Report on the Inaugural Programme of the Africa Leadership Forum

Ota, Nigeria 24 October to 1 November 1988


Report on the Inaugural Programme of the Africa Leadership Forum

Ota, Nigeria 24 October to 1 November 1988

Page I. II. Introduction Review of Proceedings A. Challenges of economic development B. Challenges of the international Economic environment C. Challenges of social and cultural development D. Challenges of the South African situation E. Challenges of policy formation III. Group Discussions A. Political and strategic issues B. Economic and social issues IV. Summary and Conclusion 30 33 37 1 5 6 13 17 24 26

Appendix I A List of participants Appendix II A List of statements and papers 45 41



The Africa Leadership Forum was established as a private initiative to assist incumbent and potential African leaders who have been propelled into leadership positions yet who have not had the opportunity to acquire all the skills necessary for leadership. It is, indeed, only rarely that African leaders have been adequately exposed to and gained experience on the myriad issues and problems confronting the continent. The enormous difficulties that face Africa today and the even more worrisome problems of tomorrow make it imperative to establish such an institution as the Africa Leadership Forum. It is the view of the Forum that leadership skills are not only prerequisites for those in the executive branch of government or in the top echelons of political parties. Leadership skills are needed at many levels of the society. Industry and finance have become such powerful sectors today that even a dictator, albeit with an arsenal at his disposal, must bend under pressure from the leaders of the private sector. In our educational systems, too, and in our military institutions, in the arts and culture, in government service and in diplomacy, there are many people who must posses the skills of leadership. The intention of the Forum is to identify potential leaders, in all these spheres, through the assistance of seasoned leaders, the growing pool of active participants, through the press, and through recognized personal achievers. The Forum aims to bring together participants from Africa, with a sprinkle of participants from other regions, and incumbent and retired leaders from all walks of life. It sees such interaction as important in offering informal preparation and assistance to those who would be called upon to lead in the various sectors of the African continent. The broad objectives of the Forum are: (a) To encourage the diagnosis, understanding, and informed search for solutions to local, regional, and global problems, taking full account of their interrelationships and mutual consequences; (b) To develop, organize and support programmes for the training of able and promising Africans with leadership potentials so as to expose them to the demands, duties and obligations of leadership positions and to prepare them systematically to assume higher responsibilities and to meet the challenges of an interdependent world;

(c) To generate greater understanding and to enhance the knowledge and awareness of issues of development and social problems, within a global context, among young, potential leaders from all sectors of the society, cutting across national, regional, continental, professional and institutional borders and with a view to fostering close and enduring relationships and promoting life-long association and cooperation among such potential leaders: (d) To support and encourage the diagnosis and informed search for appropriate and effective solutions to local and regional African problems from an African perspective – within the framework of global interdependence. This includes consideration for phased action programmes that can be initiated by various countries, sub-regions and institutions. The inaugural programme of the Africa Leadership Forum took place at the Forum’s Conference Centre, Ota, Nigeria from 24 October to 1 November 1988. Participants from eleven African countries and six non-African countries attended this inaugural programme. The list of these participants is contained in Appendix 1. The Programme was opened by His Excellency Ibrahim Babangida, President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, who declared on that occasion publicly the support of his Government for the private initiative that the Africa Leadership Forum represents, which may materialize in the near future in a very substantial way. Subsequently, a keynote address entitled “Africa in Today’s World” was delivered by the former Head of State of Nigeria, General, Olusegun Obasanjo, who had initiated the idea of establishing the Africa Leadership Forum. Both addresses are of pivotal importance for appreciating the enormity of the leadership crises in Africa and they are published together with the discussion thereon in a separate booklet. The inaugural programme comprised a number of seminars, at which papers were presented and discussed, and group meetings where the leadership challenges in specific areas could be discussed in more depth. The programme also provided direct and stimulating exposure to the pressing problems of rural areas, through a one-day field trip to the Ibarapa area of Oyo State, and to the problems of metropolitan Lagos, through a

presentation by and exchange of views with the Military Governor of Lagos State. The participants also enjoyed social programmes and contacts with the Ifo-Ota Local Government Council and the Government of Lagos State. While reflecting on the operations of the Forum, participants suggested that future meetings should be of a shorter duration than the inaugural programme, lasting, perhaps, not more than four days. Such meetings can be held twice a year. As a long-term project, there was a feeling that the Forum should help initiate the establishment of a high-level African think tank or a Center for Policy and Strategic Studies, where much sustained investigation and analysis of the African situation can be undertaken to assist policy formulation and decision-making by African leaders. The critical financial support by several donors, which helped make the Forum and the inaugural programme a reality, must be gratefully acknowledged. Generous and significant contributions were received from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Government of Japan, The Carnegie Corporation of New York, Mr. Victor Mpoyo, an African industrialist, and the Africa Leadership Foundation Inc. The Forum extends its sincere gratitude also to governmental agencies, embassies, private sector institutions and individuals whose warm hospitality added welcome social dimensions to an intellectually most stimulating encounter. It is not possible to indicate all of these benefactors in this brief report but special mention must be made of the Nigerian Ministry of External Affairs for facilitating the attendance of participants; the Lagos State Government for hosting delegates to a lecture on the “Problems of the Lagos Metropolitan Area” and a delightful dinner and culture show; the IfoOta Local Government Council for exposing delegates to cultural life at the grass-roots level; to the A.G. Leventis Group of Companies and to Tower Aluminium (Nigeria) Limited for offering dinners at which participants were exposed to the private sector interest in leadership issues.



Review of Proceedings

Appendix II contains a list of some nineteen statements and papers presented at the programme. Each of the papers examined specific aspects of the challenges confronting African leaders today and the nature of the external environment in which they have to work to resolve these challenges. In order to provide some indication of the rich content of ideas, views and suggestions provided by these papers, the review has been organized in five sections: A. B. C. D. E. The Challenges of economic development The Challenges of the international economic environment The Challenges of social and cultural development The Challenges of the South African situation The Challenges of policy formation

The deliberations and recommendations of two groups which were formed to allow participants to explore in greater detail responses to current leadership challenges are reviewed in Chapter III. A. Political and strategic issues B. Economic and social issues Chapter IV provides in a nutshell the broad conclusions reached during this inaugural programme of the Africa Leadership Forum.


A. The Challenges of Economic Development

Several papers dealt with the economic situation of the continent. Starting with the opening address by President Babangida entitled “The Challenge of Leadership in African Development”, reference was made to the fact that in the closing quarter of the 20th century, Africa finds itself in a debt overhang equivalent to 44 per cent of its gross domestic product. If the continent is to recover from this debt overhang and confront the twenty first century unencumbered by debt, hunger, poverty disease and ignorance, it needs leaders who are strong and self-confident, creators of great ideas who are able to command the loyalty of their people and who are totally committed to the development of their countries and to the imperative for peace and brotherhood among nations. Such leaders, in turn, must be able to mobilize and commit their people to a programme of honest, hard work, relying on the sweat of their own labours to improve the quality of their own lives. President Babangida observed that, throughout history, nations without strong leaders have had no enduring philosophy and have remained vulnerable to external pressure. Consequently, Africa needs today a systematic examination of the failures of past and current African leadership in the development process. Equally, there should be a recognition of the imperative for sustained high-level training of potential African leaders to ensure a process of orderly, intergenerational succession. This trend of thought was carried one step further in the keynote address by General Olusegun Obasanjo, entitled “Africa in Today’s World”, in which he tried to define the new context in which African leaders have to operate. That context derives from the demise, in the early 1980s of the international economic order that evolved after World War II. The presently emerging world constellation is not only characterized by the importance and preponderance of the developed world but also by the growing significance of the countries of the Asia-Pacific Rim, particularly Taiwan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong. Disappointingly, it also depicts the increasing marginalization of the whole of Africa, particularly the subSaharan region. This marginalization is a function of the fact that this region has remained one of the most unreconstructed economies, where production processes have been frozen within colonial moulds. International indebtedness brought the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund

into Africa in a manner unparalleled anywhere else in the post-war world. These organizations now determine the tenor and tempo of the development of many African countries. Everywhere, the evidence is of a continent in dereliction and decay, rapidly becoming “the third world of the Third World”. But the position is far from hopeless: General Obasanjo suggested four areas where African leaders could begin to transform the circumstances of their countries and the whole continent. First, African leaders have to stimulate creativity in their peoples through establishing social institutions which make for a humane society. Second, African leaders must endow political institutions and political processes with the requisite democratic content so as to guarantee their necessary legitimacy and safeguard them against violent overthrow. Third, African leaders must review their present organization as nation-states and strive towards new forms of larger, regional economic associations with the aim of political union. Lastly, African leaders must pursue serious scientific and technological development through encouraging the flowering of indigenous talents, experts, and intellectuals inside and outside their national universities. To pursue these goals as vigorously as the situation demands, General Obasanjo concluded by calling for more purposeful and regular economic summits of African leaders and the establishment of the necessary machinery to follow up on the decisions of such summits. In his presentation, Professor Adebayo Adedeji further elaborated on the perilous economic situation in Africa today. He sees African economic everywhere as having suffered a systemic collapse caused by low productivity, lack of co-operation and collective self-reliance among African countries, and a high level of dependence on a Europe which is becoming more and more inward-looking and more and more determined that Europe is its own best market. The answer to the situation is not a mindless structural adjustment of the type currently being initiated in one African country after another. Certainly, what is required is not a structural adjustment which, even with a human face, leads to the closing down of schools and hospitals whilst leaving what remains with no books or drugs. What Africa needs is a serious structural transformation constructed on greatly increased per capita productivity which seeks, as a first step, to end the era of hunger in a continent where only 20 per cent of cultivable land is at present under cultivation.


In confronting the present economic malaise in Africa, Dr. Tariq Husain, the Resident Representative of the World Bank in Nigeria, called attention to the continued relevance of three challenges that Sir Arthur Lewis had posed to African leaders as far back as 1968. These were: (a) to strive to raise the domestic savings rate to 30 per cent of gross national product (no African country has achieved a rate of over 20 per cent: Nigeria in the mid-1980s achieved only 10 per cent, Ghana 8 per cent, and Zambia 13 per cent); (b) to invest heavily in the production of secondary (including technical) school graduates; and (c) to reduce drastically the parasitical growth of employment in the public sector. The failure to face up to these challenges is a preeminent cause of the current predicament on the continent. Yet, in any attempt to resolve the problems today, four new elements need to be taken into account. First, more than ever before, African leaders must strive to eliminate absolute poverty in their countries through setting targets for more equitable income distribution. At present, income distribution in Africa is strongly skewed in favour of the rich. An income distribution target whereby at least 7.5 per cent of national income accrues to the bottom 30 per cent, as against the present 2.5 – 3.5 per cent, is something that could be aimed for by the year 2000. Second, all sections of society should be assured of adequate nutrition through a food security programme which not only makes food available but promotes the financial ability of households to acquire it. Third, educational opportunities need to be enhanced both in the broad sense, i.e., with due regard for human rights, and in the narrow sense, i.e., education for increased productivity. Fourth, environmental resources must be conserved through reducing the rate of population growth, rationalizing the rate of exploitation of natural resources and being more vigilant in matters of pollution control in respect of both internally generated wastes and attempts to make the continent a dumping ground for toxic waste from developed countries. In all of these, African leaders need a revolution of perceptions and of approach, particularly in respect of rules that direct intergovernmental relationships for greater co-operation and negotiated progress. On the issue of co-operation and negotiated progress, the paper by D. Donatien Bihute, Chairman of the Meridien Bank of Burundi, was particularly instructive. He observed that after 30 years of independence and collective commitment to achieving economic integration, inter-African trade still accounts for only 5 per cent of the continent’s trade flows. Apart from external interference and sabotage, the main reasons for this state of affairs are the predominance of political and short-sighted considerations in

the decision-making process and the lack of effective legal and administrative mechanisms to support and activate the main economic operators, especially from the private sector. To rectify the situation, he suggests political security and sound economic policies in each country; faith in the future of the continent and its constituent countries through investing in them; and improvement in general accessibility and communication networks as preconditions for facilitating multi-country cooperation involving the private sector. Given the above, the private sector in African countries can foster more effective co-operation if common tariffs and collective trade protections are instituted by sub-regional groupings against outsiders. Such groupings can engage in joint ventures in trade and industry and promote economic growth through greater interaction among national chambers of commerce. More importantly, they can organize the joint training of African managers, help them overcome linguistic barriers and use national and sub-regional trade fairs to foster the exchange of views and ideas for enhanced productivity. Finally, where trade imbalances result from such co-operation, mechanisms to correct these can be put in place through a special fund financed by the countries with positive surpluses. The strategic urgency of seriously confronting the agricultural and rural development challenges of the continent was presented in the paper by Prof. Akin Mabogunje, Vice-Chairman of the Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure, Office of the President, Nigeria. He argued that apart from the conventional wisdom of how to stimulate agricultural and rural development through price incentives of various types, much still remains to be done to create the structural context in which African agriculture can be truly modernized and its productivity greatly enhanced. Central to this would be strategies to deal with the land tenure situation and bring it into conformity with the market orientation of most of the institutions needed to stimulate agricultural productivity. Such strategies need not entail expensive modern land reform procedures, but could creatively use the community context in which most farmers and farming groups still exist to determine and register individual access to land in a manner acceptable to credit institutions. The need to achieve congruency through the market mechanism for access to all factors of agricultural production is the most pressing challenge for African agriculture if it is to resolve rapidly the problems of hunger, malnutrition and inadequate food supply in the continent.


The final paper on the challenges of economic development was a review of the lessons of experience with the development strategies pursued by African and other developing countries since the end of World War II. It was presented by Prof. A.M.A. Muhith, former Finance and Planning Minister of Bangladesh. He observed that, up to 1975, there was an unflinching devotion to economic growth and most developing countries, including many in Africa, registered growth rates of at least 3 per cent per annum. Much of this growth was promoted through transnational corporations, which were able to bring together profitably four processes that dominated the period: technological development; trade growth; cheap energy; and free capital movement. In spite of these, weaknesses were recognized, especially in developing countries where population growth remained largely uncontrolled, the poverty of an increasing proportion of the population was not checked, the environment was continuously assaulted and degraded, and national economies were poorly managed. From 1974 to 1985, therefore, these countries entered a period of payment crisis caused by the crisis of the “there Fs”: fuel, food and fertilizers. This was the period of hyperinflation, when country after country had to adopt rigorous austerity measures. The developed countries got out of this situation quickly as they were able to muster a new entrepreneurial spirit through which individual initiative as well as new organizational structures broke loose from the oligopolistic giant corporations; new technological advances were made, especially those based on computer and information revolution; inflation was kept in control and there was a substantial expansion of United States’ exports to the world. However, African and many other developing countries are still gripped in the throes of paralyzing structural adjustment programmes. If they are to return to the path of growth and development, there are a number of strategic imperatives they must attend to. First, they must rise above doctrinaire fanaticism and pay greater attention to implementation efficiency, selective investment programmes, higher productivity and greater overall efficiency. Second, they must operate their economies within flexible policy frameworks rather than on the basis of the rigid comprehensive planning format of conventional development plans. This would mean giving a greater role to the market mechanism in setting prices, to enterprise and to efficiency and to managing the national economy more through consultation than direction. Third, they must intensify domestic resource mobilization with emphasis on community efforts. Fourth, they must harness more energy

sources and give primacy to agriculture, which is required for overall growth, to diverting surpluses to industrialization, to creating employment opportunities and to generating demand in the economy. More than anything, they must reduce their population growth rate and appreciate that structural adjustment is likely to be long term rather than short term. Serious attention must be given by every African country to negotiating viable relationships with their development partners so as to create the environment necessary to revitalize their economies and put them back on the path of growth.



The Challenges of the International Economic Environment

One whole day was devoted to enable Mr. Helmut Schmidt, former Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, to give participants the benefit of his views on the current international economic environment within which African countries have to undertake the structural transformation of their economies. Mr. Schmidt began by noting that the structure of the world economy had become multi-polar. The size of the poles, however, is not easily determined by superpower status. Thus, although one may identify five superpowers at present in the world, their economic significance varies considerably. The Soviet Union is a military or strategic superpower but is neither an economic nor a financial one. Japan is par excellence an economic and financial superpower, with the potential of becoming a strategic superpower. It is noteworthy that one of the factors responsible for the enormous upswing in Japan’s economic strength over the last 30 years is the firm control it has placed on military spending, keeping this down to no more than one per cent of its gross national product. The United States is the major economic, financial and military superpower in the world. Its current difficulties with the twin trade and budget deficits could, however, be resolved by the end of the century. Europe as it is envisaged in 1992 is also a potentially formidable economic superpower, but the reluctance to establish a European monetary system or sacrifice more individual national sovereignty could inhibit the full realization of this potential. China can be seen as a superpower in ascendancy, currently stronger in military and strategic than in economic terms. Apart from these superpowers, there are the medium powers who can affect the global economic situation for good or for ill. On the one hand are the Asian countries such as Taiwan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong – the “four little tigers” On the other hand are the Middle Eastern countries of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Israel, which among them can provoke major international military confrontations. There are also the Latin American countries, whose external indebtedness can also cause a significant global crisis if not properly managed. In spite of this multi-polar structure, the most significant feature of the global economy is the highly integrated and interdependent nature of the financial system that keeps it together. The impact of an event anywhere in

the world can be felt in the system within a few minutes. There are no longer independent national stock markets which can be regulated and modulated by national authorities. All markets are now one international financial market, with no international authority to regulate its operation. The Bretton Woods institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank, have lost much of their impact in recent times. By contrast, no such integrated markets exist for commodities and foodstuffs, especially for oil or manufactured goods. And yet, these are the products that dominate the economies of developing countries. Thus, it is not clear what Third World countries mean when they press for a new international economic order. Such an order is already emerging – though it is not the type they want. The new order is the product of the reactions by the developed countries to the two oil shocks of 1973-1974 and 1979. As a result of the high oil prices most of these countries were able to invest in alternative energy sources, particularly nuclear power. The result is their increasing economic independence from raw material constraints and the enormous flexibility of their markets to switch from one consumer product to another. For African countries in particular, this situation has meant a severe marginalization of their economic importance, even for Europe. This fact must be borne in mind in designing economic policies and programmes for the period ahead. Its implications are many. First, the message from the international economic environment, increasingly, that Africa is on its own and must find its own way to salvation. At best, it can expect only official development assistance from developed countries. Second, not much can be expected from private financial institutions until present debts are retired. All talks of debt repudiation by debtor countries are unhelpful and likely to be self-defeating in the long run. The issue of debt overhang to private financial institutions is indeed one area where there is considerable scope for co-operative leadership in Africa. Thirdly, African and other developing countries must take the issue of population control seriously. By the year 2000, the world population will be approximately 6 billion, of which only 800 million will be in the industrialized countries. It is unthinkable that this latter group will shoulder the responsibility of developing the 5.2 billion people in the rest of the world. Fourthly, African leaders must reduce their defence expenditure and concentrate on investing in their nation’s development. In some African countries, military spending is as high as 14 per cent of gross national product. This cannot be sustained. Fifthly, African

countries must pursue a studied programme of diversification so that they are not tied to just one market or one country or one product. They must find ways of using their present reservoir of cheap labour to real economic advantage. Like Asian countries, they must deliberately set out to discover what they can produce cheaply and well to various foreign markets. Sixthly, African countries must concentrate on improving their economic management capacity. Great emphasis must be deliberately placed on training in economics and business administration as well as on widespread proficiency in the English language, which had emerged as the language of global commerce and international economic relations. Finally, African countries must be more circumspective about ideas and proposals coming from foreign sources. They must examine these against the background of their own cultural heritage and gradually build up confidence to be selective in regard to foreign innovations which can serve to transform for the better the socio-economic circumstances of the majority of their people.


C. The Challenges of Social and Cultural Development The papers presented on the challenges of social and cultural development emphasized the importance for African leaders to regain their pride and confidence in the integrity of their cultural heritage. Dr. Pierre-Claver Damiba, Assistant Administrator and Regional Director for Africa of the United Nations Development Programme, while presenting a message from the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme, observed that the development process in Africa, in many ways more than necessary, had been rather more wasteful, more disruptive and more traumatic than anywhere in the world. Perhaps this was because no thorough attention had been paid to Africa’s cultural values and social institutions, even by Africans themselves. Instead, Africans are confronted everywhere with negative images of themselves and their societies. Thus, it is worth stressing that, like other people, Africans cannot advance without a keen sense of their own self-worth and without the constant reinforcement of this sense. Nobel laureate Prof. Wole Soyinka further developed this theme with a paper entitled: “Twice bitten: The fate of Africa’s culture producers”. He began by emphasizing that culture is not a sum of parts but a summation and synthesis of the entire life of a people. It encompasses not only objective products and their interrelated activities but also the social psyche and the basic life affirming elements of a people as they evolve, as they transform the concept and manipulation of their environment and influence their assessment, rejection or conciliation with alien encounters. For ex-colonial territories, however, culture had become a slave to expertise, indentured to alien training and its inevitable repercussions. This has made it easy for Africans to accept transferred models of other people’s cultures, the products of different, specific conditions of climate, social life-styles, economic acceptance and even religious influences. Architectural programmes in most African countries are easily the most visible area of the greatest failure in terms of cultural enracination. The challenge of cultural productivity requires that attention be paid to the conditions of the producers of culture and their destiny at the hands of those who direct affairs of state. In this connection, Africa and African leaders stand self-indicted. There can be few African countries today where the artistic and intellectual potential of the people has not been truncated in the so-called process of nation-building. Many of these countries have experienced the internal equivalent of a brain-drain through the wanton

imprisonment and sometimes murder of their writers, their poets, their dramatists, their artists and the various intellectual producers of their culture. Some have even gone so far as to have books burnt in the manner of the medieval Inquisition in Europe. Everywhere, the story is a catalogue of the betrayal of African culture by African leaders and the sacrifices have been made as much by the masses as by the artists themselves and the intelligentsia. If Africa is to achieve real development and strive for a new and creative dimension of national identification, then African leaders must seek new inspiration through pursuing a vigorous policy of what Soyinka calls “raceretrieval”. This involves the conscious activity of recovering what has been hidden, lost, repressed, denigrated or indeed simply denied, not just by Africans themselves, but certainly by the conquerors of African peoples and their Eurocentric bias’ of thought and relationships. For if a people must develop, they must have constant recourse to their own history – a crucial component of their material art and culture – not only for inspiration but also to retrieve the fount and spring- head of their creativity. African leaders must therefore appreciate that the producers of this culture are not poor relatives of development; efforts must be made to ensure that they are no longer treated as front-line victims by those under the delusion of power, affected by leadership alienation and paranoia at the pinnacle of state authority. Professor Junzo Kawada of the Institute for the Study of the Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa based in Tokyo, Japan further explored the theme of the relationship between development and culture. He noted that the basic problem was how to relate the intrinsic cultural value of every society with the inequalities seen in the degree of development of those societies. Part of the answer must be that development cannot be considered in terms of some universal criteria but is to be sought on the basis of the cultural heritage of each society. In pursuing this line of thought, however, it is necessary to recognize three points. First, that in the course of the general global development of technology, a complete reversal is practically impossible. There is no way a society living in the twentieth century can reject all the conveniences that modern industrial civilization has brought the world. Second, that in our modern age the peoples of both the so-called developed and developing countries are contemporaries. Thus, irrespective of their levels of development, these societies are confronted and concerned with similar problems, such as urbanization, environmental degradation and so on. Third, that the conditions that enabled traditional technology to

function appropriately in the past have changed and it is important to reject a mere nostalgic and retrospective attachment to the “good old days”. Professor Kawada then used the example of Japan to illustrate the relationship between development and culture. He believes that the phenomenal development of Japan can be traced back to three significant elements of its cultural heritage. First, its linguistic unity, which made it easy to absorb, disseminate and popularize new ideas and concepts among all of the people. The second factor is the human-dependent character of Japanese traditional technology. European technological orientation, Prof. Kawada pointed out improves tools and instruments to obtain maximum result independently of the user’s personal skill and to economize human labour through exploiting non-human energy. In contrast to this, the technological orientation of Japan is to make tools and instruments whose functional efficiency depends heavily on the skill and manual dexterity of the user. This orientation has had two contradictory consequences for Japanese industrial development in modern times. Positively, it ensured that in the domain where precise manual skills were important, such as in the textile industry, the manufacturing of watches and bicycles, and later of cameras, transistor radios and so forth, Japan was able to compete effectively with Western countries. Negatively, however, Professor Kawada pointed out, in proportion to its development in the applied aspects of sciences, Japan has made astonishingly little original and creative contributions in the domain of fundamental scientific research. Third, the traditional Japanese value system has emerged over centuries of working on the limited available land with great earnestness and assiduity. These values of old Japan made it easy to absorb Western science and technology rapidly and to set the stage for nationalistic industrialization, although it did restrain individual creative activities. It is, of course, too early to be sure of the direction of African technological orientation but there is no doubt that it will be influenced by the fact that African farmers loved, and still live, in open spaces, full of unknown possibilities, using their wisdom with relatively high labour productivity. This cultural heritage, the base for an emergent African development ethos, will continued to form and be reformed in the course of history, through contact with elements of foreign cultures. The danger however is not the introduction of foreign elements but rather the idolization of one culture, tendencies, which lead to ethnocentrism or xenophobia, and cultural inferiority or superiority complexes. This is why Professor Kawada

suggested that African leaders should consider the value of “a triangulation of cultures” to the multiplication of cultural points of reference as a means of combining the ancestral wisdom of their people with ideas and cultural experiences from a number of foreign sources to build a new and more glorious future for their people. Against this background, it was possible to appreciate the insistence of Professor Alex Kwapong of Ghana, former Vice-Rector of the United Nations University in Tokyo, that the main challenge of education in Africa is to develop the human resources which will ensure accelerated development and modernization without compromising Africa’s cultural identity. He noted that the expansion of primary school enrolments in Africa, particularly during the 1960s and 1970s, might have been unparalleled in any time or place in history. Yet, for all that, there are areas of educational expansion that require urgent attention. There is, for instance, a need for a more equitable distribution of educational opportunities and the reduction of existing inequalities based on sex, economic status and geography. There is also the need to improve the internal and external efficiency of the educational system as a first step towards improving the quality of education and high cognitive achievements by students. Internal efficiency entail arresting the decline in the supplies of key inputs into the educational system at all levels – including such basic materials as books and other learning materials – as well as ensuring serious administrative action relating to the flow of students, class size and the use of space and facilities. External efficiency requires an increase in the relevance of schooling to the job market and making certain that students are equipped with the knowledge and skills needed to find employment in an increasingly competitive and changing milieu. For such educational transformation to take place in the current circumstances of most African countries, three policy remedies are suggested. First, African leaders must pay greater attention to the adjustment of current demographic rates of growth to the fiscal realities of their countries. Second, there is a need to revitalize the existing educational infrastructure, giving special emphasis not just to science and technology but also to the integration of traditional and emerging technologies. Third, a programme of selective expansion in all three sectors should be pursued through renewed progress towards long-term goals of universal primary education and the improvement of quality in the secondary and tertiary

sectors. Particularly in the case of the tertiary sector, such improvements can be fostered through the identification of selected, nodal centres where a critical mass of teachers, researchers and practitioners can be brought together. In all of this, the overall political environment is of prime importance. The prevalent political instability and the near-collapse state of the economy of most African countries have precipitated a massive internal and external brain-drain. As the position begins to improve, African leaders, through the type of political climate they provide, must resolve the twin challenges of attracting back from abroad the skilled professionals, scientists, scholars and researchers and adding to and retaining all those being produced in the various institutions of higher learning and research in the continent. The crucial importance of the political environment of social change in the health sector was further highlighted in a presentation by Professor Thomas Lambo, former Deputy Director-General of the World Health Organization. Professor Lambo called attention to the frightening dehumanization going on presently in most African countries as a result of the current economic crisis. He noted the rise in the rate of infant mortality and the level of malnutrition, especially among vulnerable groups in the population at the same time as health institutions were being denuded of vital drugs and medications and skilled and highly trained manpower. Yet, in planning to redress the situation, it is important to bear in mind that health is not just the absence of infirmity and disease but a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being. Against such a definition, it is necessary to re-examine the complete dependence of African governments on Western-type medical tradition, with its philosophical underpinnings in the rational materialism and scientific empiricism deriving from the Renaissance period. The fact that alternative medical traditions with equal efficacy do exist is perhaps best brought out by the Chinese medical tradition with its emphasis on acupuncture. Given the abundance of vegetal species in Africa, African governments need to give urgent attention to verifying and validating the healing capabilities of African traditional medicine. This is an area where the call is to innovate, not imitate. Indeed, the World Health Organization has given the lead in this matter and its Division on Traditional Medicine has taken decisive strides in various directions. This has not always been easy; especially as such achievements were made in the face of strong opposition by large, transnational corporations in the pharmaceutical industry. Nonetheless, the current economic situation in most African countries

presents African leaders with an unparalleled opportunity to fall back decisively not only on the product of their environment but on the technological and medical resources of their cultural heritage.


D. The Challenges of the South African Situation

The challenges that the South African situation constituted for African leaders were well summarized in the presentations by both Dr. Ntatho Motlana, Founder and Co-Chairman of the Soweto Crisis Committee, and the Rev. Stanley Mogoba, President of the South African Institute of Race Relations and Secretary of the Conference of the Methodist Church of Southern Africa. The presentations outlined clearly the nature of the problem and provided a historical serialization of attempts to resolve it. Basically, the problem is the dispossession and displacement of Africans during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries from their lands through the greater violence of the foreigner’s gun when pitched against the African spear. Apartheid, as a racial policy, should therefore not be seen as dating back only to the time the Nationalist Party came to power in 1948 but it originated as far back as 336 years ago, during the Dutch occupation of the Cape. As a policy, it was equally espoused by the British, who presided over the allwhite National Convention in 1908, in which the Union of the four provinces of South Africa was decided, and who also authorized the Act of Union in 1910. Soon after that Union – by 1913 – the Government of South Africa was already declaring that 87 per cent of the land belonged to whites only. After four years of negotiating and organizing, the African National Congress was established in 1912. It immediately drew up a petition to the British Government to protest against the white union and the grabbing of almost all of the land. No redress was forthcoming. The period since 1912 has thus witnessed different phases in the struggle to reverse this situation and make the African no longer a foreigner in his own land. Five such phases were identified: (a.) The Negotiation Phase) 1912-1950) when the African National Congress sought a democratic and peaceful solution to the problem; The Positive Non-Violent Action Phase (1950-1960) when, under the leadership of Chief Albert Luthuli, a defiance campaign was mounted, resulting in the first treason trials;




The Violence Phase (1960-1970) which witnessed such violent incidents as the Sharpeville Riot, the Pass Campaign, the Podo and the Rivonia Uprisings; The Youth Revolt Phase (1970-1980) which culminated in the Soweto uprisings and the banning of the Black Consciousness Movement; and The Phase of New Organizations and New Leaders (since 1980).



Whilst apartheid has continued to be entrenched in the life of South Africa through a process of state terrorism, it has provoked reactions not only among the blacks but also among the whites. Among the blacks, the most striking feature of present resistance is the multi-dimensional character of its leadership, embracing not only those exiled or imprisoned but also the church, labour movement, internal opposition groups, homeland and youth leaders. This diversity of leadership presents problems of communication and dialogue, especially within the country. A state of political impasse seemed to have been reached internally. A new initiative is expected through international leverage on the situation, especially leverage carefully worked out by African leaders and enjoying superpower support. Not much can be expected for now from the cosmetics of unscrambling apartheid by state President Botha nor from the liberation movements. Careful diplomacy and negotiation skills by committed African leadership would appear to hold the greatest hope for the immediate future. Things look bleak, grim and gloomy in the medium and long terms if serious negotiations are not embarked upon soon.


E. The Challenges of Policy Formation

One of the most serious failings of leadership in the present circumstances of Africa is the lack of vigorous economic discussions on the policy scene. Professor Ojetunji Aboyade, Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee, Office of the President of Nigeria presented a paper to explore the challenges of policy formation using the example of Nigeria. Professor Aboyade began his presentation by noting the enormous structural problems of development in Africa and their implications. This has meant that the policy maker does not choose his starting point, no matter how differently he might have wanted it. Development, however, is a process almost daunting in its complexity. As such, it is important to stress the dangers of individuals coming into government and into policy prescription with a very naïve view of what is realizable and with a heavy baggage of populist sentiments. Professor Aboyade then dealt with the challenges of policy formation in three parts, namely the nature and structure of public policy, the historical setting for policy-making in Africa and some recent attempts at policy reform in Nigeria. On the nature and structure of public policy, Professor Aboyade began by noting that policy formation for underdeveloped countries such as Nigeria must necessarily be seen in a holistic context; that is, the complex interdependence of targets and instruments in all segments of the economy operating simultaneously. It invariably involves large numbers of technocrats, bureaucrats, opinion moulders, political leaders, pressure groups, special interests and social activities for whom the time required for initiating or getting results from particular policies varies enormously. Thus, time is probably the most severe constraint that policy-makers have to confront in an underdeveloped society. The speed of reaction to given policy measures is not only often slow, long and unpredictable, it invariably gets lost in the dynamics of intervening exogenous events. The core of policy formation is rigorous economic analysis. Good training in economics is thus essential for a nation’s team of economic advisers and bureaucrats, since it is through objective economic analysis that the quantitative effects of a given measure can be discovered i.e., how large are the expected results and how long might they take to work themselves out; whether there are other alternative measures which might more effectively

and efficiently achieve the goals being sought; or whether there are other side effects which either help or hinder the attainment of a given policy objective. Good training in development economics thus facilitates the capacity in a policy-maker to rise above the various pressures and criticisms of the moment in a relentless pursuit of his objectives, unless there is no social consensus about what those objectives are. Nonetheless, although economics remains the core of policy formation, its boundaries are constrained by the historical and social conditions of a given nation and the global context of continuous economic and political interaction. In the African situation, the colonial experience until recently detached the region from the general development process. Beyond creating markets for imported industrial products and procuring sources of tropical products and raw materials for metropolitan factories, colonialism resulted in a structural dualism and the heightening of fragmentation in African economies. Its negative consequences included the stagnation in agricultural productivity in products other than the primary exports, the almost complete absence of industrialization, the poor state of social infrastructure, the underdevelopment of peasant agriculture and the food economy, the neglect of human resource development at the grass roots, indifference to serious entrepreneurial efforts in the population and the almost total failure to develop indigenous, self-sustaining capacity for economic analysis and national economic management. It took the turbulence of the 1970s in the world markets for primary commodities (especially with respect to crude petroleum, tin, copper, beverages and vegetable oil) to completely unmask the severe fragility and external dependence of African economies. This fragility was made more precarious by a political leadership and party machinery, which, though filled with dogma and rhetoric, often lacked the basic economic control of the state. The results have been the rise of the informal or parallel markets, loss of Government revenues, rapid accumulation of heavy external debts, the real economy running away from the Government’s administrative control and policy instruments, increased unstructured and illegal ways of operating business while earned incomes and policy formation were seen increasingly in terms of political importance and discretionary patronages, rather than in terms of their long-term value to sustained economic development and social welfare.


Not unexpectedly, most African economies collapsed. In the past seven years, they have all been forced to introduce stabilization and structural adjustment measures aimed at national economic recovery as a pre-condition for the resumption of growth and development. In Nigeria, this situation has been used not only to promote policy reforms but also to begin to face seriously the long-term developmental challenges of the country. The lessons of the Nigerian experience in policy reform stress the need for African leaders to ask serious questions about the essence of the development process and of the system of production relations required to promote it. In striving to outline a new paradigm for African structural transformation, it must be recognized that the core of a permanent and sustainable development process is to achieve a major, significant shift in per capita physical productivity in a country. The cumulative effect of such a shift will provide the national economy with the structural flexibility and management capacity to confront shocks, whether such shocks originate externally or internally. Starting from this period of difficult transition, African leaders must promote widespread economic education in their countries, bearing in mind that structural problems cannot be wished away and that there are no easy choices that do not involve sweat and courage.


III. Group Discussions The participants at this first programme of the Africa Leadership Forum were assigned into two groups. The first group discussed the political and strategic issues arising from the various presentations, noting in particular their implications for leadership in African countries, the types of problems that confront them and the strategies that can be suggested to deal with these problems. The second group focused on economic and social issues. A. Political and Strategic Issues Under its Chairman, Dr. Francis Deng, the group noted that in any country, leadership must be considered very broadly. It embraces not only political leaders at all levels of Government – national, state, provincial, district and local – but also the youth, women, and leaders of the community, academia and of business. One must also add leaders in public service and the military. Nonetheless, participants observed that, although the challenges of leadership were essentially of the same nature, the performance of leadership at the national level had implications for all other categories of leadership, both internally and at the international level. In the African context, there were a number of problems that have vitiated the effectiveness of leadership. These include the problems of corruption at all levels, the people’s mistrust of the leaders and a general attitude of cynicism towards leadership effort. With respect to corruption, it was suggested that one reason for this was that the leaders in Africa often have to relate to two categories of the public. On the one hand, there is the private circle of the ethnic or extended family group, friends and supporters, who usually profit from the corrupt practices of their members and therefore encourage them. On the other hand, there is the general public, which usually surfaces where such corrupt practices go hand in hand with a contemptuous disregard for public opinion. Although they are in the public eye almost twenty-four hours a day, many African leaders show such a poor sense of accountability that the basis for trust hardly exists. The result is a paralyzing cynicism among the people as to the intentions of government. This has made it difficult for most African leaders to mobilize their population or to pursue effective policies that would require commitment and acceptance by their respective societies. It has also encouraged the persistence of a negative perception of the ability of society to resolve its problems by itself.

All of this emphasizes the need for African leaders to develop institutions that can translate political independence to broad-based popular democracy and liberty. African leaders must encourage the emergence in their societies of broad-based mechanisms which can accommodate dissent without undermining the upsurge of the creative energies of the people for social and economic development. Such mechanisms would entail greater concern for an equitable and impartial balance of interests as a means of breaking down ethnic, cultural and religious barriers in the country. According to the group, gross violations of human rights and repression are antithetical to the purposes of development and nation-building. African leaders must rise above factionalism and strive to foster the growth of internal consensus in their country by breaking down various forms of community barriers. Only then would they have begun, in the words of General Obasanjo, “the process of endowing political institutions with the necessary legitimacy which is their ultimate safeguard against violent overthrow”. The group considered various strategies that may help in sensitizing African leaders to the moral imperatives of leadership by checking their abuse of power and fostering the values of respect for the will of the people and their human dignity. It recognizes that a fundamental tenet of such strategies is that people know their rights. Education and public enlightenment are thus paramount to this process – not just any type of education, however. The group noted what it calls “the crisis of knowledge discontinuity” in Africa, whereby indigenous knowledge and traditions are regarded as marginal and irrelevant to the process of development and nation-building when compared to imported theories and practices. Yet, such imported ideas tend to marginalize African masses, erode their self-confidence and participatory relevance and undermine their resourcefulness in the development process. It was therefore agreed that the requisite educational programme for encouraging people to know their rights must be one built on their own cultural values and one which employs to the fullest the resources of proverbs, sayings and imagery in the local language. This will facilitate effective communication with the people and reinforce the moral and cultural basis of their expectations and the obligations of leaderships in meeting those expectations. Furthermore, it was felt that an important strategy for real leadership development is greater emphasis on local government, encouraging a return to the autonomy and self-reliance of local communities and reducing the overwhelming and stultifying presence of the central government. In this

regard, it was noted that there was in many African countries an unnecessary parsimony in the number of local government councils, their individual area of jurisdiction too large for real and effective governance. Related to the need for greater and more broad-based local autonomy is the importance of improving data collection processes, right down to the grass roots as a means of enhancing the basis of sound policy decision-making. One other strategy for improving the quality of leadership in Africa is for leaders to have regular “sessions of introspection” to review performance and the general direction of governance. Along with such regular retreat should go some unobtrusive form of education and training for leaders, especially with respect to international economic relations so that African leaders can become increasingly self-assertive in their enlightened pursuits of Africa’s interest in the global arena. In this connection, it was indicated that African countries and their leaders have paid less than adequate attention as to how their foreign policy should feed into their economic purposes. This is perhaps understandable as long as Africa comprises so many small and highly dependent countries. But as the imperative of regional economic (and possibly political) integration is better appreciated, it becomes urgent that African leaders see Africa as the centerpiece of their foreign policy. B. Economic and social issues The discussion began with attempts at better appreciating the nature of the current economic crisis in Africa, particularly as it relates to the problem of the debt overhang. There were views that it should be possible for African countries to act in concert, either to repudiate the debts or at least secure a debt relief or consolidation (another word for longer-term rescheduling). Following Mr. Helmut Schmidt’s presentation, four categories of debts were recognized: (a) Those owed to states or to state banks; (b) Those guaranteed by a government or governmental financial institutions of the creditor countries; (c) Those in which the debtor is a firm or government from a developing country while the creditor is a private bank in the developed country; and


(d) Debts where the creditor is a private enterprise in the developed country. Each of these categories needs to be considered differently. Whilst one can conceive of debt relief (or forgiveness) in respect of the first category, it is not wise to press for it in respect of the other three since this could have considerable implications for the profitability or cash flow of creditors and might make them less willing to engage in the flow of investible funds to developing countries. A more realistic approach in these cases is to press for re-scheduling or the lowering of the interest rate or the prolongation of the repayment time frame. One reason for approaching the issue of debt settlement with greater circumspection is the prognosis that the volume of investment funds likely to be available for transfer to developing countries in the foreseeable future is bound to be considerably reduced. For one thing, the era of recycling superabundant petro-dollars is gone forever. For another, the position of the United States or other developed countries in attracting investment funds is unlikely to be matched by developing countries, particularly in view of the latter’s’ history of political instability and their fragile economic structures. In all these, the role of OPEC is likely to be one of diminishing importance. After eight years of acting as an economic “superpower” and raising oil prices to very high levels, OPEC has created a situation in which industrialized countries have developed alternative sources of energy to such an extent that OPEC will never again be in a position to exercise comparable leverage. Under these circumstances, African leaders must review their basic economic strategies. They must develop a more positive, though not necessarily complacent, approach to multinational corporations, which remain major sources of investible funds in developing countries. They must design and vigorously pursue new strategies of export promotion, seeking out those products and markets where their countries have decisive comparative advantages. They must also pay considerable attention to environmental issues, particularly those of toxic pollution whilst concentrating research and development efforts on non-palliative sources of energy, particularly solar energy. More importantly, African leaders must start to give serious thought to regional and sub regional economic integration and to significant reduction of expenditure on arms and


armaments as major pre-requisites for ensuring the long-term development of the continent. Of more immediate urgency is the need for African leaders to work relentlessly towards ensuring food security for the populations of their individual countries. The current food and nutrition situation in Africa calls for new, imaginative and, above all, practical policy initiatives. Such actions, the group noted, are feasible through programmes of farmer co-operatives integrated with agro-industrial enterprises. Efforts should be directed at the complete involvement of local farmers, avoiding their displacement and offering them maximum encouragement and incentives. Nonetheless, whether in regard to internal developmental challenges or external economic relations, the group felt that African countries, individually, but particularly collectively, do not have the necessary institutional capacity to facilitate understanding and develop analytical and negotiating capabilities for coping with the array of problems emanating from these sources. It was the view of the group that Africa must take a leaf from the experience of other nations and begin to equip itself now with the intellectual and scientific capacity as well as the requisite knowledge base to formulate long-term strategies, analyse economic and social issues correctly, and implement such policies with the necessary political vision. The group observed that, unlike other parts of the world, Africa at present has no high-level think tanks, no institutes or centres for long-range studies, policy formulation and analysis. As a first step, the group recommended that the Forum initiate action and seek possible assistance or collaborative efforts in creating an African Centre or Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies. Such a center or institute should be a think tank with a small, highly professional staff of, say, three dozen social scientists and policy experts in other disciplines, equipped with the necessary financial resources, and up-todate library and research facilities. It must enjoy the general support or goodwill of African governments, but have only minimal direct government involvement. Such a high-quality institution, dedicated to policy formulation and analysis, would be a crucial first step for African nations to acquire the necessary institutional and intellectual development tools.


The group reviewed some past and current attempts to bring about similar or related institutions in the region. It was particularly delighted to note and accept the offer of its Chairman, Mr. Pierre-Claver Damiba, for the UNDP to provide the necessary support and seed money to undertake a plan of action for the envisaged Centre or Institute. The benefits to be derived from such an institution would be long term, but the Group urged the Forum to take the decision now to bring it about.


The wide range of issues that were thoroughly discussed at the inaugural programme of the Africa Leadership Forum led to a number of suggestions that have been highlighted above. The following eight conclusions are however worthy of special mention. 1. It was generally agreed that the external environment within which African countries must now plan their development can no longer be regarded as benign. Even when the global economy recovers fully from its recession, it will no longer be possible to envisage ample resources of the type available in the 1970s through the recycling of petro-dollars. The signal from the international community is that Africa is now on its own. There may be humanitarian assistance of various types, but the volume of aid or even of investment flows to the continent can be expected to be very much less than that in the recent past. Since the rest of the world is no longer particularly interested in Africa, the message to African leader is clear. They must learn to devise and design strategies and programmes of self-reliant development. Assiduity in achieving a higher degree of debt relief may help their economy to some degree but only sustained increase in per capita productivity can make a lasting impact. To achieve this, African leaders must pay more serious attention to reducing significantly the rate of population growth as well as maintaining, and even enhancing the quality of their environment. Sustained, increased productivity cannot be attained so long as political instability prevails in African countries. Military coups and threats of coups do not encourage the flow of investment capital, nor do they reassure resident enterprises to reinvest in the country. The position is not helped by the glaring disregard for human rights, especially those of highly trained personnel who are then made to flee their countries. This massive brain drain, the result of political instability, becomes very detrimental to development since the loss often has to be made up by the costly importation of foreign expertise to advise African governments.





One other factor that African leaders have to consider seriously in striving to improve their national performance in development is military expenditure. Considering their gross national product, most African governments spend an extremely high proportion of their annual budget on defence. This must be drastically revised. It is instructive that one element in the success story of Japanese development in the last four decades is the very small fraction of national expenditure devoted to defence. All African economies are correctly going through a structural adjustment programme designed either by the International Monetary Fund or worked out by the countries themselves. It is important, however, for African leaders to recognize that these programmes are generally short-term in scope. They should not be allowed to compromise the long-term interests of development. This is why it is vital to ensure that the policy package under a structural adjustment programme is compatible with the achievement of increasing structural transformation and the cumulative growth of the national economy. Structural transformation requires an increasing use of local resources, local technological skills and indigenous cultural values. One area where such a shift of development emphasis could be critical is, for instance, in health delivery services. Any programme of achieving health for all within the shortest possible time can be only on the basis of the fullest and most rational utilization of all available systems of health care delivery in a country, whether western or traditional. Another important element in achieving such structural transformation and cumulative economic growth is a vigorous programme of food production and rural development based on the effective mobilization of rural communities. Such broad-based grass-roots mobilization equally has tremendous implications for the growth of democratic institutions and the political distribution of power. It encourages the emergence of a large number of local leaders directly accountable to the people. This helps to strengthen the calibre, competence and quality of the leadership that will eventually emerge at the national level.





Whilst the improvement in the quality of education and the number of those educated are important factors in enhancing leadership capacity, there is a need to emphasize the increasing acquisition of economic or business expertise for all those aspiring to be leaders in African countries. This is not only because national development is the single most important challenge confronting African leaders today, but also because it must be tackled in an international milieu that exacts harsh penalties for shoddy economic thinking or failure to perceive and exploit economic advantages. In an increasingly competitive and interdependent world, where the language of international relations is couched more and more in the idioms of bargaining and negotiations, a good knowledge of economics provides African leaders with the facility of comprehension and the ability to appreciate better where the national interest lies in the welter of complex and conflicting options. The situation in South Africa is a challenge to all African leaders. This challenge must be addressed, however, not only on the basis of the current liberation struggle, but also in preparation for a postapartheid South Africa. It was agreed that strategies should be evolved through governmental and non-governmental channels to ensure that African contributions to the final resolution of the conflict are orchestrated in such ways that African interests cannot be marginalized or ignored in the subsequent reconstruction and reconstitution of forces in the country.



LIST OF PARTICIPANTS CHAIRMAN: General Olusegun OBASANJO A. LECTURERS/PANELISTS 1. 2. Ojetunji ABOYADE (Nigeria), Professor and Chairman, Pai Associates Chief Simeon O. ADEBO (Nigeria), former Permanent Representative to the United Nations, New York and Executive Director, United Nations Institute of Training and Research (UNITAR) Adebayo ADEDEJI (Nigeria), Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) Tariq HUSAIN (PAKISTAN), Representative of the World Bank in Nigeria. Junzo KAWADA (Japan), Professor, Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo. Alexander A. KWAPONG, (Ghana), Lester Pearson Chair for Development Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada; former Vice-Rector, United Nations University, Tokyo Thomas A. LAMBO (Nigeria), President, Lambo Foundation for the Advancement of Biomedical and Bio-behavioural Sciences; former Deputy Director-General, World Health Organisation Flora LEWIS (USA), Columnist, The New York Times. Akin L. MABOGUNJE (Nigeria), Professor, Pai Associates; Pro-Chancellor and Chairman of Council, Ogun State University, Ago-Iwoye Ntatho MOTLANA (South Africa), President-Founder, Soweto Crisis Committee and Chairman, Get-Ahead Foundation A.M.A. MUHITHA (Bangladesh), Former Finance and Planning Minister Col. Raji RASAKI (Nigeria), Military Governor of Lagos State. Helmut SCHMIDT (Federal Republic of Germany,) Former Federal Chancellor Wole SOYINKA (Nigeria), Nobel Prize Winner 1986 for Literature J.U. AIRE (Nigeria), Executive Director, A.G. Leventis and Co. (Nig.) Limited. A. ANATHARAMAN (India), Managing Director, Tower Aluminum (Nigeria) Ltd.


4. 5. 6.


8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.


PARTICIPANTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Malam Yaya ABUBAKAR (Nigeria), former Permanent Secretary, Political Department, Cabinet Office P. Ayangma AMANG (Cameroon), Directeur-General, Compagnie Nationale d’Assurances C.N.A. Babafemi BADEJO (Nigeria), Senior Lecturer, University of Lagos. Donatien BIHUTE (Burundi), Managing Director Hydrobur; Chairman, Meridien Bank Burundi; former Minister of Planning of Burundi and VicePresident, African Development Bank Cecil BLAKE (Sierra Leone), Senior Programme Officer, Global Learning Division, United Nations University, Tokyo




7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29.

Munirul CHOUDHURY (Bangladesh), President, Aegean Maritime International, Washington, D.C.; former Adviser to the President of Bangladesh Pierre-Claver DAMIBA (Burkina Faso), Assistant Administrator and Regional Director for Africa, UNDP Francis M. DENG (Sudan), former Minister of State for Foreign Affairs; Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C. Julien DOBONGNA (Cameroon), Conseiller du President,Compagnie Financiere et Industrielle Jens FISCHER (Federal Republic of Germany), Chief of Staff, Office of Mr. Helmut Schmidt Jean HERSKOVITS (USA), Professor of African History, State University of New York. Ahmadu JALINGO (Nigeria) Dean, Faculty of Management and Social Sciences, Bayero University, Kano. Mansur KHALID (Sudan), former Foreign Minister and Vice-Chairman, World Commission on Environment and Development Justin LABINJOH (Nigeria), Senior Lecturer, University of Ibadan Zamani LEKWOT (Nigeria), Major-General (rtd.), former Governor of Rivers State, former Nigerian Ambassador to Senegal L.B.B.J. MACHOBANE (Lesotho), Minister of Education Rev. M. Stanley MOGOBA (South Africa), President, South African Institute of Race Relations ;and Secretary of the Conference of the Methodist Church of Southern Africa Viktor M.P. MPOYO (Nigeria), Industrialist (oil industry) Dragoljub NAJMAN (Yugoslavia), former Assistant Director-General, UNESCO Lopo Fortunato do NASCIMENTO (Angola), Governor of Huila Province; former Prime Minister and Deputy Executive Secretary, ECA Letitia OBENG (Ghana), former Regional Director for Africa, United Nations Environment Programme Anezi N. OKORO (Nigeria), Professor of Medicine, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu James ONOBIONO (Cameroon), President, Compagnie Financiere et Industrielle Hans D’ORVILLE (Federal Republic of Germany), Senior Officer, UNDP New York and Coordinator, InterAction council Secretariat Oyeleye OYEDIRAN (Nigeria), Professor, University of Lagos Tayo SERIKI (Nigeria), Chairman, Siemens Nigeria Albert TEVOEDJIRE (Benin) President, Centre Panafricain de Prospective Sociale; former Deputy Director-General, International Labour Organisation Bilikisu YUSUF (Nigeria), Editor, New Nigerian Terencia LEON-JOSEPH (Peru), Administrative Assistant


Appendix II List of Statements and Papers


The Challenge of Leadership African Development Africa Today’s World Message from the Administrator of United Nations Development Programme Leadership Challenge for Improving the Economic and Social Situation in Sub-Saharan Africa The African Economy: Overview and prospects for Recovery and sustained development Development Strategies - Lessons from Experience Multi-Country Private Sector Co-operation in Africa The Interest of the Private Sector in Leadership Some Thoughts on African Leadership Agriculture, Rural Development and The Post-Colonial State in Africa Local Government in Nigeria The Challenge of Education in Africa

Gen. Ibrahim Babangida Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo

2. 3.

Pierre-Claver Damiba


Tariq Husain


Adebayo Adedeji


A.M.A. Muhith


Donatien Bihute


A. Anantharaman

9. 10.

J.U. Aire Akin L. Mabogunje

11. 12.

J. M. Olanipekun A. A. Kwapong


The Problems of Managing a Conurbation like Metropolitan Lagos Leadership in an interdependent World and What is Expected from Africa Twice Bitten: The Fate of Africa’s Culture Producers Development and Culture – Is Japan a Model? Policy Formation: A Case Study of Nigeria Apartheid and Leadership Apartheid and the Challenges of African Leadership

Raji Rasaki


Helmut Schmidt


Wole Soyinka


Junzo Kawada


Ojetunji Aboyade

18. 19.

Nthato Motlana M. S. Mogoba


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful