Out of all the colonial powers to set foot in Africa, France is arguably the most invested. When I say invested I don’t mean it in the same terms of china’s capital in Africa – I mean a dominion over Africa which has ironically turned into a dependence. France’s history with Africa is mainly concentrated in North and West Africa with countries like ivory coast, Mali, Algeria, Sierra Leone to name a few. What many don’t know is that decades after the independence of African nations from France, France still desperately clings on to some sort of control over its former colonies. This is just an example of the neo-colonialism that has been developed since independence. My aim for this blog is to help us understand the historical factors that has led to France’s intense dependence on Africa and how France still exerts influence over Africa today.
“Without Africa, France will slide down into the rank of a third [world] power” – former French President Jacques René Chirac
A strong quote right? What’s even more fascinating is that it was said by two former French prime ministers. See those in high places in France know that France can literally not survive without Africa and will at all costs maintain some sort of control over Africa. To understand this unique, intense interest in Africa, we must go back to a critical juncture in the 19th century – the industrial revolution. Before the industrial revolution there were a few European powers who had significant international influence – Britain, Russia, France and the ottoman empire. However, the industrial revolution completely changed the dynamics of power relations in Europe with new technology creating unparalleled opportunities for growth and development. However, the key issue for France was the rapid economic growth occurring in Britain with the industrial revolution led to a significant gap in power relations between Britain and France. The political instability in France with the various revolutions occurring within 19th century meant that France could not take advantage of the industrial revolution to the same extent as Britain. Their failure to take advantage meant that their relative economic strength gradually waned and with that their military and international influence weakened. The rise of America and Germany as increasingly influential figures due to their burgeoning economies (based of industrial revolutions) further heaped pressure on France and had forced them to seek new ways to improve their economic strength and keep pace with pack. The new opportunity was Africa. The end of the 19th century saw the ‘scramble for Africa’ and it allowed France to colonise countries rich in minerals and resources which fuelled the French economy. This birthed France’s economic dependence on African colonies and by the time of independence, France’s economy was significantly reliant on African resources, capital and labour. Thus, when independence occurred, France was the most hostile of European nations as it had the most to lose.
The hostility shown by France after independence is an issue that has not had enough attention and needs to be addressed because the sort of attitudes shown then is still around. When Sékou Touré of Guinea decided in 1958 to get out of the French colonial empire, and opted for the country independence, the French colonial elite in Paris got so furious, and in a historic act of fury the French administration in Guinea destroyed everything in the country which represented what they called the benefits from French colonization. Three thousand French left the country, taking all their property and destroying anything that which could not be moved: schools, nurseries, public administration buildings were crumbled; cars, books, medicine, research institute instruments, tractors were crushed and sabotaged; horses, cows in the farms were killed, and food in warehouses were burned or poisoned. The purpose of this outrageous act was to send a clear message to all other colonies that the consequences for rejecting France would be very high. Even when Sylvanus Olympio, the first president of the Republic of Togo tried to find a moderate version of full autonomy by conceding to pay an annual debt to France for the so called benefits Togo got from French colonization in order that the country was not destroyed, France estimated was so inflated that it took up 40% of the country’s budget in 1963. Olympio decide to leave the FCM and print his own money. On January 13, 1963, three days after he started printing his country own currency, a squad of illiterate soldiers backed by France killed the first elected president of newly independent Africa. Olympio was killed by an ex French Foreign Legionnaire army sergeant called Etienne Gnassingbe who supposedly received a bounty of $612 from the local French embassy for the hit man job. The same happened to Modiba Keita – the first president of Mali. The supporting of coups by France was a deliberate and repeated tactic by France to ensure that their dominance and influence over the region maintained and highlighted the extent to which they would go to have some influence. I believe with an understanding of the historical atrocities of France post African independence highlights their dependence on Africa’s resources and the reality behind France’s real attitudes to immigrants from such countries today.
As touched on, one area of extreme tension is the colonial tax imposed on France after African independence. All francophone nations in Africa are pegged to the franc. In return for having their own currency pegged to the franc, Francophone nations had to deposit 85% of their foreign reserves at the French central bank which is currently costing African countries $500 billion. To add salt to the wounds, the related countries can only access 15% of their money in any given year. Other terms include the priority to French interests and companies in public procurement and public biding even if African countries can obtain better value for money elsewhere. With France’s right of first refusal on any countries’ raw or natural resources discovered and their exclusive right to supply military equipment along with the ability to re-deploy troops in a country to protect its interests, we see a pattern emerging. What we see here is France reshaping their control of their former colonies by controlling key stakes in these countries such as the foreign reserves and public service, thus providing them with the leverage and the influence to ensure that their interests in Africa are maintained. The term that strikes out to me the most as particularly damaging to Francophone countries is the depositing of 85% of their deposits in French treasury. The economic implications of this is astonishing because such foreign reserves could be the money need to fund infrastructure projects, subsidising fledgling industries and investment in their education system. These foreign reserves would have freed up space for other government revenue to spent elsewhere and could ease a country’s reliance on debt borrowing and aid. The French right of first refusal of raw and natural resources prevents African countries from access to export revenues which is a key source of revenue for development as many national budgets rely heavily on tax revenue from exports. Overall the colonial tax is essentially maintain France’s stronghold over Africa and is another example of neo-colonialism.
A subject I would like to touch which is related is the issue of French nationality. In wake of the French football’s team world cup win and Trevoh Noah’s joke of France being the ‘6th African team’, there has been a lot of discussion over the reality of ‘French citizenship’. The large proportion of France’s team originating from mainly north and west Africa is not a coincidence but in fact a consequence of the forced assimilation pursued by France decades ago in order to keep some sort of power over their former colonies. France now performs he process of removing data of a new citizens former nationality once they become a French citizen in order to promote inclusiveness and equality. The argument here is that many African originated French citizens are citizens on paper but in reality, face massive inequality, institutional racism and Islamophobia on a daily basis. So, the idea that France can suddenly celebrate and praise players of who 80% are Muslim and over 50% are black is ironic and a blatant example of double standard. Furthermore, I see the notion to remove data on origins of new French citizens and push for this extreme form of inclusiveness rather frustrating, as it is an example of the act of ‘colour-blind’. The act of trying to create a colour-blind society is great if every skin tone was treated equally. However, the blatant issue is that there is serious inequality and racism towards black and especially black Muslims. Trying to be ‘colour-blind’ in an unequal society simply papers over the daily racism and discrimination African originated French citizens face in France and to be honest, removes all accountability for the failure of France as a whole to accommodate and create a fair, equal society. This was exactly the motive behind Trevor Noah’s jokes that many fails to comprehend due to their ‘colour-blind’ thinking. What makes it worse is that those who are ‘colour-blind’ are selective with it. They are ‘colour-blind when African immigrants from former colonies do something which benefits them (e.g. winning the world cup, the French immigrant who saved a child from a fire in a tall estate), but outside of that, they are viewed as second class and inferior. This is not an issue that resonated only with France but for many European countries (Ozil and German national football team, British boxer Anthony Joshua etc.) who have a significant number of immigrants within its land.
I hope this article has given us an insight into the relationship between France and Africa and opens us up to the way France, and actually the west in general has kept their stronghold in Africa. France’s actions with its former colonies is another example alongside China (which I have touched on) where the threat or in this case the act of neo-colonialism is occurring in Africa. The issue is that these former colonies rely on being pegged to the franc in order to have some sort of relatively stable exchange rate. Until former French colonies, create some sort of stable and strong currency, French control over her former colonies will continue. My solution to creating a stable currency will be touched on my next blog (hint – EU).
FO's perspectives 
Leave a comment