British mercenary Simon Mann was sentenced to 34 years in jail on Monday by a court in Equatorial Guinea following a failed 2004 coup attempt in that country. South Africa's foreign affairs department responded by saying that the sentence signalled an end to the days of military coups in Africa. But the recent sham election in Zimbabwe, which was carried out under South Africa's nose, was no better than a military coup and in many respects far worse.
Since the 1960s there have been more than 250 coups and coup attempts in Africa of which about 30% have been successful. In total this works out to an average of almost five coups per country over fifty years although some have suffered considerably more from the practice than others. However since the end of the Cold War the frequency of coups has come down substantially.
There has also been a clearly discernible move towards better and more effective governance on the continent. Of the approximately 200 African leaders to have left office since 1960 more than 100 were assassinated or overthrown in coups. Of the 20 odd African leaders voted out of office since 1960 only one was voted out before 1990. While this positive trend should be sustained it also carries the risk that Africa's remaining despots may indulge in the trappings of democracy in order to gain some level of legitimacy for their regimes.
Zimbabwe and Equatorial Guinea are two such regimes. Both countries have elections and opposition parties but are in effect run by despots. In Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe today plays the role of the archetypical African dictator. He is well matched in that role by President Teodoro Obiang Nguema in Equatorial Guinea. Both men have been in power for more than 25 years. Mugabe was initially elected to power but now hangs on via corruption, intimidation, and sham elections.
Obiang Nguema came to power via a coup but has hung onto that power via corruption, intimidation, and a series of sham elections in which he regularly wins 98% of the vote. Both men have committed large scale human rights abuses. Robert Mugabe's 1980s pillages in Matabeleland and Obiang Nguema's reported eating of his political rivals, rival each other in the savagery stakes.
Both men preside over poverty stricken populations. In Mugabe's case this is due to his ruining a once successful economy and in Obiang Nguema's case due to his refusal to invest his country's fabulous oil wealth in order to ensure the success of his economy.
Africa would undoubtedly be better off following the overthrow of both regimes. Those who came to power in coups themselves or those who manipulated constitutional checks and balances to hang onto power should not be allowed to sleep easy at night.
If sham democracies are going to compromise Africa's move to more effective governance the celebrating an end to African coups is premature. These democracies are in effect worse than coups in that they instil a level of sham legitimacy on which illegitimate regimes will thrive - especially in the absence of the Simon Manns of this world. Put another way it is Africa's tyrants not its democracies that sleep better at night knowing that Mann is in prison.
Frans Cronje is Deputy CEO of the South African Institute of Race Relations. This article first appeared in the Institute's weekly online letter, SAIRR Today, July 14 2008
