initially was opposed to the passing of hereditary power of President Eyadema Gnassigbe to his son Faure Gnassingbe.

However, after receiving French emissaries from president Jacques Chirac promising him heavens in the form of the French support of Nigeria becoming a full member of the UN Security Council, the Nigerian president was on board of the Togo power transition.
Nigeria turned a blind eye to the election of son Eyadema Gnassingbe to become the new president of Togo. Nigeria is still seeking membership in the UN Security Council to date.

In 2010, the political crisis in Cote d’Ivoire was reaching fever pitch. At the guidance and request of the French, both Nigeria and South Africa were involved collectively in finding relief for the crisis. The French governments again were playing political chess with a seat at both ends of the table.

The French government promising both Nigeria and South Africa support at the UN regarding full membership of the Security Council.

Dr Mehenou Amouzou is from European
Advanced Institute of Management.