Burkina Faso: Blaise Compaoré and the politics of personal enrichment – By
Peter Dörrie
August 17, 2012
<
http://africanarguments.org/2012/08/15/burkina-faso-blaise-compaore-and-the
-politics-of-personal-enrichment-by-peter-dorrie/blaise/>
http://africanarguments.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Blaise.gif
Blaise Compaoré: 'the only African head of state who managed to dramatically
limit the development of his country without declaring outright war on it.'
By African standards, Burkina Faso is not a particularly spectacular
country. It is small, has a tiny population and internal politics which most
foreign correspondents tend to find somewhat pedestrian. No wonder that it
receives only little attention, even in Africa-focused publications.
In those rare cases when something is published on the internal politics of
Burkina, it often only scratches the surface and conveys a deceiving image
of the country and its primary actors.
The recent piece on African Arguments
<
http://africanarguments.org/2012/08/09/burkina-faso-compaores-continuing-wi
ll-to-power-%E2%80%93-by-michael-keating-and-coulibaly-nadoun/> ‘Compaoré’s
Continuing Will to Power’ by Michael Keating and Coulibaly Nadoun is a
perfect case in point. It <
http://bit.ly/OexdS3> leaves the reader with two
main impressions:
1. While Compaoré hasn’t been a democratic role model, he has managed to
foster a certain amount of development (‘wide and well maintained’ streets,
etc.), under difficult circumstances.
2. He has a dark past of cooperation with rebel groups in other countries,
but has recently shown a lot of initiative in resolving conflicts in the
region, like the post-election violence in Côte d’Ivoire or the civil war in
northern Mali and securing the release of western hostages held in the
Sahara by Al Qaida affiliated groups. What’s more, he has prevented his own
country from descending into the all out civil wars experienced by many of
its neighbours.
Compared to contemporaries like Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, the late Libyan
ruler Muammar Al Ghaddafi and Liberia’s Charles Taylor, Compaoré has indeed
kept a low profile and has managed to prevent himself becoming associated
with the worst expressions of African political life – at least not in his
own country. But a more critical assessment of his legacy and method of
government demonstrates that he is in no way the ‘benign dictator’ that
Keating and Nadoun would like him to be.
To adequately judge Blaise Compaoré’s record of bringing development and
prosperity to his people, it is first of all important to remind oneself
that he has been in power since 1987, a full quarter of a century. More than
half the population of his country has only known his rule.
Despite the period of peace that Burkina experienced during this time, and a
<
http://stats.oecd.org/qwids/#?x=2&y=6&f=3:51,4:1,1:1,5:3,7:1&q=3:51+4:1+1:1
+5:3+7:1+2:27,34,105,127+6:1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996
,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011>
comparatively generous 13 Billion US Dollars in international development
assistance, the country still
<
http://hdrstats.undp.org/images/explanations/BFA.pdf> ranks only 181st out
of 187 countries in terms of human development. All of the other bottom ten
countries in the HDI ranking experienced devastating civil wars during this
time – except Guinea, which instead had to put up with a brutal military
dictatorship. To put it bluntly: Blaise Compaoré is the only African head of
state who managed to dramatically limit the development of his country
without declaring outright war on it.*
Not to be misunderstood: Of course most indicators of economic and human
development improved during the 25 year term of Blaise Compaoré – but so
much slower than in most other African nations that his lack of interest in
lifting his population out of poverty can hardly be denied. Instead,
Compaoré is obviously more concerned with developing his own personal
fortune and that of his entourage.
This can be observed clearly by visiting Ouaga2000, a newly built,
extravagant part of the capital, where one can indeed find the ‘wide and
well maintained’ roads that Keating and Nadoun mention in their article.
While the rest of the city (not to speak of the rest of the country) has
only a handful of surfaced roads, in Ouaga2000 new SUVs glide over a
pristine tarmac in front of lavish villas and luxury hotels.
The tiny upper class, which ostentatiously shows off its wealth in this
district, is the only real beneficiary of Compaoré’s rule. While Burkina
hasn’t got the riches of some of its neighbours, the ruling elite has
managed to find significant profits from gold mining, cotton production and
development assistance. An example: One company among the many owned by the
mother in law of Blaise’s brother François was contracted to build a new
road between the regional hubs Koudougou and Dédougou. While the road
<
http://lefaso.net/spip.php?article49608&rubrique3> should have been
finished long ago it constantly requires further public investment, whilst
the ‘belle mère de la nation’ has become the richest women in the country.
While certainly exploitative, Compaoré has been smart in securing the
support of important elites, allowing him to rule by co-option rather than
by force. His predecessor <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sankara>
Thomas Sankara (killed during a coup led by Compaoré) attempted to limit the
power of traditional rulers and emancipate the country from conservative and
authoritarian rule. Compaoré by contrast embraced the conservative elements
of society, securing their privileges and making them the foundation of his
power.
To sum it up, it is hard to find any other head of state who puts his own
interest and that of his cronies so clearly above the needs of his
population, completely undisturbed by ideological considerations.
This is also demonstrated by activity in the regional and international
sphere, where Compaoré recently received a lot of goodwill due to his
‘commitment’ to mediate in various conflicts. Looking closely at his
approach to mediation and the results of his diplomacy, three aspects are
noteworthy:
1. He usually ‘solves’ conflicts in which he is deeply involved himself.
This is true for example in the case of Côte d’Ivoire, where he supplied the
northern rebels with arms and recruits before stepping in as a mediator.
2. His mediation has never proved to be sustainable. Be it his involvement
in negotiations between Tuareg rebels and the Malian government or the
aforementioned conflict in Côte d’Ivoire: the parties he ‘brought to the
table’ were at each other’s throat again soon after.
3. This suggests that his objective is not to resolve the conflicts he
purports to manage, but to make himself indispensable in the region, lest
one of his neighbours or a western donor might get the idea that Burkina
would be better off without him. It is a strategy to consolidate personal
power, not to seek peace and reconciliation.
Beyond its initial appearance, Compaoré’s legacy becomes clear: his rule has
not benefited Burkina Faso in any tangible way. Instead, he has treated the
country and its limited resources as his property, to the benefit of a small
ruling elite designed to secure his power. That he has managed to avoid
directly killing a large part of his population in the process shouldn’t win
him any praise, written or otherwise.
*Make no mistake though: Opposing the ruling elite can be just as dangerous
in Burkina as in other authoritarian countries. Just ask the children of
<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norbert_Zongo> Norbert Zongo, a journalist
killed for investigating the involvement of Compaoré’s brother in a murder.
Peter Dörrie is a freelance journalist reporting on security, politics and
development in Africa. He is based in Ouagadougou and tweets as
_at_PeterDoerrie <
http://www.twitter.com/peterdoerrie> .
------------[ Sent via the dehai-wn mailing list by dehai.org]--------------
Received on Fri Aug 17 2012 - 09:39:24 EDT
