The Press FRIDAY, JANUARY 16, 1959. Africa

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28795, 16 January 1959, Page 8

The Press FRIDAY, JANUARY 16, 1959. Africa

The establishment of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (which met recently for the first time at its permanent headquarters in Addis Ababa) is an exercise in faith. All the colonial Powers are well enough aware of the difficulties of getting co-operation within a single territory, let alone co-operation among neighbours. Britain, particularly, has had discouraging experiences in Central Africa and East Africa. Nevertheless, Africa’s need for help in its headlong dash into Western civilisation is so great that whatever can be done should be done. So far South Africa alone has declined to share in the work of the commission, on. the ground that Africa is not one entity but two. divided roughly by the Sahara desert. While this division may be admitted, it could equally be argued that other divisions should be recognised. But on the whole South Africa’s abstention may be an advantage, since its attempt to work out apartheid rouses strong feelings in other African territories. This leaves, as full African candidates for membership, Ethiopia, Ghana, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, the United Arab Republic, and now, presumably, Guinea. European Powers eligible for membership, because of their continuing responsibilities to backward peoples, art Belgium, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. In addition, dependent territories with some measure of legislative freedom are entitled to be associate members. When the commission was set up the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations wisely rejected a proposal that the United States and Russia should be members. Both these countries will probably be expected to

help provide capital for African development; but to seat them in the commission would be to risk turning it into a propaganda forum.

The problems of Africa are unique. First, most of the continent has had a relatively brief association with Western ideas; and development, political and economic, has only recently reached its present dizzy momentum. Second, historians believe that Africa has begun to develop several times in the past and then slipped back, into tribalism. Third, the interdependence of races and colours is accompanied by antipathies that will not be easily removed. This leads to the great paradox noted by the “ Economist ” in its recent survey of Africa: that political advance has been greatest in areas where economies are weakest (because of the absence of large-scale European investment) and that economic advance has been greatest where political progress is most difficult (because of the presence of multi-racial societies). No easy solutions can be found for the diversity of African problems; certainly the somewhat cumbersome United Nations Commission will not be able alone to work them out However, any and every experiment in co-operation will make some contribution to better understanding. And, whether they like it or not, the success of the African revolution will depend most on the generosity of Western nations. Grave issues are in the balance. Western democracy has more to lose from chaos in Africa than supplies of raw materials and markets. It would be a blow to the moral standing of the colonial Powers if they did not use their resources to guide events in Africa while they still had time. And, as the “Economist” says, time is running out.