Africa-Press – Zimbabwe. SOUTH African President Cyril Ramaphosa recently returned from what is now a controversial bi-lateral meeting with his United States counterpart Donald Trump.
It was evidently controversial in its public live streaming by the mainstream media and social media platforms.
This was mainly because the media framed it as “ambush” of Ramaphosa by Trump on the issue of an alleged “white genocide” happening in South Africa.
An alleged genocide that is patently untrue.
But had been built up as a major diplomatic relations issue between the two countries because of the USA recently offering refugee status to white Afrikaners on the basis of the same allegations of “white genocide”.
I would not, however, refer to this bilateral meeting between the two presidents as an “ambush” similar to the one that occurred with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky.
Instead, this was supposed to be a well-planned, well-choreographed meeting on the part of both countries with a specific focus on, as Ramaphosa said, “resetting” their bilateral relations, both in their diplomacy and also their trade agreements.
Even on the part of Trump, his spokespersons had publicly indicated that they were not inviting Ramaphosa in order to embarrass him.
Well, it turns out they did not only embarrass him, but also humiliated his team.
It was a clear charade in which where one was watching it streamed live on social media, as a black African, you could only wince in pain at the absurdity and racist tone of it all.
And as a black African, it definitely induced an immediate sense of anger at how an African sitting head of State can be trivialised to the extent that occurred in the White House, moreso by a white American president.
Or even as to why Ramphosa took white business and celebrity Afrikaners as a key diplomatic move who when they were preferentially allowed to talk were busy undermining African history and their own South African state.
One of them even praised the US for helping with the “Angola war”, forgetting that at that time, the Americans were firmly on the side of the apartheid government against the liberation movements.
Now we see the criticism of anyone, particularly black African, who has expressed angst and disgust at the way Ramaphosa is being treated as though we are being too emotional.
Surprisingly, this criticism is also coming from black Africans who in the main purport to have “business lenses” to all matters African.
The latter are busy praising Ramaphosa for remaining calm/mature in what they are calling either an emotional diplomatic storm or necessary engagement for the purposes of achieving the business goals of the interaction.
With all due respect, calling this incident anything other than the humiliation it was is nonsense.
And it signals the highest levels of our African inferiority complexes.
And I will not go deeply into the Malcolm X narratives that defined what a “house negro” or a “field negro” can be.
In this instance, I would just hazard to argue that Ramaphosa and his team were being treated and accepting being treated as “house negroes” at the White House.
In front of a glaring global mainstream and social media and under the aegis of Elon Musk.
But beyond this, there are more important issues that we must now learn from this diplomatic disaster that was visited upon South Africa and by default Africa. (I am not sure what head of an African State will next visit Trump without suffering similar treatment)
And I will outline at least three.
The first being that we need to understand the importance of retailing our historical and organic Pan-Africanist ideological and cultural pretext as Africans, even if we are presidents or government ministers as we interact with global superpowers or even among ourselves.
Now this new organic Pan-Africanism is not about business or fawning to private capital.
It is also about our own cultural and historical identity which must always be apparent when we interact with the rest of the world.
And our presidents and prime ministers must always bear this in mind, especially in their public interactions with the global north.
Business can and should generally be part of how Africa interacts with the rest of the economic world, but it is not the priority as Ramaphosa tried and failed to demonstrate with Trump.
It is about respecting our history, culture and liberation struggle legacies anew and for setting an example to younger Africans of this, even as time, technology and global interests in the African continent shift.
In the second instance, linked to the first, as Africans, we now need to re-learn how to hold our own in international affairs.
This is beyond strategic plans such as the African Union’s Agenda 2063 or the African Free Trade Continental Agreement.
Being feted as politically correct in the global north may help, but it is essentially a veneer that dismisses the principles of the United Nations of universal equality of all human beings, a point that the global north increasingly electorally pushes back against.
Thirdly and finally, what happened with Ramaphosa and Trump is part of an emerging cultural, political and economic complex that directly affects young African minds in a negative
way.
The incident to all intents and purposes was designed to put Africans in their place about global power and what race ultimately controls it.
And to this, add the fact of the techno-feudal entrepreneurs as represented by Musk and the social media platforms that they privately own and how they influence young Africans today.
So the impression of power and its origins even against a sitting South African president creates and exacerbates an inferiority complex among young Africans, to the extent, and as seen by arguments being made from the “master’s house” on social media, that if you can’t beat them, join them.
Or if they really don’t want you, just pander to their whims, as Ramaphosa tried to do.
To conclude, what happened between South and the US this week is emblematic of Africa’s placement in world.
Going forward, we need to revamp our Pan-Africanism, understand our colonial and post-colonial political-economic histories, make new global friends that treat us equally.
But perhaps above all else, we need to be more resolute and believe in ourselves, our historical struggles and remember that in the final analysis, the majority of us Africans are in the Malcom X sense, the more revolutionary “field negroes”.
For More News And Analysis About Zimbabwe Follow Africa-Press
