A new African state body has arisen: The Mali Federation, 1959

A new African state body has arisen: The Mali Federation, 1959
International Communist Party
Africa Reports
A new African State body has arisen
The Mali Federation
Il Programma Comunista
, No. 4, 1959)
Events in Africa are unfolding at a furious pace. With each passing
month, the great forward march of the movement for the renewal of the
Dark Continent conquers a new stage. While everything is rotting away in
the capitalist metropolises, the more backward continents are being
renewed from top to bottom, and at the head of the movement are Africa’s
most developed peoples, those who inhabit the western part of the
continent. The dreary champions of bourgeois reaction cannot reconcile
themselves to it. The bleak philosophies of ‘nothing changes’ are forced
to denounce another stinging denial. Indeed, it is undeniable that while
‘nothing changes’ for the moment in the world of imperialism, and the
ruling bourgeoisies resort with impunity to the arsenal of fascist
ideologies in order to put off the day of reckoning, ‘everything
changes’ on the other hand in the Continents once subjugated by
colonialism. The revolutionary principle thus receives yet another
confirmation. If nothing is eternal, if colonialism, which lasted for
centuries and seemed it might never end because of the state of
demoralisation to which the enslaved populations had been reduced, has
finally reached its last hours; only to delude themselves can the
reactionaries of Europe and America proclaim the eternity of
capitalism.
The facts show how colonialism, the proud creation of white
capitalism, is forced to cede one position after another. The pace of
events leaves even those of us who, while supporting the liberation
movement of the African peoples, thought that the struggle would take
many more years, pleasantly surprised. It was the results of the
referendum held in October by the Gaullist regime that had suggested
pessimistic forecasts. It was then seen that only Guinea, of all the
French possessions in Africa, had dared to throw off colonialism,
choosing independence. Another cause for concern was the insidious
Unionist campaign, which tended to fight the federalism advocated by the
most advanced forces of African independence, and defended a programme
which, if implemented, would have resolved the French African empire
into a myriad of nominally independent, but in fact weak and insecure
statelets. It was feared, that is, that the coalescence of the interests
of the indigenous social strata linked to colonialism and the intrigues
of certain ‘askari’ politicking would lead to the ‘Balkanisation’ or
‘South Americanisation’ – as the advocates of federalism put it – of the
future post-colonial Africa. Well, the latest events in West Africa have
come to dispel these concerns. With the exception of a few West African
territories, which will not necessarily always remain subject to the
current ‘oligarchies, the federalist camp has won over the majority of
the anti-colonial and independence movement. Unionism à la
Houphouët-Boigny, De Gaulle’s minister of state, is on the ropes
everywhere.
Two major events have occurred in recent weeks: the proclamation of
the Mali Federation and the unification of the African workers’ union
movement. One does not need to be gifted with a prophetic spirit to say
that these events mark a turning point in African history. The birth of
the Federation is of revolutionary importance. It crowns the movement
that began with the recent proclamation of independence of the French
territories of West Africa and Equatorial Africa – a fact that, left
without a follow-up, threatened to dismember the continent. But no less
important is what the African wage-earners accomplished, who, by uniting
their forces, have created the premises for the incorporation of the
African labour movement into the new social reality following the
decline of colonialism.
The Mali Federation, like the Republic of Ghana in its time, brings
back into living history the name of a great African empire, known as
Mali, which was formed in western Sudan in the 13th century and became
very prosperous in the following centuries, ranking among the great
powers of the time. The promoters of the new state formation could not
have chosen a better title for it. In fact, under the Mali empire, to a
greater extent than the rival empire of Ghana had managed to do, African
populations managed to overcome tribal divisions and give themselves
unitary political systems. To the French colonialists, who were the not
unworthy descendants of the oppressors who at the Congress of Berlin in
1895 sanctioned the partition of Africa under the illusion that they had
built an indestructible prison in which to lock up the African revolt,
all that remained was to kick themselves and dream about avenging
themselves with impossible massacres. The proclamation of the Federation
inflicts a heavy defeat on the collaborationists and ‘bourguibists’ of
black Africa and upsets from top to bottom the plans of the colonialists
in Paris who were preparing to sleep soundly after their indisputable
success in the referendum.
The secession of Guinea, which was led by Sékou-Touré’s Democratic
Party and had massively rejected the Gaullist referendum (1,136,324 no
votes against 58,901 yes votes), had dealt a severe blow to French
colonialism. But the loss of control of the territory’s considerable
riches (gold, iron, bauxite, coffee and bananas) could be believed to
have been compensated for by the success that, thanks to the moderate or
even collaborationist leaders of the RDA, the colonialist authorities
had achieved in the eleven territories of the AOF and AEF [French East
and Equatorial Africa], which had voted in favour of the constitution
proposed by De Gaulle and agreed to become part of the Franco-African
Community. One knows what ‘concessions’ the Gaullist constitution made
to African independentism. The ‘Community’, i.e. the body in charge of
the administration of the vaunted Franco-African union, is, as was
recently reaffirmed in Paris, responsible for these matters: foreign
policy, defence, currency, common economic and financial policy, policy
on raw materials, control of justice, higher education, general
organisation of external transport and telecommunications. It is clear
that such a ‘community’, which keeps the African peoples out of the
actual government of the territories and perpetuates the old colonialist
paternalism under another name, was not such as to worry the French
bourgeoisie. States belonging to this type of ‘community’ could be
‘sovereign’ in name only.
Under these conditions, the establishment of the eleven territories
as independent states could not harm French interests. Indeed, it had
seemed to Paris that the ‘incident’ of the Guinean secession should
remain without a follow-up. Instead, Guinea’s resounding revolt against
colonialist impositions had the effect of a landmine on the rotten old
French colonial edifice. Above all, the proclamation of the state union
between Guinea and Ghana in November must have had a decisive influence.
Such a political breakthrough marked a clear victory for the federalist
camp throughout West and Equatorial Africa, as well as within the
borders of the two states. That the initiative was not, in the
intentions of the promoters, limited to the two countries, but was part
of the general African federalist movement, was clear from a passage in
the joint declaration signed by Prime Ministers Nkrumah and Touré:
‘Conscious that the aspiration towards a closer union is shared by all
the peoples of our Continent, we appeal to the governments of the
independent states of Africa, as well as to the leaders and peoples of
the countries still dominated by foreigners, to join us in our action.
In this same spirit, we welcome the accession of other African states to
this union’. On another occasion, namely at the end of the talks between
the Ghanaian delegation and Guinean leaders in Conakry on 7 December, an
official communiqué announced that Ghana and Guinea had decided to set
up a constitutional committee to draft the United States of West
Africa.
On that occasion, the press attributed to Nkrumah and Touré the
ambitious project of a great Negro Federation including territories
still subject to imperialism, such as Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Ivory
Coast, Dahomey, French Togo and Portuguese Guinea. An African Federation
of such proportions would comprise more than 40 million inhabitants and
have ample agricultural and mineral resources, including gold, silver,
platinum, diamonds, iron, coal, bauxite, manganese, tin, and some rare
minerals, such as tantalum and uranium. What is certain is that at the
African Conference in Accra (8-13 December), delegates approved a plan
to establish five territorial complexes, including a coastal federation
from Senegal to Cameroon.
At the RDA Conference (Bamako, 29-30 December) it became clear that
the federalist movement had gained ground on the ‘Bourguibist’ thesis of
the wing represented by Houphouët-Boigny. There was a replay of the old
clash between him and the Senegalese leader Léopold Sédar Senghor,
supported by the ‘Présence Africaine’ group, who declared it was time to
bring the movement to a turning point even at the cost of breaking with
France and aligning with Sékou-Touré. The conference was dissolved
without any common ground being found between the currents. But today we
know that federalism was on the rise. In fact, to untie the knot of
contrasts came the proclamation of the Mali Federation on 17
January.
Four territories joined the new federation: French Sudan, Senegal,
Upper Volta and Dahomey. A simple glance at the map shows what
importance the Federation will assume when it has freed itself of
residual French domination. Perhaps then the plan for a Negro Federation
from Cameroon to Senegal approved at the Accra Conference can be
implemented. Given what forces prevail in West Africa, this seems
possible because the territories of the Mali Federation and the
Ghana-Guinea union are contiguous. The only break is represented by Côte
d’Ivoire, which has preferred to isolate itself; for the rest, there are
no constitutional difficulties, since the Federation has declared
itself, like Ghana and Guinea when they proclaimed their state union,
open to all neighbouring territories.
The negative attitude held by Mauritania and Niger, along with Côte
d’Ivoire, remains to be explained. Behind the rejection by these three
territories lie different causes. If the motive that drove the leaders
of Niger and above all of Côte d’Ivoire must be sought in the political
and social structure of the two territories, for Mauritania the field of
investigation widens, because this new state is subject to the
influences of the other great historical driving force acting in Africa:
pan-Arab nationalism, entrenched in the North of the Continent.
Mauritania, which the Arabs call Bilad Chinqit, has for some time
been the subject of a tenacious Moroccan irredentist campaign. Although
the extreme western offshoot of Algeria and the Spanish West African
possessions are interposed between Morocco and Mauritanian territory, it
is claimed by the Rabat government as a territory belonging, for
historical and ‘popular’ reasons, to ‘Greater Morocco’. Moroccan
nationalists refer to the fact that, since the time of the Almoravids
and Almohads, and under the Saadian sultans of Morocco, Mauritania was
the bridge between the Muslim world and black Africa. It should be
recalled that under Sultan al-Mansur, in 1590, the conquest of Sudan
began, i.e. the expansion of Arab power to the detriment of the black
Songhai empire. The struggle, which saw the major European powers of the
time (Portugal, Spain, France, England) support the Arab conquerors, was
to last until 1737, when the last remnants of the Moroccan army were
driven out of Timbuktu.
Despite the time that has elapsed, Mauritania, inhabited by over
600,000 people, four-fifths of whom are Muslim Moors (of the Berber
race) and the rest of Negroes concentrated in the south, still feels the
effects of such remote events. In fact, if there is strong opposition to
Moroccan aims, the pro-Arab movement, which claims the union of
‘Chinqit’ with greater Morocco, is also quite considerable. Indeed,
quite a few emirs and sheikhs, and even leading political figures, such
as the four ministers of the territorial government who fled to Morocco
in March 1958, continue to make acts of submission to Muhammad V. This
leads to the division of the country between forces inclined to union
with the Mali Federation, and thus with black Africa, and forces aiming
to fit into Morocco’s ambitious expansionist plan, which is aiming to
realign its borders with the positions reached by the ancient Arab
conquerors.
Why do we dwell on these issues? If only to prove the bad faith of
the false Marxists who, by adopting positions of absurd indifference
towards the anti-colonial revolution, accuse us of unconditional and
indiscriminate support for Afro-Asian nationalist parties. The truth is
that we realise at all times that the anti-colonial revolution acts
within the limits of the nation-state, and thus entails all the
contradictions inherent to that stage of historical evolution. We
support, even if only with the help of the press, the political
movements best placed to clear away the obstacles in the former colonies
which are preventing the emergence of new forms of production, which
cannot arise without increasing the weight of the wage-earning
proletariat in the world and objectively laying the industrial and
social foundations of socialism in backward areas. Therefore, we refuse
to be navel-gazers, mere spectators of what is happening in the
continents that are waking up to new life; and we are not afraid of
contaminating ourselves, as Marx and Lenin were not, by taking positions
in favour of one and against the other. Only those drunk on sectarianism
can recite the false theorem: anti-colonialism = capitalism = reaction.
Only imbeciles can think that the world ‘stays the same’ whether
colonialist imperialism or national-democratic movements are in charge
in Africa; or whether, having defeated colonialism, local forces of
conservation or parties of renewal take power.