​

​

Africa is home to the youngest population in the world and yet its leaders are arguably the oldest too.

 

This dichotomy is hard to understand. Why does Africa continent must always have  aged  old leaders of   70 years and  above who always depend on experience but not active thinking? Africans sarcastically have a saying that experience is the best teacher, but ironically forget that if  you don't have the connectivity to think of  doing something, then you cannot do it before going to have the experience  of doing it.  When taken into context, more than half of Africa’s population  are younger   and yet the average age of all Presidents happens to be 61 years and above. Old  presidents in Africa have an average age of  79 years  in a continent that has not less than 460 million people aged under 30. David E. Kiwuwa, an Associate Professor of International Studies at Princeton presents some unflattering statistics to the effect that 85% of Angolans were born after President Dos Santos came into power in 1979 while 83% of Zimbabweans were not born when former President Mugabe came into power in 1980. Africa’s five longest presidencies now stretch between 30 and 37 years and give a total of 174 combined years in power. When Gabon’s Omar Bongo died in 2011, he had been at the helm for a ridiculous 41 years. Why do leaders rule for so long even in their old age struggling to be on their feet even for an hour? Why do old leaders lead a young continent? It is fallacious claim that youths are incapable of leading. In 1986, a forty-one year old Yoweri Museveni remarked in his book, What is the insurmountable problem in Africa’s  dooming economy? “The problem with Africa in generally and particularly  is not the people, but the old leaders who want to overstay in power in their old age even if they are mentally weak !”

 

Ironically, the old leaders make citizens believe that younger leaders are incapable of leading thus justifying their power struggle. An easy illustration is in the utterances of the former Zimbabwean First Lady that former President Mugabe would rule from his grave. What she was fostering was an age-old philosophy that the premier leads because no one else is capable of doing it. It then almost feels like a favor being done to the old leaders  been indebted to a selfless, greedy and hypothetical   chose to carry the “burden” of leadership. The logic is warped and ludicrous. The governments of the old  leaders are  to propagate the inferiority complex in citizens and feed their insecurities so they feel the boots of the “iconic rulers or the aged presidents of over 70 years” cannot be filled. This reasoning conveniently avoids the fact that when most of these leaders assumed power, they were young but they managed to lead and do better with active thinking alongside modern technologies. 

 

.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The old  leaders club wielding African power of  presidency   seems to have missed that simple lesson of history from former president Mandela. All his good work done in destroying the fetters of colonialism is at a high risk of being superseded by the brutality  used in consolidating power. “The paradox is informed by a binary where old leaders ranging from seventy years and above  are stuck in the anti-colonial mentality.

 

Added to these are nostalgia of liberation struggles, distrust for the youth….” President Museveni of Uganda believes he will only step down when East Africa achieves unity. His philosophical reasoning for remaining put is something like this, “I am not a fanatic of presidency. If you want to survive, you blacks, you must work for African unity and for pan-Africanism. ” These old learders of 70 years  and above  generally have discernible delusional beliefs that they are what stands between African and the second colonisation. Africans understand  these selfish, greedy and hypocrite  agendas.  The youths are more  able of fighting off the exploitative double standards of the developed world. The war of booming Africa`s economy to be developed   does not have to be in old age and with Africa old leaders of seventy years and above counting on lackadaisical experience that has nothing to do with modern technologies that cannot fight  after all.

 

When Equatorial Guinea’s President Teodoro Obiang speaks against repressive Western tendencies, along with his old peers, the argument loses gravity as they are guilty of decades of repression in their own country. It is time for more credible and impregnable young  leaders with clean slates to represent the interests of the continent as presidents.

 

Why  leaders stay in power well into their old age of 70 years or above might not even be a complex ideological question; some leaders are just greedy and want to remain in a position that allows them and their cronies to loot. President Dos Santos of Angola’s daughter, Isabel dos Santos is worth $3.2 billion, according to Forbes. She is said to deny having holdings with connections to her father but “Forbes research found that he transferred stakes in several Angolan companies to her”. In October 2015, four members of the European Parliament are said to have called for an investigation into her wealth as it seemed the Angolan government was financing her investments.

 

Former president Jacob Zuma of South Africa, well above 70yrs  was another old leader in a young continent. His Nkandla fiasco is yet another example of an old president abusing state resources. Not for the strict controls in South Africa, he might have walked away with the upgrades to his Nkandla home unscathed.

 

They are popular Though many reasons may be presented as to why old leaders are at the driving seat in Africa, one thing is certain;  In the African society, respect is more readily given to elders who are given such titles of reverence  “as representatives  of ancestors”. Tradition therefore does play a role in the African political matrix and almost every time, the older the better your chances. Is this still a cultural conviction that youths hold? That is a moot point. The role of State media is to promulgate such ideas in the youth and when they do not succeed, the old guards uses old disciplinarian tactics, abducting and whipping the young into line. The respect of the leaders are given and demand goes to the extent of making dissension  treasonous activities. It becomes clear, therefore that the leaders if not for their age and what they stand for are supported because of fear of victimization. After all, with decades of power, these are people with enough political tact to easily fend off opposition. They win when it counts. Are they over 70 years presidents who could only emphatically count on experience  still relevant in booming the Economy of Africa?

 

Africa is a developing continent on the move and requires leaders or presidents able to flexibly protect Africa`s  interests of have a developed economy and capable of dialogue with the developed world for fair partnership. But most old leaders are simply ignorant to this fact and take dialogue with the developed world as “selling out” properties of Africa, a developing continent to the developed continent in name of privatization or divestiture.

 

I Lord Lawrence Atsu Amaglo rhetorically ask if African leaders don't know that it is incompetency, incompatibilities,  Laziness, lack of knowledge, lack of technical know-how, inability to manage, corruption, lack of  quality leadership and abilities to salvage corruption  that leads to privatization or divestiture in economy?

​

​

Are the old age leaders able to lead the technological revolution in Africa? Now in the current slump, are they proactive enough to adapt policy to the changing times of technology? Is simply being icons of pan-Africanism enough to substantiate prolonged rule of  old leaders ranging from seventy (70) years and above? The best leaders know when to call it a day.