By Prof. S.N. Malakkar, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University

INDIA'S Relationship with Africa dates back to 3000 BC. Indian traders would not have ventured into the African continent but for business. Contrary to the popular belief, Africans were affluent and mobile then.

In 1885, there was a mad scramble for Africa to take control of its vast natural resources, resulting in battles between the Dutch, French, Germans, Belgians, Spanish, English and the Portuguese. They met in Berlin to agree upon how to achieve their goal without working at cross-purposes. Their military presence was used as the yardstick to divide the resources-rich Africa. Not cultural or social ground realities. In 1910, they resorted to conglomeration in Namibia and South Africa. The sole objective was the exploitation of Africa.

Superpower rivalry, in the post-World War II era, increased Africa's importance. Given their numerical strength in the United Nations, they enjoyed a certain amount of clout. Strategic as well as ideological reasons played a big role: for instance, realising that Ethiopia came under the Soviet influence, the United States moved into the neighbouring Somalia. Subsequently, Somalia and Ethiopia switched sides. Egypt played a big role in the Middle East wars, though it is part of Africa. At the height of cold war and until the collapse of Soviet Union in 1989, every superpower had its regimen in Africa. After the collapse of Soviet Union, Africa lost its sheen. During the 1990s, Africa went into an internal turmoil - ethnic and territorial conflict and the western powers felt the cost of holding operations was uneconomical. Withdrawal of Soviet Union led to the US pull out.

However, it does not mean they wrote off Africa. Under the guise of Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) sponsored by IMF and World Bank, they kept their interests alive in a different format since the 1980s. Despite knowing SAP is harmful to their own interests, they accepted and implemented the same willingly. African nations were under the spell of Dependence Theory. The basic premise of this theory was to make African countries dependent on outside help and then bring them under western control.

Massive assistance in various forms were given and generated a campaign that budget deficit is a progressive thing. So loans emerged as the route to control Africa. Every nation in Africa stood in queue to get the loans to bridge the budget deficit. Reality struck them in 1970s. Under compulsion they came under the Structural Adjustment Programme. Macro-economic sustainability became the buzzword. Superficially it may appear as if the developed world is helping Africa. On the contrary, they were taking more and more from Africa. SAP has become the exploitation game perpetuated by the west on Africa.

Subsequent to 1989, there were still some pockets of Marxist influence which resisted SAP - say in Mozambique, Angola, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe. Then came the globalisation drive, another exploitation game. African decline began in every sphere. This resulted in social conflict. Lack of political space to address economic ills led to large scale ethnic conflicts. Of late, the prospects of oil is making Africa the cynosure of all nations.Littoral states are believed to enjoy huge hydrocarbon resources and every western nation is interested and refocusing on Africa. France, which has influence in 18 countries thanks to its colonial days, is trying to stage a comeback.