I am a celebrity and I want to adopt a poor African child. But why are people so repulsed?

I got to thinking about this issue a few days ago after reading a status message on a friend’s Facebook page that read, “I'm not sure how I feel about this whole "I'm so rich I'm going to adopt a poor African child" thing.” Today another friend’s read, “Madonna: please leave the African orphans alone..you worthless attention seeker, u are doing the world no good with your publicity stunts..clean up ur marital mess before bringing innocent african kids into ur home...”

Some people, at least a few of my friends, have a basic knee-jerk repulsive reaction, or as some ethicists have described, “yuck factor ” response to the news of Madonna wanting to adopt yet another poor African orphan. With the media flurry fanning flames of controversy, we itch for glimpses into the many unanswered and unanswerable questions. What is Madonna true motive? Is she simply yearning for some attention? Does she really care? The list of questions is unending. However, the bottom line is that we find it difficult to shake the thoughts of imbalance of power, class, socioeconomic and racial categories that the scenario evokes. Madonna, a rich white western celebrity wants to adopt a poor black African orphan.

The yuckiness expressed by my two friends, both of African decent, is most certainly not universal. I suspect the initial reaction people have to this scenario is dictated by what side of this divide they most relate with. I think exploring the reasons for our initial responses in greater depth and considering empirical information may lead to reconsidering our previously held positions.

Here are some simple basic facts. There are millions of orphan in Africa today, many of whom have lost both parents. The traditional systems of families and communities taking on the responsibility for orphans have in recent times been threatened by the HIV/AIDS. Millions of children are left alone to care for themselves and siblings, and some are privileged to be housed in orphanages. Orphanages are usually under-resourced, understaffed and teeming with children. I need not continue spouting statistics and cliches; but my point is that the reality for so many children is life in despicable situations. Some would say, "But can such children not have some level of happiness and satisfaction in their lives?" They absolutely can; the human spirit has a way of making do with whatever life/fate brings.

However, I have a very difficult time justifying depriving such a child of a chance of having a better life. I think having the luxury of stable meals, attention of care givers, and education, to say the least, qualifies as a 'better life.' Adoption is the least terrible of the few options available to these children. Irrespective of the dodgy motives of Madonna or any other adopting parent, I think the best interest of the child should be the ultimate trump card.

I am certainly not advocating for the removal of kids from poor families simply because they would have a better life in a richer one. The calculation is, however, a whole lot simpler when you talk of orphans with virtually no other options.

Unintended consequences- a lesson for Pope Benedict

Pope Benedict is in the media spotlight again. I guess we should expect regular international coverage, being that he is at the helm of a faith that boasts billions of followers. However, the perverse interest of myself, and that of many fellow world citizens, is not spiked by the gracious and noble achievements this holy man makes but by his major gaffes. Pope-related stories would prove boring if they ranted off narratives filled with things we expect from a Pope, but not so of a little Pope-scandal, whether real or artificially inflated. Hmm, sensational!

In January, the issue of contention was over Bishop Richard Williamson whose excommunication was lifted by the Vatican. Reports later surfaced of Williamson's controversial views, especially of his denial of the holocaust. As you can imagine, the response was absolute outrage from the Jewish community and many others. The Pope later released a letter admitting to mistakes in the handling of the matter. The situation was a real public relations debacle, which was blamed on lack of communication within the high echelons at the Vatican and the inadequacy of their spin establishment. 

Now, the Pope is visiting Africa, his first visit since assuming the position in 2005. However, the predominant media coverage in Europe and America is not of the great spiritual and symbolic significance of the event, but the coverage is about the potential public health nightmare the Pope's recent statement may cause. So, what did the Pope say and what's all the huff and puff about?

Pope Benedict is quoted by Reuters as saying condoms are not the solution to the AIDS crisis and may serve to "increase the problem." Since his statement was translated to English, there have been questions about the appropriate exact wordings. However, the message was quite clear: forget about using condoms, they risk making the HIV/AIDS problem worse. The position of the Vatican on the use of condoms and its sole support for abstinence is very well known; this stance has even been previously publicly ratified by this Pope. But the uttering of what is arguably a very careless statement is an example of an instance when the the potential resulting harm completely obviates any initial good intentions, however noble them may have been.

Here are some well known, dare I say, common-sense facts. HIV/AIDS afflicts tens of millions in Africa; millions have died and many more will die from the disease. Condoms, when properly used, cut the rates of HIV transmission, as well as transmission of other STDs, to less than 10%. Obviously, abstinence is the only full-proof method; but, as the world experience very clearly continually shows, it is not fool-proof. There is also no expert consensus that the use of condoms significantly changes people's level of sexual activity. 

I understand that the Pope is a deeply religious man, clearly with strong spiritual convictions, which he may feel compelled to share. But Pope Benedict is neither an epidemiologist nor a public health specialist and should exercise extreme caution when dabbling into unsure territory especially when many lives, thousands and millions of them are at stake. 

To many, Pope Benedict is a demigod. He speaks for God and has the utmost respect of many. I do not envy such responsibility nor do I crave the power his position wields. I can very clearly envisage religious poor African peoples led by some high-school educated minister latch on to the words of the Pope; abandon condoms and leading to HIV spread between lovers and worst of all to the resulting children. What a wonderful chicken-out excuse to be wielded by many, "the Pope says... so I won't use a condom." If the fornicators and adulterers deserve the retribution of HIV/AIDS for their sins, their faithful innocent spouses and resulting children do not.

The acts of a guilty man

The international spectacle that has arisen after the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for the arrest of Sudan's president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, is of little surprise. There had been a hype build-up in the media in the weeks leading to the courts decision, which set the stage for the current showdown. There was, arguably, bound to be strong reactions to whatever decision the court made, whether or not al-Bashir was indicted.

The facts of the matter are that great atrocities were committed against the people in Darfur and the atrocities were committed under the watch of President al-Bashir. With the overwhelming evidence, the deck was stacked against al-Bashir, hence, the indictment. It is important to note that al-Bashir is only accused of committing the crimes but has not been proven guilty.

Should recent progress in the region and the interest of peace have swayed the court to decide otherwise or delay its decision? It is clear that the decision of the court could not, and should not, be entirely divorced from the greater political picture; I believe the prosecutor and judge would agree. However, with the preponderance of the evidence against al-Bashir, the real question is not whether the court could have decided otherwise, but one of the appropriateness of the timing of making the decision public. I am in support of the court's action of indicting al-Bashir immediately after they came to the decision. If Bashir was not indicted now, would there ever be a right time? The human rights infringements and killings have happened and many are still suffering even today; these people deserve justice and peace now. The legal cliche, "justice delayed is justice denied," captures the essence of my assertion.

As for the president's response: defiance, jubilation and flexing of sovereignty muscles. President al-Bashir's reaction should not be very surprising. Considering his history, no one should have expected him to cower in shame and surrender. But firing aid organizations and confiscating their assets have only served to deepen the image of his reckless disregard for his own people. Though I am not a proponent of dependence of African countries on international aid, it is clear in this case that the government lacks the capacity or is unwilling to support the vulnerable populations, and these organizations play a vital role in alleviating suffering. There are already reports of meningitis in a southern Darfur camp, showing the first fruits of much predicted suffering to follow. An eloquent column in the NYTimes column by Nicholas Kristof calls for the international community to take action against al-Bashir and in support of these vulnerable people.

The ICC has sent a symbolic message that country leaders cannot act with impunity and should be held accountable. Though the means of enforcement of the warrant is not certain, the whole world has taken note of the message.

Moreover, the response of the African Union, AU, has been disheartening. Their request to suspend the charges may be one of the last straws that completely shatters my trust in the credibility if the AU. AU leaders have been aptly described as a society of rogue leaders trying to protect one another's interest and not their populace; they may be living up to that description. The AU needs some serious self-honesty. We need to start calling a spade a spade, and realize we cannot continue in self-deception only because we need to oppose the neo-imperialists. The AU continually denies, harsh but true, realities, and continually polishes its reputation of placating and dancing to the tunes of dictators and criminals. We can be authentic and independent from Western pressures but yet also self reflective and courageous enough to call our offending brothers into question.

A man convinced of his innocence would show up in court and present evidence refuting those of his accusers. What would a guilty coward do? Behave like al-Bashir.

An additional idea for the blog

Thanks for following the blog and reading the weekly* country profiles. It is quite obvious that I am not sticking to the earlier country schedule calendar in the first post. Unfortunately, my slacker tendencies frequently get the better part of me. Not to worry, I am committed to completing the task of profiling each country. I may not get done in one year, but hopefully before 1.356 years. Who cares? I have already learned a great deal and hope you have too.

Another idea I have to reduce the blog's rating on the boring scale is to introduce current news and affairs. I try to keep up with African news as portrayed on the international scene and usually have something to say, sometimes insightful, and at other times painfully naive. As I buy time to complete each country profile, I will intermittently post my thoughts, analysis and opinions on interesting current news.

Please share any helpful ideas or suggestions.

P.S.
weekly = a range from every 7-days to every 28-days

Botswana, Gaborone

Botswana

Botswana is a completely landlocked country in Southern Africa, bordered by South Africa in the south, Namibia in the north and west, Zimbabwe in the northeast, and a controversial Zambian border in the north, where both countries flank the Zambezi river.

Botswana enjoys a reputation as being one of the most successful African countries since the start of the post-colonial era. A few reasons for this claim include continued political stability in the country since 1966 independence as evidenced by decades of democratic representative rule; steady strong economic growth as evidenced by having the highest GDP (PPP) in Africa after Equatorial Guinea; and low level of corruption, earning the country the highest rating of any African country on the Transparency International ranking.

The story of Botswana begins in prehistoric times with the Khoisan people, hunter-gatherer "bush men," who have inhabited the area for thousands of years since around 20 000 BC. The migration of the more sophisticated Bantu peoples originally from current day West Africa to this area occurred around the start of the common era, leading to the marginalization of the original inhabitants and establishment of Bantu kingdoms. This migration was mentioned in the Angola post, and will be repeatedly mentioned in relation to other southern African countries. The Bantu-origin Tswana people formed several powerful kingdoms, centered in eastern parts of current-day Botswana. These kingdoms extended into the Kalahari desert, current-day Namibia and South Africa; the Tswana became the dominant ethnic group. Tswana kingdoms flourished in relative peace well into the late 18th century, when there were battles with neighboring empires over raids for slaves and other goods. Due to its inland location, significant European involvement in the area did not begin until the 19th century. Around this time there was increasing trade between the Tswana and the Cape Colony to the south, which was under European control since their arrival in the mid-17th century.

During the Scramble for Africa, Germany laid claim to the areas west of the Tswana territories, while the British, who controlled Cape Colony, claimed the Tswana territories as inroads to access areas of Zimbabwe and Zambia where they had interests. The Tswana area and other nearby kingdoms were named Bechuanaland. Bechuana was derived from the European pronunciation of Batswana; as is typical in Bantu languages, the Tswana people are called Batswana (singular- Motswana). Bechuanaland became an official British Protectorate in 1885 when the area came under threat from nearby kingdoms and from the Boers. The Boers were European descendants from the Cape Colony who despised the British colonial rule and formed a breakaway independent state. A compromise in the early 2oth century led to the formation of a self-governing state, Union of South Africa, which comprised the Cape Colony, Boer controlled areas, German controlled current-day Namibia and the southern areas Bechuanaland. The northern areas remained under British control; which represent present day Botswana. As a result of these boundaries, majority of peoples of Tswana origin actually reside in South Africa not Botswana.

Bechuanaland remained under British control until the 1960's wave of independence of former British colonies led to general elections and eventual independence in September 1966. Seretse Khama became the first president of a newly named Botswana. The prospects for the newly formed country were bleak as they were saddled with a dearth of infrastructure, mounting debt and an unfortunate geography, being trapped between then Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and South Africa, both not attaining independence till much later. Seretse was re-elected twice to the post; his good governance, anti-corruption measures and infrastructure investment are generally regarded as responsible for transforming Botswana's economy. It is also generally agreed that there have been regular transparent democratic elections since independence.

Botswana's economy is primarily driven by the mining industry. The country is the world's largest producer of gem diamonds, as well as engages significant activities with other minerals including copper, nickel and gold. Moreover, majority of the populations still live in rural areas and derive their source of livelihood from agriculture. Most of the landscape in the western and central parts of the country is desert, leaving only eastern areas for farming; these eastern areas are much more densely populated. In addition, in more recent times tourism is becoming a greater contributor to Botswana's economy. Large areas or pristine nature have been made into national reserves, the most popular of which is Central Kalahari Game Reserve.

However, HIV/AIDS remains a major problem in Botswana. Current statistics place the prevalence rates at over 20%, making Botswana one of the worst hit countries in the world. The government has done tremendous amount of work in efforts to control the epidemic as the country has some of the most extensive treatment and prevention programs. Nevertheless, the strain on human resources, health infrastructure and the economy have been significant and are expected to continue into the foreseeable future.

Botswana has undoubtedly displayed spectacular progress since independence. The Botswana model is proof that wealth from mineral resources do (and should) not necessarily always invite the company of insatiable greed and mismanagement.

Timeline of significant events.

10 000- 20 000 BC- Khoisan people begin living in Southern Africa
200 BC - 100 CE- Arrival of Bantu peoples
1200 - 1400- Establishment of Tswana Kingdoms
1800's- Arrival of the Europeans to Tswana areas
1867- Gold mining begins
1885- British Protectorate of Bechuanaland is established
1910- Union of South Africa is formed and south Tswana areas is incorporated into union.
1950- Seretse, then a chief of Ngwato, a major Tswana kingdom is deposed by the British and exiled primarily for his interracial marriage.
1959- Copper mining begins
1961- Seretse forms nationalist democratic party
1965- Seretse's party wins election and he becomes prime minister
1965- Gaborone is established as capital
1966- Independence from the British, change of name to Botswana and Seretse becomes President
1967- Diamonds discovered
1980- Seretse suffering from cancer dies in office, after being re-elected twice, vice-president Quett Masire takes over office
1995- Government relocates "Bushmen" from ancestral lands in Kalahari reserves
1997- Constitutional amendment to limit presidential terms to two 5-year terms.
1998- Masire retires from office of president after two re-elections and Festus Mogae becomes president
2000- date- continued HIV/AIDS problem
2006- Bushmen win legal battle against government to remain in ancestral lands
2008- Ian Khama, son of the first president, becomes president, while former president Festus Mogae wins $5 million prize- established to reward good governance in Africa.

Other Facts- 2008 estimates

Population: 1.8 million, 35.2% are less than 14, and the median age is 21.2
Life expectancy: 50.2. M- 51.2, F- 49.0
Literacy rate: 81.2% (2003 estimate)
HIV prevalence- 24% (2006 estimate)
Ethnic groups: Tswana 79%, Kalanga 11%, Basarwa 3%, others 7%
Languages: English (official), Setswana, Kalanga, Sekgalagadi
Economy: GDP (PPP): $15 800. GDP real growth rate: 5.2%.
Cities: Gabarone- capital and largest city, Maun, Francistown, Kanye
Currency: Pula (BWP)
Internet TLD: .bw

Sources and for more information

Wikipedia: Botswana, Bechuanaland
CIA World factbook: Botswana
Infoplease: Botswana
Botswana History Page
BBC Timeline: Botswana

Benin, Porto-Novo

Benin

Benin is a country in western Africa. Benin is nestled between Togo and Nigeria, the former on west border and the latter on the east. Niger and Burkina Faso also border Benin in the North, while Benin's southern edge sits on the Atlantic ocean.

One important distinction to make is between Benin- the country and the Benin Empire, which was a precolonial civilization centered around the area of present day Benin city in Nigeria. This article is about Benin- the country. The country was named Benin in 1975, a change from Dahomey. Dahomey, also the name of a precolonial empire, was chosen during colonial times and at independence to describe the area though the original empire did not extend through much of the present-day country. The name change was prompted to appease political and ethnic minority groups. The choice of 'Benin,' a neutral name not associated with any groups, was after the Bight of Benin, which was originally named after the Benin Empire.

Little is known about the ancient history of the area of present day Benin. The earliest known inward migration occurred in the 12th and 13th century; the immigrants were Yoruba people from the Oyo area of southwest Nigeria, and the Aja people from Tado area in eastern Togo. The Aja people lived on the coast but moved inland around the 16th century and settled among the Fon people, who already resided there. The mixture of these two groups formed the basis for the Dahomey kingdom, which was centered around current-day Abomey. This kingdom flourished during the 17th and 18th century through the strength of its warriors and tactful trade with European countries. The Dahomey culture had a strong military emphasis. Two of their signature elements were specially trained women warriors called Mino, and the practice of apprenticing young boy with experienced warriors. These respective elements have led to comparisons to ancient Greece Amazons and the Spartans' military culture.

Despite the military traditions, the kingdom remained relatively small, and localized mostly to the south and central areas of Benin. The kingdom was able to avoid subjugation by other near-by empires until the mid-18th century when the much larger Oyo empire extended its dominating influence. This domination was more for economic reasons since there was still a large measure of cultural independence from the Oyo empire, but the Dahomey kingdom was required to pay heavy taxes.

European exploration of the area intensified around the mid-17th century with the Portuguese as the major player, hence, the Portuguese name of Porto-Novo (New Port). This port and others set up but other European powers including the Dutch and the French have historical significance as main routes of the slave-trade enterprise. The Dahomey kingdom rulers supplied captured prisoners usually in return for financial compensation and firearms. After slavery abolition, an attempt by the Europeans to solidify control over African colonies led to a series of wars which culminated in the fall of the Dahomey kingdom to the French in 1894 and subsequent incorporation into French West Africa. The area was under a central French Governor, with the seat of government in Dakar. Up until the end of the second-world war, there was no direct representation of the colonial people in French central government, and the colonial economies were molded primarily around the supply and exportation of various raw materials to Europe. In the 1950's, with the build up of anti-imperial and nationalist movements in colonial Africa, the French gradually let go of their West African colonies, granting self-governance to the Republic of Dahomey in 1958 and independence on August 5th, 1960.

Similar to many new African countries, the immediate years after independence were characterized by political instability. President Hubert Maga, who was elected at independence was overthrown in a coup in 1963 by Colonel Christophe Soglo. Elections in 1964 led to Sourou-Migan Apithy becoming president. Rapid succession of coups and counter-coups led to four regime changes between 1965 and 1969. A quasi-democratic presidential council of three leaders, representing different ethnic groups, was established in 1970, only to be overthrown in 1972 by Major Mathieu Kerekou. President Kerekou retained power till 1991, during which he embraced Marxist-communist ideologies, resigned from the military, survived multiple overthrow attempts and was reelected three times. Political, economic, civil unrest and international pressure prompted Kerekou to abandon communism as official government policy in 1989. President Kerekou lost the election in 1991 to Nicephore Soglo, but Kerekou was re-elected under controversial circumstances in 1996. This second phase of Kerekou's presidency lasted 2-five-year terms; Benin constitution's 70 years age-limit barred him from running for additional terms. The current president is Yayi Boni.

Benin's economy is very dependent on subsistence agriculture and agricultural exports as it was during the colonial era. Political instability, adherence to communist ideologies and government bureaucracy hampered economic progress until the 1990's. Efforts since then have been focused on reduction of and less dependency on international loans, and a push towards privatization of several government run industries.

Timeline of significant events

12th - 13th century- Migration of Aja and Yoruba to area
1600's- Dahomey Kingdom was established
17th century- Arrival of Europeans and start of Slave trade
1730's- Dahomey becomes a tributary of the Oyo empire
Late 19th century- Franco-Dahomean Wars
1894- Dahomey Kingdom is conquered and the area is incorporated into French West Africa
1946- Dahomey becomes oversees territory of France, territories send local representation to central French government council
1958- Dahomey becomes self-governing
1960- Dahomey independence with election of President Hubert Maga
1963- 1972- several military coups and regime changes
1972- President Kerekou becomes military ruler
1975- Republic of Dahomey becomes People's Republic of Benin, Marxist-communist ideology is declared as the government's official policy.
1980, 1984 and 1989- Kerekou re-elected
1989- Communist ideology abandoned, civil unrest and protests
1992- Nicephore Soglo becomes president, defeating incumbent Kerekou
1996, 2001- Kerekou re-elected and serves 2 five-year terms
2006- Yayi Boni becomes president. Kerekou is barred from contesting by constitutional 70-years age-limit.

Other facts: 2008 estimates

Population: 8.5 million; median age: 17.1; ~45% are less than 14 years.
Life expectancy: 58.6; M- 57.4, F- 59.8
Literacy rate: 34.7%
HIV prevalence- 1.9% estimate in 2003
Ethnic groups: Fon 39.2%, Aja 15.2%, Yoruba 12.3%, Bariba 9.2%, Peulh 7%, Ottamari 6.1%, Yoa-Lokpa 4%, Dendi 2.5%, other 1.6%
Languages: French (official),;Fon and Yoruba in south; Nagot, Bariba and Dendi in north
Cities: Cotonou- largest, Porto Novo- capital
Economy: GDP (PPP): $1500. GDP real growth rate: 5%.
Currency: West African CFA franc (XOF)
Internet TLD: .bj

Random fact.
Voodoo has it origins in Benin.

Sources and for additional information
CIA factbook
US State department site
BBC Benin profile, timeline
Wikipedia Benin, Dahomey

Please share your thoughts. http://africa-onecountryaweek.blogspot.com/

Angola, Luanda

Angola

Angola, a country in southern Africa, spans over 1.2 million square kilometers; it is bordered by the South Atlantic ocean in the west, Namibia in the south, Zambia in the east and Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in the north and north-east. An exclave of Angola, Cabinda province, is not contiguous with the rest of the country; but is nested North of the mainland, between the DRC, Congo-Brazzaville and the Atlantic ocean.

There is archaeological evidence supporting the presence of prehistoric people in areas of present-day Angola. However, the Khoisan 'bushmen' are the first known settlers in modern history. These people, similar to pygmies, were primarily hunter-gatherers. More sophisticated Bantu people migrated to the area, from around current-day Cameroon, about the start of the Common Era (CE). These new migrants had more developed tools and were involved in agriculture. The Bantu people dominated the political scene and created vast kingdoms including the kingdoms Kongo, Ndongo and Lunda.

The Portuguese came to this area in 1482, under the command of Diogo Cão, and begun establishing trade missions with the major kingdoms. Through the end of the 15th century and into the 16th, multiple expeditions occurred as the Portuguese begun establishing a base in the area. Luanda was founded in 1575, as well as other subsequent settlements, most around the Atlantic coast. By the early 17th century, the Europeans had introduced Christianity in addition to establishing trade of firearms and other finished goods for slaves, ivory and minerals. The initial slaves were prisoners and servants of the ruling kings and warlords; but later, certain tribes developed alliances with the Portuguese and kidnapped people solely for sale into slavery. Slaves traded from the main ports in Luanda and Benguela were transported to Brazil, another Portugese colony, to serve as workforce on plantations. The trade benefited the European as well as the African elite rulers. During political instability in Portugal, collusion between Queen Jinga (Nzinga) of Ndongo and the Dutch led to ousting of the Portuguese in 1641 until they recaptured Luanda in 1648. Slave trade was abandoned in the early 19th century when the need for manpower diminished after Brazil attained independence.

After the end of slave trade, Portugal still maintained a firm hold on it African colonies. These colonies, Angola included, were then used primarily a source of raw materials, which were transported to Portugal to support its economy and industries. Towards the end of the 19th century, with increasing European interest in the economic potential of Africa's vast natural resources, the Berlin Conference in 1884-85 legitimized the hold of European colonial powers on their African territories. The conference effectively officially fragmented the continent and ushered in the 'Scramble for Africa' where colonial Europe established more direct rule over the colonies. The Cabinda exclave was a product of this fragmentation; the colonial occupants of the DRC wanted a path to the ocean, and were graciously 'given' the land surrounding the path of river Congo basin, effectively separating Cabinda from the rest of Angola.

Through the end of the 19th century and into the early 20th century, Portugal strengthened rule in the Angola colony, extending its administration hinterland. During this period, though slavery was abolished, forced labor was imposed on the indigenes. European immigration increased to the area; these immigrants with the help of colonial governors acquired land and resources by displacing the local population. While the immigrants flourished, the natives worked and lived under despicable conditions, leading to multiple revolts and eventually the struggle for independence.

The independence struggle spanned almost 15 years; it was fierce and bloody. In 1951, changes to the political structure in Portugal changed the status of Angola from a colony to a province of Portugal. By the 1960's with the wave of independence sweeping through Africa, the Portuguese remained determined to hold-on to their provinces while political parties and movements began taking off. The major players were the MPLA, UNITA and FNLA; they were mostly regional and ethnic based and they organized both peaceful and violent revolts. The parties were later recognized by Portugal and they were able to effect some political and practical change; one notable achievement was their influence in abolishing of forced labor. Like in many African countries at the time, though these political movements had a common goal of ousting the Portuguese, differences and clashes between them undermined their efforts.

Another complicating factor was the alliances the major political movements made with other countries to bolster their legitimacy. MPLA was supported by the Soviet Union, Cuba and other communist sympathizers, while UNITA and FNLA were supported most notably by China, South Africa, DRC (the Zaire) and the USA. Political turmoil in mainland Portugal in the 1970's led to a change of government in 1974 and subsequently an opening for the liberation fighters in Angola. An agreement was reached in July 1975 to grant independence to Angola on Nov 11 1975. With no plans to organize a democratic process, civil war broke out between the political movements as each tried to gain control at independence; weapons were supplied by their respective allies. The war was a proxy Cold War. The MPLA had control of Luanda, the capital, in the periods leading to the day of the independence. The USA government, with the help of President Mobutu in DRC, who could not bear allowing the expansion of Communist influence in Africa, provided weapons and technical support through the CIA to the UNITA and FNLA front. South Africa, under apartheid rule at this time, controlled current-day Namibia, which it feared would be threatened by Soviet control in Angola. The attempts to capture Luanda from the MPLA failed. On Nov 11 1975, the Portuguese left Angola a fragmented place. The MPLA led by Agostinho Neto declared independence in Luanda while the UNITA and FNLA led by Jonas Savimbi and Holden Roberto formed a rival coalition government and declared independence in Huambo.

Angola descended further into chaos as the civil war between the political factions prolonged past independence, and for another 27 years, leading to the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians and economic devastation. The proxy Cold War subsequently continued through the 1990's; it had covert and even more blatant support from the opposing allies in the from of military personnel and supplies. Agostinho Neto official remained president until he death in 1979 when Jose Eduardo dos Santos, also from the MPLA, became president. Peace deals between the rival UNITA and MPLA in 1991 and 1994 were subsequently unsuccessful and the fighting continued. Jonas Savimbi, long time leader of UNITA was killed in 2002, leading to a UNITA cease-fire agreement and ushering in an era of peace.

Timeline of significant events

1483: Portuguese arrive
17th and 18th century: Slave trade. Millions are sold and transported to plantations mostly in Brazil but also to the US
1836: Slavery is officially abolished by the Portuguese, but it is still practiced till later in the century
1885: The Scramble for Africa begins
Early 20th century: Forced labor persists
1951: Angola becomes a province
1950's: Political movements begin
1961: Forced labor is abolished
1960's till 1975: The war for independence
1975: Independence and start of civil war. MPLA, Agostinho Neto, rule official government
1979: Agostinho Neto dies and Jose Eduardo dos Santos becomes president
1980's: Continued Civil War
1991: Lisbon Peace deal signed by dos Santos (MPLA) and Savimbi (UNITA)
1992: Presidential election conducted under UN supervision. dos Santos wins first round but has less than 50% of votes. Second round is needed, but is never conducted and peace deal disintegrates and Savimbi rejects election result. Fighting resumes and don Santos remains president.
1993: UN imposes sanctions on UNITA and USA recognizes MPLA.
1994: Lusaka Protocol peace accord is signed by UNITA and the government, integration of UNITA rebels into the military begins. Peace accord fails in subsequent years
1998: Fight resumes
2002: Savimbi killed by government troops, UNITA agrees to ceasefire and troops are demobilized
2005: Cholera and Marburg virus epidemic kills over 2000
2006: Angola joins OPEC, becomes 2nd largest oil producing country in sub-Saharan Africa, and signs peace agreement with separatist group in Cabinda province where 65% of oil originates.
2008: Parliamentary elections take place. MPLA wins 82% and UNITA, 10% of seats. Results are accepted and no violence ensues.
2009: Presidential elections planned.

Other Facts: 2008 estimates

Population: 12.5 million, 43.6% are less than 14, and the median age is 18
Life expectancy: 37.92. M- 36.99, F- 38.9
Literacy rate: 67.4%
HIV prevalence- 3.9% estimate in 2003
Ethnic groups: Ovimbundu 37%, Kimbundu 25%, Bakongo 13%, Mestico (mixed) 2%, European 1% and others
Languages: Portuguese (official), Kongo, Mbundu, Chokwe
Economy: GDP (PPP): $9100. GDP real growth rate: 15.1%. 2nd largest Oil and diamond producer in Sub-Saharan Africa
Currency: Kwanza (AOA)
Internet TLD: .ao

Sources, and for more information:
Wikipedia: Angola, Colonial history of Angola,
BBC: Country Profile, Timeline
CIA World Factbook: Angola
Angola Embassy in DC

Please share your thoughts.