Article from La Libre Belgique, “d\u00e9bats et opinions” section (published 07-02-2023)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Port of Matadi. In 1955, Belgian Congo had more than 2,500 manufacturing industries and more than two million industrial workers. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Political stability, infrastructure (roads, railways, drinking water, etc.), manufacturing, public health, education: Belgian Congo (1908-1959) was so developed that it was called “Poto Moyindo” or “Black Europe”. Post-colonial kleptocrats turned this country into a “hell on earth”. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n By Emizet Fran\u00e7ois Kisangani, economist and political scientist, professor at Kansas State University (USA), author of The Belgian Congo as a developmental state: Revisiting Colonialism<\/em> (OxonNew York: Routledge 2022, 264 pages).<\/p>\n\n\n\n In one of his famous songs, the father of Congolese music Antoine Wendo described the post-war Belgian Congo as Poto Moyindo<\/em> or “Black Europe”. Indeed, annual economic growth in the 1950s hovered around 5.2% (1). Inflation was around 1.08% per year during the same decade (2). Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita averaged USD 2,850 at 2015 prices (3). In the 1950s, Congolese received drinking water almost everywhere, and malnutrition was unknown in the Belgian Congo. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In 1955, Belgian Congo had more than 2,500 manufacturing industries spread across all sectors of the economy (4). Consequently, the colony had more than two million industrial workers. This number proved to be the highest in Africa. As a result, manufacturing contributed about 18% to GDP in 1955 (5). This economic performance was also the highest in sub-Saharan Africa. More specifically, manufacturing produced 45% of consumer goods, the result of an industrialisation based on import substitution that began in the early 1920s. By comparison, in the 1930s, all European colonies in Africa were still predominantly agricultural. More impressive was the fact that Belgian Congo had more roads in excellent condition, more railways (with the exception of South Africa) and more waterways than any other colony in Africa. Belgian Congo also had the best health infrastructure in sub-Saharan Africa. Although secondary and tertiary education were not part of colonial social policies, more than 90% of Congolese school-age children were enrolled in primary school free of charge (6) . This impressive number was also the highest in Africa. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Unlike the Congo Independent State (EIC) under Leopold II (1885-1908) and the post-colonial state since July 1960, Belgian Congo (1908-1959) was known as a “model colony” and a “paradise” for foreign direct investment thanks to its political stability and fabulous natural resources. In short, Belgian Congo was a welfare state similar to the system that was developing in Belgium. Belgian Congo was truly a Poto in the 1950s. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Sixty years after independence, this “Black Europe” no longer exists, even though in 1960 it had the best possible socio-economic conditions, far more favourable for sustainable development than any other African country. Today, the Congolese call their country a “hell on earth” and label their political leaders “demons, sorcerers”. This “hell on earth” has also become a hostile place for foreign direct investment. In 2015, Congo was among the economically poorest countries when it came to the overall “doing business” index and ranked almost last when it came to the human development index. How can we explain this change in Congo’s status from a “paradise” for foreign direct investment to its current state of “hell on earth” and so unfavourable to such investment? How can we explain that Congo has become one of the least attractive countries in the business world? <\/p>\n\n\n\n The main aim of the book The Belgian Congo as a Developmental State: Revisiting Colonialism is to answer these two questions based on the notion, or rather paradigm, of a “developmental state”. This state had, among other things, a strong infrastructural base and a certain degree of political autonomy, which allowed it to pursue policies of economic development. Based on the idea that Belgian Congo was a ‘developmentalist’ state, this book refutes the assumption that colonisation is the direct and main cause of African leaders’ poor economic performance. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite the colonial system of economic exploitation based on socio-economic inequalities, Belgium had developed Congo economically in a short time. I do not want to glorify colonialism or the atrocities committed in the Belgian Congo, but rather to emphasise that the economic development of the Belgian Congo was made possible by massive investments in public goods such as political stability, infrastructure, public health and education. Based on the two notions of infrastructural power and autonomy that characterise the ‘development-oriented’ state, I show that the colonial government endowed Belgian Congo with these public goods, which sustained economic growth for several decades, resulting in economic development. I also explain how different forms of capitalism, based on the market economy and the mobilisation of financial resources, had built a strong state and consequently supported the economic development of Belgian Congo. <\/p>\n\n\n\n On the other hand, post-colonial kleptocrats squandered the country’s natural resources without investing in political stability, infrastructure, health and education. Post-independence Congolese leaders failed to enforce the colonial acquis regarding these public goods. This undermined any hope of the country’s economic development and dragged the Congolese people into poverty and, above all, misery. By viewing the colonial state as ‘developmental’, I encourage academia and all researchers of goodwill to adopt a more nuanced view and analysis of Africa’s colonial economic history. <\/p>\n\n\n\n (1) Belgian Congo as a developing state: a retrospective of colonialism, p. 12, Figure 1.4. Based on various sources, notably the annual volumes of the Rapport sur l’administration de la Colonie du Congo Belge pendant l’ann\u00e9e X, submitted to the legislative chambers; the Annuaire statistique de la Belgique et du Congo belge, and the appendix on PIB in A. Huybrechts, Transports et structures de d\u00e9veloppement au Congo (1970).The most developed country in Africa<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
A ‘model colony’<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
It became a ‘hell on earth’<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
A ‘developmental state’<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
No glorification of colonialism<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Congolese people in misery today<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Sources<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
(2) See various tables in Survey of African Economies, NY, UN Publications 1962.
(3) Data are in current dollars, converted to 2015 dollars. Data come from R. C. Freenstra, R. InklaarM. P. Timmer, “The Next Generation of the Penn Tables,” American Economic Review vol 105, no 10 (2015), pp. 3150-3182. You can access the data via Google Penn Tables.
(4) Minist\u00e8re des Colonies, Rapport de l’administration de la colonie du Congo Belge pendant l’ann\u00e9e 1955 pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 aux Chambres l\u00e9gislatives (1956, pp. 193-194).
(5) This figure fell to 16% during the 1957 recession, but then rose slightly again, in P. Kilby, “Manufacturing in Colonial Africa,” in DuignanL. H. Gann (eds.) Colonialism in Africa 1870-1960. Volume 4 The Economics of Colonialism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975, p. 472)
(6) My estimates are based on the 1958 figure of 1.5 million and an annual growth rate of 4% (p. 117 of my book). The figure of 1.5 million and the 4% growth rate come from E. Frankema, “Colonial Education and Post-Colonial Governance in the Congo and Indonesia,” in E. Frankema and F. Buelens (eds.) Colonial Exploitation and Economic Development : the Belgian Congo and the Nerthelands Indies Compared (London : Routledge 2013, p. 162). <\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"