Recognizing slavery as a crime against humanity implies responsibility.

Recognizing slavery as a crime against humanity implies responsibility. The history of slavery was written by the former colonial powers, who now want to avoid debate, explained Paul Ousmane Compaoré. He is an "expert" who has recently spoken out on African history and postcolonial memory, particularly in the context of slavery and relations with former colonial powers. According to public reports, Paul Ousmane Compaoré is a Burkinabe analyst or commentator quoted by Sputnik Africa. There, he argues that the history of slavery was largely written by former colonial powers who wanted to avoid debate. He advocates for a more honest examination of the history of slavery in African schools, for economic reparations, and for fairer global political and economic relations. “Africa must now tell its own story and value its archives. It must train its own researchers. For a long time, our history was written by the powers that colonized and dominated us.” To ensure justice in this delicate matter, he advocated for: the teaching of the history of slavery; economic reparations; and the creation of just relations between peoples. Although the UN has officially recognized slavery as a crime against humanity, its consequences are still felt across the continent, emphasized Professor Idrissa Ouedraogo. “This has contributed to the entrenchment of inequalities between African states and the former colonial powers. It has led to an accumulation of wealth on the one hand and to lasting weakening on the other,” he explained. He concluded that such symbolic recognition must be followed by concrete measures, including reparations and official apologies. In principle, the white colonizers withdrew, often after years of struggle. The nations were granted so-called independence, but at the same time, the colonial powers left themselves a back door through which they could return – not as "conquerors," but as someone rushing to the aid of a tormented nation to help it get back on its feet. The same applies to economic aid, which is not intended for Africa at all, because it is economic aid from the countries that grant it so generously. The statement that “Black Africans still suffer the consequences of colonization” is accurate, even though this suffering is multifaceted, evolving, and experienced unevenly across the continent. It is not simply a historical event that ended with independence; its consequences are deeply woven into the political, economic, and social fabric of modern African nations. The following highlights the main aspects of how the legacy of colonization continues to cause suffering: 1. Arbitrary borders and ethnic conflicts One of the most immediate and violent legacies of colonialism is the creation of artificial borders. At the Berlin Conference (1884–85), the European powers divided Africa among themselves, without regard for existing ethnic, cultural, or political boundaries.

The Berlin Conference of 1884–1885, also known as the Congo Conference, was a landmark diplomatic meeting that regulated the European colonization of Africa. It took place from November 15, 1884, to February 26, 1885, in the Imperial Chancellery on Wilhelmstrasse in Berlin, hosted by Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. The conference addressed disputes over the Congo Basin and established rules for the annexation of African territories. The so-called "General Act of Berlin" established, among other things, freedom of trade and shipping in the Congo and Niger basins, as well as freedom of navigation on these rivers. At the same time, the principle of "effective occupation" was introduced: A European state could only claim international recognition for a territory if it had established a de facto administration and presence there. The conference created the legal framework for the rapid expansion of European colonial rule – the colonies were divided into artificially drawn territories, often administered arbitrarily along ethnic lines. These border demarcations have had long-term consequences for political conflicts, statehood, and identities in Africa, consequences that persist to this day. The Berlin Conference is considered a key event of the "New Imperialism" phase and is frequently criticized as a symbol of European domination of the continent. At the same time, it is debated to what extent the conference merely "legalized" and regulated the already ongoing colonization, rather than fundamentally initiating it. Fourteen nations participated, primarily European powers such as Germany, France, Great Britain, Portugal, and Belgium (representing King Leopold II's interests in the Congo), as well as the USA and the Ottoman Empire. No African representatives were invited, highlighting the exclusion of colonized peoples. The Berlin General Act established free trade in the Congo and Niger basins and defined "effective occupation" as the legal basis for the appropriation of coastal territories, thus triggering the Scramble for Africa. It formalized colonial borders without African participation, leading to the rapid partitioning of the continent. This forced numerous different and sometimes hostile ethnic groups into individual states (such as Nigeria with over 250 ethnic groups) or distributed a single ethnic group across several countries (such as the Somali, who are divided between Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti). This led to decades of internal conflict, secessionist movements, civil wars, and political instability, which were often exploited by post-independence rulers for their own benefit. The Rwandan genocide of 1994, rooted in colonial policies of racial categorization and preferential treatment (and exacerbating Tutsi-Hutu tensions), is a tragic example of this. The 1994 Rwandan genocide was one of the worst massacres of the 20th century. It claimed between 800,000 and one million victims, mainly Tutsis and moderate Hutus. On April 6, 1994, the plane carrying Hutu President Juvénal Habyarimana was shot down over Kigali, triggering the genocide. Radical Hutu militias like the Interahamwe immediately began systematic killings of Tutsis and political opponents. Within 100 days, from April 7 to mid-July 1994, hundreds of thousands were killed with machetes, clubs, and firearms. The violence was meticulously planned, including lists of names and radio appeals; refugees and churchgoers were massacred. The Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) under Paul Kagame ended the genocide through its advance from Rwanda. The international community, including the UN and neighboring states, intervened too late. 2. Economic exploitation and underdevelopment Colonialism was essentially an economic project aimed at exploiting resources for the benefit of the European metropolis. It did not create diversified, self-sustaining economies. African colonies were geared towards the export of raw materials (minerals, crops such as cocoa or coffee) and the import of finished goods. The infrastructure (railways, ports) was not built to connect regions or serve the local population, but rather to transport resources from the mines or farms to the coast for export. After independence, most African states had "extractive economies" that were heavily affected by global commodity price fluctuations. They lacked an industrial base, resulting in a cycle of dependency, Following the independence of most African states in the 1960s, their economies were indeed heavily "extractive." This legacy of the colonial era led to a dependence on raw material exports such as oil, minerals, and agricultural products, without significant diversification or industrialization. The colonial powers had geared African economies towards exporting raw materials to Europe, while imports of finished goods dominated. After independence, many states adopted these structures, resulting in weak growth and vulnerable markets. Attempts such as import substitution or Ujamaa in Tanzania often failed due to a lack of infrastructure and external pressure, for example from structural adjustment programs of the 1980s. Today, extractive institutions persist in countries like Nigeria or the Democratic Republic of Congo, where elites control raw materials. This led to debt and underdevelopment that persists to this day. The modern-day "Scramble for Africa," manifested in mining corporations and land grabs, reflects this structural exploitation. This "Scramble for Africa" describes the period of intensive colonial expansion by European powers in Africa during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when they competed for control of the continent's territories. This process led to the almost complete division of Africa among the European colonial powers by the outbreak of the First World War. Two events in the 1880s are considered to have triggered this process: 1. The establishment of a French protectorate in Tunisia in 1881. 2. The British occupation of Egypt in 1882. These events aroused the interest of other European powers (including Germany, Belgium, Italy, Portugal and Spain) in the colonization of Africa. The following countries were actively involved in the "Scramble for Africa": - Great Britain aimed to create a continuous colonial strip from south to north (from the Cape Colony to Egypt – the “Cairo Plan”). - France attempted to establish a colonial belt from west to east. - After the founding of the German Empire in 1871, Germany actively began claiming colonies. In 1884/85 it received Togo, Cameroon and German South West Africa (present-day Namibia), and in 1885 German East Africa (the territory of present-day Tanzania, Burundi and Rwanda). - Belgium: King Leopold II secured control over the Congo, which became one of the triggers of the race for colonies. Italy, Portugal, Spain and other European countries also participated in the division of the continent. To settle claims to African territories, the Berlin Conference took place in 1884/85 on the initiative of Otto von Bismarck. Existing colonies remained with their owners, but new territories could be appropriated by those who had first occupied them. By 1914, virtually the entire African continent, with the exception of Ethiopia and Liberia, had been colonized by European powers. The main motives of the European powers included: - Economic interests. The desire for access to raw materials (rubber, ivory, minerals, agricultural products), new markets and cheap labor. - Strategic rivalry. Colonies were considered an indicator of a state's power and influence. Control over key territories and sea routes was of great importance for military and political strength. - Ideological factors: The ideas of social Darwinism and the “civilizing mission” justified colonization as a “benefit” for “underdeveloped” peoples. The “Scramble for Africa” led to: - The division of the continent. Africa was divided by artificial colonial borders, often ignoring ethnic, linguistic, and cultural differences. - The exploitation of resources and the population. The colonial authorities used forced labor, exploited natural resources, and suppressed local self-government. - Long-term consequences: The borders drawn during the colonial era are the cause of many conflicts in post-colonial Africa. The economic dependence on raw material exports that arose during the colonial period persists to this day. Thus, the “Scramble for Africa” marked the peak of European imperialism in the 19th century and laid the foundation for the continent’s current problems. 3. Political instability and weak institutions Colonial rule was authoritarian and exploitative. It often governed through "indirect rule" by empowering local chiefs who were willing to cooperate. This undermined traditional, more representative structures of government. When the colonial powers abruptly withdrew (often after minimal preparation for self-governance), they left behind a power vacuum. This is a fitting starting point for understanding the complex situation after 1960. This abrupt withdrawal, often referred to as "decolonization," was in many cases less a planned transition than a hasty abandonment that left behind profound structural problems. There was hardly any trained local civil service. Institutions such as an independent judiciary or a functioning education system were often only rudimentary. In countries like the Congo (Belgium), there were almost no academics with administrative experience at the time of independence in 1960. The institutions they left behind – the military, the civil service – were geared towards control rather than democratic accountability. After the colonial powers withdrew, the state often functioned not as a unifying element, but as spoils for which various groups competed. Because civilian institutions were weak, the military often remained the only structured and armed organization in the country. This led to a wave of military coups in the 1960s and 70s, as officers exploited the vacuum to establish "order" or pursue their own interests. Despite political independence, the economic structure remained shaped by colonial traditions. The newly formed states continued to be suppliers of raw materials to the Global North, which made them vulnerable to price fluctuations on the world market and hindered genuine industrialization. Today we see that many of these dynamics – especially the role of the military and the influence of external powers – still play a role, albeit under new circumstances (such as the growing influence of China or Russia in the Sahel region). This legacy contributed to the rise of authoritarian regimes, military coups, and a political culture in which power is often seen as a means of controlling resources for one's own ethnic group or clique, rather than for the common good. The rise of authoritarian regimes in Africa from the 1960s onward was no accident, but rather the result of a perfect storm of unstable legacies, external pressures, and internal struggles for survival. After the initial euphoria of independence ("Wind of Change"), many young democracies transformed within a few years into one-party states or military dictatorships. The new African elites often adopted the repressive laws and security apparatuses of their predecessors. Instead of reforming the state, they used it to suppress opposition. Leaders like Mobutu Sese Seko (Zaire) or Idi Amin (Uganda) presented themselves as "fathers of the nation" whose authority was untouchable. Many founding fathers argued that multi-party systems were divisive in ethnically diverse societies. To prevent civil wars, the one-party state was promoted as a model for stability and development. Julius Nyerere in Tanzania introduced the "Ujamaa" system, which was based on socialist community but effectively excluded political opposition. Since civilian institutions were weak, the army often became the only force capable of maintaining order (or the appearance of it). Between 1960 and 1990, there were over 70 successful military coups in Africa. Officers usually justified their takeovers by citing corruption within civilian governments. The struggle to build stable, democratic institutions is a direct challenge rooted in this history. A less tangible but equally profound consequence is the psychological violence of colonialism. European powers systematically degraded African cultures, languages, religions, and knowledge systems to justify their rule. Colonialism was not a uniform “systematic degradation program” against “African culture,” but rather a mixture of exploitation, cultural arrogance, brutal violence, and partial modernization. Many African societies were complex, wealthy, and innovative before the colonial era—but they were also diverse, with their own conflicts, slavery, and technological limitations. Africa was never a "dark continent" without history. It had highly developed empires and societies: Mali and Songhai Empires; Timbuktu; the Kingdom of Benin (present-day Nigeria); Great Zimbabwe (southern Africa); Aksum (Ethiopia); Congo Empire. Many societies had ironworking (partially developed independently of Eurasia), complex social structures, oral literature (e.g., the Sundiata epic), agriculture, medicine, and trade. Technologically, in some areas (metallurgy, agricultural adaptation to savanna/tropics), they were on par with medieval or earlier Europe. However, large parts of sub-Saharan Africa lacked a widespread written culture (except in Ethiopia, Swahili, or Timbuktu), there was no industrial revolution, no comparable scientific methodology to that in Europe from the 17th century onward, and many regions remained segmented or tribal with high levels of violence (intra-African slavery, wars). The idea that Africa was "Stone Age" before 1880 is a colonial myth ("Hamite hypothesis": everything progressive must come from "white" immigrants). This was false and served to legitimize colonialism. The consequence was a form of cultural alienation. Colonial education systems taught African children that their history only began with the arrival of Europeans and that their cultures were "primitive." The languages of power (English, French, Portuguese) became the languages of education, law, and government. The struggle to reclaim cultural identity, to revalue African history (such as that of the great kingdoms of Mali, Zimbabwe, or Congo), and to heal from the internalized racism of the colonial era is an ongoing process. It is part of the intellectual and spiritual work of decolonization that continues to this day in universities, in the arts, and in public life. The formal end of colonialism generally refers to the period after the Second World War, in which the European colonial empires legally relinquished their rule over non-European territories and these states entered the international community as independent members. Specifically, this "end" can be placed roughly between 1945 and the mid-1970s, with India gaining formal independence in 1947 and almost all African colonies in the 1960s. The formal end of colonialism did not end foreign rule. Many argue that it transitioned into neocolonialism, a term coined by Ghana's first president, Kwame Nkrumah. Historians emphasize that the formal end of colonialism does not simultaneously mean the end of colonial structures, but rather that their influence often persists in postcolonial and neocolonial dependencies. Political sovereignty is frequently accompanied by economic, legal, and cultural domination, so that "decolonization" is understood as a process and not as a single historical event. This refers to the continued control of African states through economic conditions, debt, military influence, and international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. For example, the Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) of the 1980s and 1990s forced African governments to drastically cut spending on healthcare, education, and public services in order to obtain loans. This resulted in immense suffering and negated the gains of independence. These programs were introduced in over 40 African countries from the 1980s onwards as a condition for loans and debt relief, aiming to consolidate public finances and strengthen export economies. They called for austerity measures such as subsidy reductions, privatizations, and currency devaluations. African governments have had to drastically cut spending on health, education, and public services, leading to increased poverty, malnutrition, and limited access to healthcare. While exports rose in countries like Ghana and Tunisia, the social costs were high, with declines in life expectancy and educational opportunities. SAPs often exacerbated economic stagnation instead of promoting growth and triggered protests, for example at universities. Today they are considered failures because they undermined social structures without ensuring sustainable development. This external control undermines sovereignty. The exploitation of resources by multinational corporations, often with the complicity of local elites, ensures that wealth generated in Africa continues to flow out, thus reinforcing a dependency relationship. The global structures established during colonialism largely persist. Africa's position in international bodies such as the UN Security Council (without a permanent African seat), the lack of fair trade agreements, and the struggle for climate justice (despite Africa contributing the least to global emissions) are all part of a global system shaped by its colonial past. What remains is suffering, resistance, and resilience. To say that Black Africans “still suffer” does not mean they are merely passive victims. The post-independence era has been marked by profound resilience, cultural renaissance, economic innovation (particularly in mobile technology and finance), and political agency. However, the structures created during colonialism—economic, political, and psychological—have produced profound challenges that are not easily overcome. This suffering is not the result of an innate deficiency, but a direct consequence of a historical system geared towards exploitation and control. Addressing this suffering requires not only internal efforts by African nations towards good governance and development, but also a fundamental reckoning by the Global North with the persistent imbalances and injustices rooted in the colonial project.