WHY AFRICA REMAINS POOR WHILE ASIA FLOURISHES — IT ALL COMES DOWN TO LEADERSHIP

The astonishing tenure of ten African leaders totals an astounding 308 years in power. If the duration of their rule were synonymous with effective leadership and authentic progress, we would expect to see significant advancements and transformative changes across the continent. Sub-Saharan Africa would stand as the world's preeminent economic powerhouse. To the contrary, the continent remains at the bottom of the heap of the world’s poor.

Consider the astonishing duration of rule among these African rulers (clockwise): Consider the extensive duration of rule among these dictators: Teodoro Obiang, 82 years old, has ruled Equatorial Guinea for 46 years; Paul Biya, 92, has ruled Cameroon for 43 years; Denis Sassou Nguesso, 81, has ruled the Republic of the Congo for 42 years; Yoweri Museveni, 80, has ruled Uganda for 39 years; Paul Kagame, 68, has ruled Rwanda for 31 years; Isaias Afwerki, 79, has ruled Eritrea for 32 years; Ismaïl Omar Guelleh, 77, has ruled Djibouti for 26 years; Faure Gnassingbé, 58, has ruled Togo for 20 years; Alassane Ouattara, 83, has ruled Ivory Coast for 15 years; and Salva Kiir Mayardit, 73, has ruled South Sudan for 14 years.

INTRODUCTION 

Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) struggles with extreme poverty while region after region in Asia has thrived since the 1960s. The key to understanding this disparity lies in three essential factors: national leadership, governance, and the role of the private sector. In the Asian case, effective leadership driven by vision and determination, strong public sector governance, and a dynamic private sector have been crucial in determining these divergent paths. In stark contrast, even once-industrialized South Africa grapples with severe dysfunction, plagued by lacklustre leadership and the alarming phenomenon of state capture by ruling elites. This highlights the urgent need for transformative change to unlock SSA’s potential.

This paper is organized into four sections. In Section One, I explore the theoretical discussions surrounding the stark contrast between SSA's persistent poverty and Asia's remarkable prosperity. Many African scholars have used dependency theory to explain the continent’s lacklustre socioeconomic development after independence. They argue that the Industrialized North continued to exploit Africa's raw materials, undermining the continent’s progress even post-independence.

However, this perspective is challenged by the experiences of Asian countries. Many of these nations have transformed dramatically, even outpacing their former colonial rulers. A more compelling explanation is found in the "flying geese paradigm." Also known as the flying geese model, this theory illustrates how, through visionary leadership, economic development can spread sequentially from a leading nation (the "lead goose") to its followers—much like a formation of geese in flight. This model effectively accounts for how Asian countries, starting with Japan, have successfully developed their economies in a domino effect.

In Section Two, I primarily draw on data from the World Bank to show how, during the 1960s and 1970s, many Asian nations were struggling, with agriculture-based economies with little to no industrial development. However, by 2025, these same countries had transformed into industrial powerhouses unleashing prosperity that lifted millions out of poverty. In contrast, SSA faced a different reality; even South Africa, which had been one of the more industrialized nations, found itself mired in perpetual crisis due to state capture the collapse of public sector governance and the devastation of the national infrastructure.

In Section Three, I analyze and compare the significant roles played by national leadership, governance, and the private sector in the Asian development narrative since the 1970s, highlighting the stark contrast with the ineffective governance and leadership seen SSA.

Section Four wraps up the paper on a rather sombre note for SSA. In Asia, the evidence of progress is striking, with India overtaking both its former colonial power, the UK and Japan, emerging as the third-largest economy in the world by 2025. Right ahead is China, a nation that was decimated by famines and struggled with poverty in the 1970s. Meanwhile, SSA continues to grapple with persistent poverty, as the situation remains largely unchanged.

SECTION ONE: THE ARGUMENT OF DEPENDENCY THEORY, WHICH CLAIMS THAT SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA'S UNDERDEVELOPMENT STEMS FROM ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE INDUSTRIALIZED NORTH, IS POWERFULLY CHALLENGED BY THE DRAMATIC GROWTH AND TRANSFORMATION OBSERVED IN ASIA.

Dependency theory, a core concept in global development studies, argues that the Industrialized North benefit economically at the expense of the Developing South due to a global power imbalance. This theory maintains that underdevelopment in the Developing South is not solely due to internal factors but is also a result of their integration into a global system dominated by the core.

Proponents of the dependency theory in Africa included Samir Amin, Walter Rodney, Colin Leys, and Mahmoud Mamdani. Rodney’s book, “How Europe Underdeveloped Africa” is one of the most influential works in the field. The key ideas of these scholars include several arguments, beginning with the notion of unequal exchange. The theory highlights that developed nations (the core) exploit developing nations (the periphery) through trade, debt, and other forms of economic activity. The resulting global system creates a situation where the Developing South remains poor and underdeveloped, while the Industrialized North becomes wealthy and powerful, perpetuating a cycle of dependence. 
Dependency theorists insist on the historical context of underdevelopment. They
emphasize the role of colonialism and neo-colonialism in shaping the global economic structure and perpetuating inequalities.

The dependency theory has been effectively debunked by the developments in Asia since the 1960s to the present. Asia has developed, while Africa remains underdeveloped. Among the problems with the dependency theory was its overemphasis on external factors. The theory neglected the role of internal factors within peripheral countries, such as leadership, governance, public institutions, human capital and the private sector. Clearly, the dependency theory is outdated and no longer relevant in the context of globalization and the rise of emerging economies especially in Asia.

Kaname Akamatsu, a prominent Japanese economist, provided a compelling framework for understanding how the Developing South has successfully followed in the footsteps of the Industrialized North. His “flying geese” paradigm, also known as the "flying geese model," offers a powerful lens through which to examine the dynamics of global industrialization.

Akamatsu's theory illustrates the migration of industries from developed nations to their less developed counterparts, akin to a flock of geese in formation. Initially, a leading nation, such as the United States, takes on the role of the "lead goose," focusing on high-tech industries and exporting advanced goods. As this "lead goose" moves forward, concentrating on even more sophisticated sectors, the production of labor-intensive goods is transferred to developing nations—these nations emerge as the "following geese."

As the emerging economies begin to manufacture products, they gradually elevate their capabilities, transitioning into more advanced industries. This process creates a continuous cycle. As developed countries elevate their focus to higher-value industries, developing nations progressively assume the production of goods that were once the hallmark of their more advanced counterparts. Through this dynamic model, Akamatsu highlighted a pathway for sustainable economic growth and development, emphasizing the interconnectedness of global industry in an ever-evolving landscape.

SECTION TWO: A DEEPER EXAMINATION OF ASIA'S THRIVING SUCCESS CONTRASTED WITH AFRICA'S PERSISTENT POVERTY

The World Bank’s data reveals a startling contrast in the developmental paths and outcomes in Asia and Africa between 1985 and 2023. This striking disparity is illustrated in TABLE 1 that compares Asian and African GDP in 1985 and 2023.

TABLE 1: SELECTED ASIAN AND AFRICAN GDP IN 1985 AND 2023

As indicated in TABLE 1, in 1985, Vietnam's GDP stood at a mere US$14 billion, trailing behind that of Tanzania, which reached US$15 billion, and Guinea, with a significant US$22 billion. To put this in perspective, Nigeria's GDP of US$73 billion was more than five times greater than Vietnam's. Meanwhile, Bangladesh's GDP of US$23 billion fell short of South Africa's robust US$64 billion, highlighting stark economic disparities of the time.

By 2023, the landscape of global economies had shifted dramatically, with Vietnam, Singapore, Bangladesh, and Malaysia rising to surpass all of Sub-Saharan Africa in terms of GDP. Vietnam emerged as a powerhouse with a GDP of US$429 billion, leaving South Africa in its wake at US$380 billion. This transformation vividly illustrates the impressive economic strides being made in Southeast Asia while starkly contrasting with the dismal performance of the Sub-Saharan economy. In a striking revelation, Guinea's GDP for 2023 stood at a mere US$22 billion, a figure that mirrors its economic output of US$22 billion in 1985. It’s as though the nation has remained stagnant for thirty-eight years, highlighting a shocking stagnation.

SECTION THREE: THE SIGNIFICANT ROLES PLAYED BY NATIONAL LEADERSHIP, GOVERNANCE AND THE PRIVATE IN ASIA’S ECONOMIC TAKEOFF

Let us recall Akamatsu’s “flying geese” paradigm which described how industries move from a more developed country to less developed countries, much like geese flying in a flock. As previously noted, according to the flying geese theory, a more developed nation is seen as the "lead goose," specializing in high-tech industries and exporting goods. As the "lead goose" shifts towards more advanced industries, the production of labor-intensive goods shifts to developing nations, which are then considered "following geese". These "following geese" then begin to produce goods, eventuallyupgrading to more sophisticated products and industries. The process repeats as more developed countries move on to higher-value-added industries, and developing countries gradually take over the production of previously exported goods.

The East Asia development process proved the flying geese model right, with Japan following the US, with South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong following a similar pattern. The story of Singapore led by its visionary leadership of Lew Kuan Yew illustrates what happened in East Asia from the 1960s onwards.

Lee recognized that Singapore needed a strong economy in order to survive as an independent country, and so he launched a program to industrialize Singapore and transform it into a major exporter of finished goods. He encouraged foreign investment and secured agreements between labor unions and business management that ensured both labor peace and a rising standard of living for workers. While improving health and social welfare services, Lee continually emphasized the necessity of cooperation, discipline, and austerity on the part of the average Singaporean.

In 1985, as illustrated in TABLE 1, Singapore found itself lagging behind nations like Guinea, South Africa, and Nigeria in terms of wealth. However, under the visionary leadership of Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore experienced a remarkable transformation characterized by efficient governance and unprecedented prosperity. Lee was instrumental in establishing the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1967, a pivotal achievement that fostered regional cooperation and stability.

Fast forward to the 1980s, Singapore, under Lee’s astute direction, boasted a per capita income that was second only to Japan in East Asia, solidifying its status as a premier financial hub in Southeast Asia.

By 2023, Singapore’s GDP per capita had soared to an impressive US$84,734, eclipsing that of the United States at US$82,769. Importantly, Singapore stood shoulder to shoulder with the other “Asian Tigers”—the term that embodies the highly developed economies of Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. These nations have become synonymous with rapid industrialization and remarkable economic growth, particularly thriving between the early 1960s and 1990s. This status is not just a testament to their resilience but a demonstration of their innovative spirit and commitment to excellence.

In the case of China, Deng Xiaoping, China's paramount leader, is credited with fundamentally transforming China through his "Reform and Opening Up" policies, which led to economic growth and a shift away from the command economy of Mao Zedong's era. He oversaw the introduction of market mechanisms, privatization of agriculture, and liberalization of prices, significantly boosting China's GDP and improving living standards.


Deng Xiaoping and his allies initiated a series of economic reforms that gradually moved China away from a centrally planned economy towards a market-oriented system. This included allowing private enterprise, opening the economy to foreign investment, and introducing market pricing for many goods. 

Deng's policies emphasized opening China to the outside world, which facilitated foreign investment, technology transfer, and trade, contributing to China's rapid economic growth. For example, Apple, the US computer giant made decades-long investments in China to fuel the company’s spectacular success and, in turn, accelerated China’s rise as a technology superpower.

After returning to Apple in 1997, co-founder Steve Jobs needed a hit product and a way to build it at scale. The iMac was Jobs’ comeback hit. Apple was able to get the iMac launched with the help of Korea’s LG, but increasing consumer demand had them looking for a second producer.

At the time, China’s competitive advantage was its “low wages, low welfare, and low human rights.” That began to change in the 1990s, when China turned into a high tech workshop capable of awesome feats of production — and eventually innovation with Apple’s investments.

Apple had seemingly landed on a winning formula: pairing the signature innovation and design personified by the late Steve Jobs, with China’s vast production capacity, overseen by now-CEO Tim Cook, the architect of Apple’s China strategy.

As Apple entrenched itself in the nation, China’s decades long effort to gain technology superiority over the United States through knowledge transfer and best practices was realized, as other American and European companies opted to produce their products in China.

By 2015, Apple had committed to spending $275 billion in China over five years, more than double what the US spent on the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe. Over the decades, Apple estimates it has trained 28 million workers, more than California’s entire labor force.

China's GDP increased tenfold since Deng Xiaoping's reforms began, and average incomes rose significantly, while poverty levels declined substantially. These changes transformed China from a largely agrarian and isolated nation to one of the world's fastest-growing economies. Today, with a GDP of US$17 Trillion, China is the second-largest economy in the world after the US.

The credit to India’s rapid industrialization goes to its formidable leader, the former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who held the top post for two consecutive terms between 2004 and 2014. There can be no question that Sigh was the architect of India's economic liberalisation which changed the country's growth trajectory.

Here are five milestones from Singh's life that shaped his career and had a lasting impact on more than a billion Indians. As finance minister, Singh led the initiative to deregulate the economy despite stiff opposition from members of his government and party. He took bold measures that included devaluing the currency, reducing import tariffs and privatising state-owned companies. Later, as as prime minister, Singh continued to build on his economic reform measures, lifting millions of Indians out of poverty and contributing to India's rise as one of the world's fastest-growing major economies.

TABLE 2: INDIA SURPASSED JAPAN AS THE FOURTH LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD

Source: International Monetary Fund

In 2023, India overtook its former colonial power, the UK as the fifth-largest economy in the world. By 2025, India had surpassed Japan as the fourth largest economy in the world and was projected by the IMF to overtake Germany as the third-largest in the world in 2028.

Vietnam is the latest Asian success story demonstrated by its rapid industrialization, transforming the country from an agrarian economy to a manufacturing powerhouse.

Favorable foreign investment has been a major driver of industrial growth, especially in sectors like textiles, electronics, and seafood. 
Many prominent US companies have established a strong presence in Vietnam, driven by its growing economy, competitive manufacturing landscape, and strategic location. These companies span various industries, including technology, manufacturing, and agriculture. Notable examples include Intel, Cargill, Nike, and Boeing, Coca-Cola, Amazon, and Meta.

SECTION FOUR: WHY AFRICA REMAINS POOR — IT ALL COMES DOWN TO LEADERSHIP

Lew Kuan Yew’s remarkable leadership spanned 31 years, during which he transformed Singapore from a struggling nation into a global powerhouse by 2023. In 1985, Singapore’s economy lagged behind those of Nigeria, South Africa, and Guinea. Fast forward to 2023, and while those African nations continue to face economic challenges, Singapore boasts an impressive GDP per capita of US$84,734—surpassing that of the United States and European Union countries. This extraordinary journey underscores the vision and determination that reshaped Singapore into a thriving, prosperous nation.

However, if the lengthy reign of rulers equated to effective leadership and genuine development, Sub-Saharan Africa would stand as the world's preeminent economic powerhouse. The combined tenure of ten African leaders reaches a staggering 308 years in power.

Consider the extensive duration of rule among these dictators: Teodoro Obiang, 82, has ruled Equatorial Guinea for 46 years; Paul Biya, 92, has ruled Cameroon for 43 years; Denis Sassou Nguesso, 81, has ruled the Republic of the Congo for 42 years; Yoweri Museveni, 80, has ruled Uganda for 39 years; Paul Kagame, 68, has ruled Rwanda for 31 years; Isaias Afwerki, 79, has ruled Eritrea for 32 years; Ismaïl Omar Guelleh, 77, has ruled Djibouti for 26 years; Faure Gnassingbé, 58, has ruled Togo for 20 years; Alassane Ouattara, 83, has ruled Ivory Coast for 15 years; and Salva Kiir Mayardit, 73, has ruled South Sudan for 14 years.

Meanwhile, the presidency in Africa has become increasingly hereditary as in kingdoms. Ali Bongo inherited the presidency from his father, Ali Bongo, who had ruled Gabon for 42 years. Omar Bongo assumed control upon his father's death and maintained a tight grip on Gabon for 14 years. However, on October 30, 2023, a military coup led by Oligui Nguema, his cousin and head of the Republican Guard, overthrew him. The family has ruled Gabon for 58 years. When Idriss Déby who had ruled for over 30 years was killed in 2021, his son, General Mahamat Idriss Déby Itno, quickly stepped into the role of the dictator. In Togo, Faure Gnassingbé inherited the presidency from his father — father and son have been in power for 58 years.

TABLE 1 provides the synopsis of what happened in Sub-Saharan Africa compared to Asia from 1985 to 2023. In 1985, Vietnam's GDP stood at a mere US$14 billion, trailing behind that of Tanzania, which reached US$15 billion, and Guinea, with a significant US$22 billion. To put this in perspective, Nigeria's GDP of US$73 billion was more than five times greater than Vietnam's. Meanwhile, Bangladesh's GDP of US$23 billion fell short of South Africa's robust US$64 billion, highlighting stark economic disparities of the time.

By 2023, the landscape of global economies had shifted dramatically, with Vietnam, Singapore, Bangladesh, and Malaysia rising to surpass all of Sub-Saharan Africa in terms of GDP. Vietnam emerged as a powerhouse with a GDP of US$429 billion, leaving South Africa in its wake at US$380 billion. This transformation vividly illustrates the impressive economic strides being made in Southeast Asia while starkly contrasting with the dismal performance of the Sub-Saharan economy. In a striking revelation, Guinea's GDP for 2023 stood at a mere US$22 billion, a figure that mirrors its economic output of US$22 billion in 1985. It’s as though the nation has remained stagnant for thirty-eight years, highlighting a shocking stagnation.

Africa's missing link consists of three critical elements: effective national leadership, robust governance, and a dynamic private sector. The continent's future appears as daunting as its historical challenges. South Africa, despite being the most industrialized nation in the region, finds itself in a precarious position.

Under the ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC) led by Jacob Zuma, deputed by the current President, Cyril Ramaphosa, Zuma’s cronies and his family seized control, manipulating state mechanisms for their own benefit. They undermined governance processes and exploited state-owned enterprises, thereby jeopardizing the nation's progress and integrity.

Today, South Africa faces severe electricity crisis steming from a combination of factors, primarily the aging and under-maintained coal-fired power plants that supply the majority of the country's power. These plants, which are reliant on a single energy source (coal), are prone to breakdowns and outages, leading to frequent and extended blackouts. Furthermore, the power utility, Eskom, faces significant financial and operational challenges, including high debt and corruption, hindering its ability to invest in and maintain the infrastructure.

Meanwhile, while failing to lead their countries, African rulers they have accumulated astounding fortunes, with three individuals surpassing the impressive milestone of $1 billion in wealth: Ali Bongo, Teodoro Obiang, and Paul Kagame. In contrast, the fortunes of Paul Biya, Isaias Afwerki, and Alassane Ouattara fall below the $200 million mark. Meanwhile, Yoweri Museveni stands out as the least affluent, with a modest net worth of just $20 million. This stark contrast in wealth among these leaders highlights the staggering disparities that exist within the continent's political elite.

In the face of failed leadership, no nation or region can truly flourish. The enduring nature of African dictatorships suffocates potential, weakens the rule of law, and perpetuates profound suffering. It begs the question: who will rise to challenge this cycle of tyranny and champion the rights and prosperity of the African people?

Botswana stands as a beacon of hope. In a remarkable turn of events, a young and dynamic leader, Duma Boko, rallied fellow young leaders to oust a ruling party that had held power for an astonishing 58 years. May Botswana transform from an upper-middle-income country into a thriving high-income nation under his guidance. Even before he assumed the presidency, Boko had already distinguished himself as a remarkable African leader. As a dedicated lawyer, he fiercely defended the rights of the indigenous San people.

A proud graduate of Harvard University Law School, he has also made significant contributions as an educator at the University of Botswana. His vision for economic development is clear: to break the country's overreliance on diamonds, which currently account for over 90% of exports. Let us support this transformative journey towards a brighter and more prosperous future for Botswana and all of Africa.