And that would have been quite dispiriting for Adeola and his fellow African commissioners on the CFA.

Blair’s historical victory – a third term in office – has steeled Adeola’s confidence in the CFA – to the extent that the British premier – who’d be manning the presidency of the European Union and hosting the G-8 – would be tabling Africa’s development requisites at the Gleneagles summit of the G-8. in July. As of press time, he was believed to have shuttled to Moscow, Berlin and Rome to make a business-like case regarding what the policy-makers in those countries could do, in a constructive alliance with Africa, in the next decade, say, for mutual development. For Adeola – one of the founders of the Guaranty Trust Bank, and the captain of the Lagos-based Fate Foundation – the starting point is sculpting both policy and institutional architectures that would persuade the G-8 countries – Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United States and Russia – and others to whom African states are indebted to forgive such debts. In practice, that expectation will have to be predicated on such development issues as zero tolerance of corruption as a top index of good governance. On their part, the industrialised world, who’s banking and financial systems have been accessories in the siphoning of Africa’s scarce – and sorely needed financial resources by some African leaders, are expected, in helping today’s dire straits, to overhaul their systems and see whether they could repatriate stolen money that are deposited in their banks. Africa is said to owe between $380 and $420 billion in foreign debts; debts that are – by World Bank standards – no longer sustainable. Some development economists, who have studied the debt profile of the continent in the past decade, are less charitable: “the foreign debt owed by each African state is anti-development.” Adeola and his fellow commissioners have since produced the CFA report titled “Our Common Interest,” and in publishing the report, Blair has established the basis of talks in Gleneagles, where the future of the continent would be at the top of the agenda. The report sets out a ‘forceful response’ to the twin problems of African poverty and stagnation, which it calls the ‘greatest tragedy of our time.’ Some of the proposals made by the Commissioners include, amongst others, an increase in aid of $25 billion a year by 2010, and a further $25 billion by 2015; an extra, yearly provision of $10 billion to help prevent, treat and care for people with HIV and AIDS; an internally generated sum of $25 billion. Besides, the report speaks of negotiations, which should be opened in 2006 on an international arms treaty, the provision of aid to help African nations resolve and prevent conflict, funding for a million nurses and doctors by 2015, and extra fund for quality education for all children and investment in infrastructure projects like roads and airports. While the report also contains proposals for increased trade with African states, it makes a case for the cancellation of foreign debt owed by sub-Saharan Africa. All these are directed at making Africa a more equal partner in the global community. And on the launch of the report, Blair was reported as saying that: “There can be no excuse, no defence, no justification for the plight of millions of our fellow beings in Africa today. We cannot allow this to continue. It is, I believe, the biggest moral challenge of our generation. A challenge for all of us – for governments of Africa and the countries of the developed world.” Coming as it did, the CFA has been seen, in one breath, as an indirect attempt of checking the influence of China – and most likely, India – in the continent by 2015. Part of the opinion is informed by China’s unrelenting economic soar – the fastest so far in the world – for which the 21st Century has been said to be Beijing’s. There are some others who posit that, given the structure and constitution of international trade and economy, there was a very strong likelihood of China embarking on development diplomacy – the third of such forays into the continent – after the ping pong and liberation diplomacies of the ’70s. During that period – the period of decolonisation of the continent and the height of the Cold War – Beijing was an active backer of such liberation bodies like the Marxist-oriented Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) led by the late Dr. Agostinho Neto, which now governs that oil-rich African state and the Comrade Joshua Nkomo-led Zimbabwe People’s Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA). That may well be the case, but Adeola sees it as healthy if it is, indeed, an indication that Africa had started acquiring the features of a much-courted international bride: a continent, where both international capital and investors would jostle for space and attention.

Said he: “For me conspiracy theory is, academically, okay. But my position is neutral. If somebody comes here and changes our fortune, such that we can stand on our own, without asking for some tough conditions, fine. In any case, if Africa has become that competitive, let China and India, and whoever else desires, come. We’ll decide whom to follow. That should not rob the CFA of our support. China has not initiated the CFA, but there is a Chinese on the Commission.” Most Africans on the CFA – Adeola with them – would warmly embrace Beijing in tune with the spirit of South-South co-operation.

Still, while some commentators have argued that there was an element of remorsefulness on the part of the British government in establishing the CFA, so as to atone for its colonial policy, which could be blamed, in part, for the underdevelopment of the continent, the CFA’s Press and Publicity Manager – Johannesburg-based Mr. Nick Sheppard – thinks differently; seeing no connection between Britain’s colonial past and colonial history in Africa and the CFA. But he admits that the British government – not just the Blair-led Labour government – but recent British governments, have recognised the impact that colonialism had across the African continent and the responsibility of the British government over the years. It is Sheppard’s contention that: “The CFA is not a direct response to that, or even if a direct response, it is a recognition of the timing both, in terms of what Britain can contribute to what Africa has already done. And the feeling – a groundswell of public opinion – both public, as well as government opinion around the world, is that Africa cannot be and should not be, for moral reasons, be left behind.”