or stateswomen in the true definition of the term. They must be leaders willing and able to rise above personal or parochial interests. They must be willing to sacrifice short-term gain for long-term stability and the common good. Attempting to build an economy on shaky political foundations will only produce an economic house of cards. Last, Africa needs strong, capable, and effective states. We cannot on the one hand lament “failed” or “dysfunctional” states while on the other hand we impose or pursue policies whose ultimate result is the weakening of what are already very weak states. So I cannot understand when people say that true democracy is when political competition is such that no party is too strong. At Africa’s level of development I ask: too strong for what? If a party is strong for development, that is good. If it is not strong for development, the other parties will coalesce into a stronger opposition that can win subsequent elections. But democracy that presupposes weak governments, or that believes a victory by the ruling party implies no true democracy, is not developmental democracy in Africa. It is naive to see African democracy through the lens of Western democracy. Italy can afford to change governments almost on a yearly basis, and that does not undermine the state. In Africa a similar scenario would be the recipe for “failed” or “dysfunctional” states. To be an effective state in Africa is to be a strong but democratic and accountable state. To think that democracy in South Africa and Tanzania is deficient just because the ruling parties have an overwhelming majority is to miss the point. The real issue is that at Africa’s level of development, the agenda for development is pretty clear-cut, and the policies and strategies would not really differ very much from one serious party to another. Any significant difference would be on how and who, rather than on what needs to be done.
Conclusion: Development Democracy for Africa It is generally accepted now that good democratic governance is important for economic growth, development, and poverty reduction. What remains unresolved is to what extent good governance is required, and therefore what other requirements are needed for growth, development, and poverty reduction. What I fear is the debate shifting from one extreme, like during the Cold War when not much attention was focused on governance, to another extreme, where governance is peddled as the panacea. As those in this business know, development, especially in Africa, is a very complex matter. There are no simple solutions, only a combination of necessary ingredients, of which good democratic governance is one. Matthew Lockwood (2005: 115–16) argues strongly for “developmental states” in Africa, but based on several studies he also concludes the following: “The case for democracy is far from straight forward. Statistically the general relationship between democracy and poverty reduction is weak (e.g., Moore et al. 1999, pp. 8–9). In Africa, the advent of multi-party
72
Leadership: An African Viewpoint and Experience