Part 2

Diaspora and Development, 200 Anniversary of Abolition Act
By Dr. Daniel T. Osabu-Kle

Crimes against humanity have been defined through the Nuremberg tribunal as "Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population . . . whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated." Moreover, the United Nations Convention on the Prevention of Crime and Genocide defined genocide- a crime against humanity - to include deliberately inflicting on a racial or ethnic group "conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part." Historians from the same countries that committed crimes against humanity during the slave trade and colonialism testify to the unprovoked invasion of African territories, the mass capture of Africans, the horrors of the middle passage, the chattelization of Africans in the Americas, and the extermination of the language and culture of the transported peoples. From their testimony and the definition of crime against humanity under the Nuremberg tribunal and the United Nations Convention on genocide, the slave trade, slavery and colonialism in Africa are crimes against humanity.

The right to reparation was confirmed in international law when the Permanent Court of International Justice defined it in 1928. Case law evidence in the international arena buttressing the right to reparation includes the following:

1. The 1952 agreement between the Federal Republic of Germany and Israel for the payment of $222 million, when Jews who fled from Nazi-controlled countries claimed reparations.

2. The 1990 Austrian payments totalling $25 million to survivors of the Jewish Holocaust.

3. Japan’s reparation payments to South Korea for acts committed during Japanese invasion and occupation of Korea in World War II.

4. The UN Security Council’s passage of a resolution, which it considered binding in international law, requiring Iraq to pay reparations for its invasion of Kuwait.

5. The United Civil Liberties Act of 1988 that provided restitution to Japanese Americans for losses resulting from their internment and ill-treatment at the hands of U.S. authorities during World War II, and subsequent payment of a total of $1.2 billion, averaging about $20,000 per Japanese American claimant.
6. The 1995 Waikato Raupatu Claims Settlement Bill over which Queen Elizabeth personally presided giving reparation for the 1863 British seizure of Maori land in New Zealand. Due apology was rendered, land was handed back and an additional $40 million (U.S.) was paid in compensation.

The particular case of the Maori of New Zealand confirmed that there can be no justified barrier to reparations rationalized on the basis of ‘long time’. Once the Maori were paid reparation, the principle of case law kicked in to require that Africans be not denied the same. In addition, it is a case in which the descendants of the original victims were granted reparations for the loss of their ancestral land and cultural defoliation. Moreover, since the rule of law requires that neither the accused nor the complainant has the right to unilaterally erect any barrier to the judicial process, it is unlawful and unacceptable for the accused nations to pass their own laws setting time lines to protect themselves from being held to account. It should also not be forgotten that “might is right” is antagonistic to the rule of law. It seems, in the mind of the perpetrator nations, the notion “might is right” is like Johnny Walker, born 1820, still going strong. The Diaspora should challenge that notion through negotiations failing which a properly constituted court excluding representation from the perpetrator nations, but acceptable to both parties, should adjudicate.

The reparation should be paid to Africa and its Diaspora as a whole. Africa and its Diaspora do not lack trained bankers. A Bank of Africa and Diaspora can be established into which the reparation amounts can be paid and disbursed for development purposes. Instead of borrowing money from the IMF and the Word Bank under harsh conditionalities, African governments, businesses and institutions within the Diaspora can then borrow from this bank with dignity and respect. However, though reparation is justified and the major potential resource for development, it is not the only avenue!

The Transferable Skills and Resources of the Diaspora

Transferable skills and resources exist within the Diaspora which can be tapped for development. Awareness, organization, training and mobilization may be required to harness these resources. Following the good example of Oprah Winfrey, contributions from the Diaspora to establish training schools where necessary may be required. While it is true that some in the Diaspora, including myself, are already making progress in this respect there is room for more commitment and broadening of the base. Contributions and mobilization should not be limited to establishing schools and training programs. Some of the contributions may be directed to establishing scholarship schemes for needy students and to encourage and reward excellence.

Job creation should not be overlooked. After completing schools or training programs many in the Diaspora relatively find it hard to get jobs. This is partly due to the vertical mosaic of racism constructed during the era of slavery and colonialism that relegated people of African descent to the bottom of its ladder and partly due to the type of education or training. However, the Diaspora can overcome or circumvent the ladder of prejudice and discrimination through contributions to establish black businesses managed by qualified members of the Diaspora that can create jobs for its members. It requires commitment and trust which seem lacking at the moment. The Diaspora should not forget that unemployment leads to poverty and there is a relationship between poverty and crime which has landed many members of the Diaspora in jail. While failure to pay reparation is at the roots of this poverty, the Diaspora can still make a difference through self-reliance.

There is, however, the danger of ‘black capitalists’ using their wealth and skills to not for the purpose of aiding the development process, but for exploitation and profit maximization purposes. While making some profit is reasonable within some limits, it should not be forgotten that Truman’s Point Four, which invented transitive development after World War II, asserts that exploitation for profit should not be part of the plan. Care should be taken to ensure that members of the Diaspora working in any of the established black business are adequately paid and rewarded.

The Diaspora and the Brain Drain Problem

The growth of the Diaspora while contributing to alleviate the unemployment problem in the countries of origin simultaneously creates a brain drain problem resulting in shortage of much needed skills there. It contributes to shortage of doctors, nurses, engineers, administrators and labour. Political instability and political repression within the countries of origin are contributing factors and so is the colonial legacy of weak economies vulnerable to fluctuations in the world market. Remittances to relations and friends while tending to provide some relief as well as benefiting the economy as a whole do not eliminate these shortages. Return to the country of origin after acquiring much experience is one way of solving the problem. Unfortunately, those who return are relatively few and may be too old to be productive. Some return to their countries of origin only when they are about to die or are dead. Indeed, the countries of origin have become the graveyards of the Diaspora. This practice must stop!
Those who visit or return sometimes carry along with them certain cultural practices and some feeling of pomposity which are not welcome. This is due to blind cultural emulation and the notion that practices in the developed North are necessarily appropriate for the South. Such cultural insensitivity leads to unnecessary and avoidable negative development. Cultural awareness and self discipline on the part of members of the Diaspora returning to their countries of origin cannot therefore be overemphasized. Cultural insensitivity on the part of those who return is only one side of the story. The countries of origin also create problems for Diaspora members willing to help. Because of their own colonial mentality of white superiority, envy, and feelings of being threatened, they prefer white advisers to Diaspora advisers. Negative comments about Diaspora members who return include: Is he coming to dictate to us, what does s/he think of herself/himself? This is very frustrating! The countries of origin must address this problem through re-education and confidence building.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I emphasize that the slave trade and slavery might have been abolished on paper, but in reality they still continue. Celebrating 200 years of abolition means celebrating 200 years of denying Africa and its Diaspora due apology followed by reparation. So long as adequate reparation has not been paid to Africa and its Diaspora to enable them create the same income generating wealth and catch up with those benefiting from the crimes, slavery and the slave trade still continue unabated. The generations who continue to benefit from it, indirectly, knowingly or unknowingly continue to participate in it, for the descendants of those who suffered continue to suffer. Once they accept the benefits they automatically accept the crime. The Diaspora must continue to fight against this injustice till the slave trade and slavery are truly abolished through reparations.

Successfully fighting for reparation is not the only means available to the Diaspora to contribute to development. It can harness a combination of acquired skills and generous contributions to provide education and training, establish businesses and create jobs for its members. Such self-reliance requires commitment and dedication.

The brain drain continues to be a problem that militates against development in the countries of origin as the Diaspora expands. Part of the problem may be attributed to the political and economic conditions within the countries of origin themselves and may be associated with the colonial legacy. While return of some may ameliorate the problem, very few do return and cultural sensitivity on return has to be taken seriously. Because the colonial mentality of superiority of the white man has not been eradicated, coupled with narrow self-interest and envy, it is very frustrating that the countries of origin prefer white advisers to better qualified members of the Diaspora. This behaviour must be addressed to enable the Diaspora contribute effectively to the development process.

Dr. Daniel T. Osabu-Kle, Canada, May 22, 2007

Previous page