The media often give the impression that Africa is being left on the fringe of globalisation. Isn’t the situation more complex than that, in reality?
Of course, that assessment of Africa’s situation has some truth in it, but it ignores the fact that Africa is taking part in globalisation in its own way. Take the example of Angola and its role in the international oil industry. The country, with its mineral and energy resources, is obviously an integral part of globalisation, exporting oil to the rest of the world and welcoming investment by numerous international oil companies.

But does this make Africa a real player in globalisation?
That really depends on what you mean by a “real player”. But there is one thing no one can deny: Africa now has more opportunities than in the past. Governments are no long the only major players. The game is much more open and more diversified. We are seeing the emergence of the private sector, and an extraordinary surge of activity by non-governmental organisations (NGOs). This is happening in countries as different as Mozambique and Chad, and many others as well. This is part of globalisation too. You can see it in the improvement in financial transparency, for example: intervention by NGOs via the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) has forced governments and companies to negotiate and to alter their positions, so that Africa’s natural resources are now managed in a way that gives more benefit to the people of the countries concerned. That is very positive.

Is Africa’s colonial past an obstacle to greater participation in globalisation, or is it an advantage?
Today’s Africa certainly still bears the marks of colonisation. You can see this in the physical spaces (which involve constraints, particularly in terms of national borders), in the changed mentalities and in the incorporation, during the colonial era, of African economies into the Western economic structure. Even today, this has a strong impact on the way Africans see themselves. The Europeans built up a sort of “colonial library” of books that defined what Africa was or wasn’t, and Africans who want to emancipate themselves from the European representation of their continent don’t find any other books that can help them grasp their real identity. Some people thought that Africans might be able to put a final end to the colonial experience by going back to the models of the pre-colonial period. But we now realise that doesn’t work. You can’t escape colonisation via a tabula rasa operation; it is an integral part of Africa’s history. In some ways colonisation brought with it a form of globalisation. Religion is a good example here: many people forget that it is in Africa that the Catholic Church is growing fastest today. And this religious globalisation has an impact on economic globalisation. Colonisation is also made up of connections and transactions, of interactions between different societies, cultures and religions. In short, colonisation caused Africa to become integrated into different sorts of globalisation.

Nevertheless, a lot of Westerners think that Africa is not living in the present, not a player in modern history.
They are badly mistaken. Africans are full-time players, there’s no doubt of that. It’s just that they are rising to the challenges they face in their own time and with the resources at their disposal. In France, in Europe, when you talk about globalisation you really mean a uniform world based on the European model. Americans, on the other hand, see it as diversification, with societies globalising in very different ways. You mentioned modern history, but there are different histories and different modernities. European modernity is not the only possible model. Who can deny, for example, that there now exists a Chinese modernity and an Indian modernity too? The real globalisation is one that includes a convergence of differences. It implies a recomposition of the world, but not one dictated by a European vision. Deep down, Africa is already globalised, but before Africans realise this they will have to come to terms with their history.

So the difficulty that Africans have in coming to terms with their history is a handicap?
Yes, it is a handicap. If a society can’t come to terms with its own past how can it think about its future? Too often, Africans forget that they played a part in history, in the slave trade, colonisation, the Cold War... They were victims, but also players. A lot of Africans tend to think that what happens to their continent is someone else’s doing, and that prevents them from coming to grips with their own history. Certainly we should never forget, or underestimate, the tragic consequences of the slave trade or colonisation, but we should also remember that Africans were accomplices in both. But the history of Africa is not just the history of colonisation; it is also a history of international trade and travel. In other words globalisation. People often forget that West Africa had strong ties with Europe as early as the 15th century. The murids of Senegal have been travelling the world for centuries, using their own resources and those of their brotherhoods to collect large sums of money without calling on conventional financial networks. Most Africa countries have been independent for about fifty years now. It is up to them to build their own future.

One of the main features of globalisation has been an increase in competition. Is Africa equipped to face stiffer competition?
Africans know all about competition. On this continent you have to compete for everything, including just to stay alive. Africans regard this as a very natural phenomenon. There is competition for resources, for territory – as in Rwanda and Burundi – for access to technology, and even for the very survival of individuals and communities, notably via access to water. Admittedly this situation can produce dramatic incidents, but it is also a source of great vitality and generates a keen ability to adapt. Africans are now giving much more importance to success, counting on their own resources and the backing of their community.

How is this visible in concrete terms?
I am convinced that Africans are now deriving much greater benefit than before from the market of resources and ideas. Today’s context offers many new opportunities. The current environment is not an easy one, but both individuals and groups have much more room to manoeuvre than they did before. Africans are now proving that they can successfully negotiate the recognized Western systems. Take for example the much talked-about brain drain, one of the key manifestations of globalisation. Africans have proved they are competitive in markets where there is the toughest competition, such as the faculties of America’s major universities. We are also seeing more young Africans in the world of business. I could also give you examples from the world of music and dance or the clothing industry. Africans are thoroughly globalised in this areas.

What role do you see for young Africans in this changing world?
Africa is the world’s youngest continent in demographic terms. There is enormous potential here, but a number of conditions have to be met before that potential can be realised. First of all there is the problem of child soldiers. This is a real drama for Africa’s youth. Then there is education for girls, which is already bringing sea changes to African society, along with some problems too (the increasing autonomy of women who are going out into the workforce has led to an increase in domestic violence). We are now seeing a new generation of young women novelists in Nigeria, for example, who are writing about these changes. Another major condition is a better understanding by African governments of the needs of their young people. The high proportion of young people in Africa means there is a huge gap between ordinary people and their political leaders, who are just too old. One of the major challenges facing Africa in the coming years will be to manage the transition from authoritarian governance (a result of colonial centralisation) to a system that is more open, in both democratic and economic terms. Africa’s youth has a vital role to play in this transition. In short, youth may be a problem for today but it is a tremendous opportunity for tomorrow.

You mentioned the drama of the child soldiers. One of the first things Westerners think of when Africa is mentioned are the numerous conflicts, often civil wars, raging on that continent. How can you remain optimistic faced with such a terrible reality?
It is true; there are, and may continue to be, very violent conflicts in Africa that tend to reverse much of the progress we are making. But I am a historian, and history shows us that conflict can often be a source of progress. There was some terrible violence in the 1970s, but it did lead to advances in the democratic process in the countries concerned. I am convinced that African society is very resilient and has the ability to bounce back after even the most traumatic events. Africans also have a knack of devising unexpected solutions to their problems. Just look at the “African renaissance” in South Africa or the social reconstruction movement in Rwanda. Compared with these endeavours, interventions by Westerners have often been quite woeful. Unfortunately, it is often necessary for the opposing parties to see the conflict right through to the end in order to burst the abscess and begin the healing process. Even during the most atrocious violence and war, Africa continues to build its future.

Do you mean that despite the awful consequences for the civilian population, the rest of the world should remain passive when such conflicts arise?
No. It’s more subtle than that. I’m not talking about situations where all the resources of the state are being used to crush a particular section of the community. In those cases there may be a need for intervention, either by African or international forces. But where international intervention is required, we must be careful to avoid ex-colonial associations. But while we’re on the subject of fighting and possible Western intervention, where do you think the arms come from? Who is responsible for this? The only country in Sub-Saharan Africa that has a major defence industry is South Africa, and it’s obvious that all the arms flooding Africa and being used in these conflicts couldn’t come from one single source...

China has strongly boosted its presence in Africa in the last few years. Do you see this as a problem or an opportunity?
It is both. Here again, the arrival of a new player in Africa makes the game more open and creates opportunities. Africa stands to benefit from some of China’s financial resources. Infrastructure development is vital to the economic development of the African continent. Today, China has become an alternative source of investment for Africa. And it would undoubtedly come as a surprise to most Europeans to learn that growing numbers of young Africans are learning Asian languages, including Chinese. In the same vein, a lot of the Africans working for international bodies like the World Bank are now dealing with countries in Asia and Latin America. In short, China’s emergence has given Africa the opportunity to renegotiate the continent’s role on the world stage. However, in terms of governance, the picture is not so rosy. The growing Chinese role in Africa could have dire consequences in terms of human rights. And of course let’s not forget the growing weight of Arab investment funds in a number of African economies. The growing role of these new players raises the question as to whether they are likely to shift Africa’s focus further to the east, thus weakening the continent’s age-old ties with Europe.

Given this context, how will the formation of regional blocs in Africa help the continent be a more competitive player in a globalised economy?
Africa is not a country, it is a huge continent structured by a certain number of dichotomies and divided into zones that have different histories. It is this principle of diversity, rather than any fantasy impression we may have of the continent, that defines the real Africa. But at the same time, the different geographical entities are now starting to gravitate around regional poles, and this may indeed help Africa to derive greater benefit from globalisation. In the same way as France is a globalisation player via its membership of the European Union. In reality, no country actually needs to be a direct player in globalisation order to take part. The mechanism may be indirect, such as via the creation of a regional economic zone that is then integrated into the world economy. This is why the bridgehead economies that are emerging or consolidating their position in Africa are trying to set up regional polarities.

Can you give us some examples of this?
The most typical example is South Africa, where a strong private sector is underpinned by a regional network that boosts its economic competitiveness at international level. Elsewhere, East Africa is turning more towards the Indian Ocean, with Tanzania and Kenya trying to gain access to maritime corridors. In Central Africa, we are seeing geostrategic moves centred on the Congo and its natural resources. But it is West Africa that seems most strongly tempted by the adventure of globalisation. I have even heard young Senegalese refer to Paris and New York as “the suburbs of Dakar”! The key to the transformation of West Africa is Nigeria, but before that can happen the country has to get organised and achieve stability on the back of a liberal economy. Polarisation in West Africa could go several different ways. For example, if the old trans-Sahara networks were reactivated we could see West Africa grow much closer to Arab North Africa. And that could be followed by an Islamic revival. It’s hard to tell at present which way things will go.

What role is migration likely to play as Africa moves further towards globalisation?
The face of Africa is changing, particularly due to increasing migration from rural to urban zones within Africa and then from cities in Africa to cities elsewhere in the world. This migration leads to different ways of thinking and living, but despite what some people think this is not necessarily a bad thing. Globalisation is not so much a trend towards standardisation as an affirmation of differences. It is also based on movement– movement of goods, capital and persons – as the history of Europe clearly shows. Europe as a continent grew by “exporting” its excess population (after all, Australia and New Zealand were populated with European convicts). On the other hand, once Europe’s economy reached a “golden age”, it went looking for labour in Africa because there was not enough available locally to meet the needs of development. Today, it is as if Europe’s leaders have forgotten this phase of its history, and they find themselves in a flagrant contradiction: they are preaching the merits of globalisation to Africa while at the same time refusing to let Africans move to Europe, whereas the movement of persons is one of the key tenets of globalisation.

Can this migration really be stopped?
I don’t think it can. Even though it makes people in the destination countries nervous, with terrible consequences for the migrants themselves. In a way, the current debate on immigration in the United States is more honest intellectually, because it puts the emphasis on the responsibility of employer companies. Paradoxically, Europe’s emphasis on policing migration flows has led some migrant communities to settle permanently even though they didn’t necessarily intend to do so when they arrived. Will it be possible to re-establish circular migrant flows? I don’t know for sure, but what’s happening in India is very interesting: they are bringing home educated emigrants to give a boost to local development. This concept of social remittance is very important. It recognises that emigrants can contribute not just money to their country of origin but, more importantly, know-how as well. Only the future will tell whether Africa can rise to this challenge.