I must admit, it has taken me longer than usual to share my thoughts on a matter as significant as President Barack Obama’s visit to Kenya and Ethiopia last month.

And although Obama’s trip can hardly be described as a ‘tour of Africa’ – he visited two out of 54 African nations – his visit was nonetheless important.

Billed as a trip to reinforce the U.S. commitment to economic growth and tread, democracy, and investing in the next generation of African leaders, Obama also became the first sitting US President to visit Kenya, and to address the African Union (AU).

In Kenya, Obama used his charisma to appeal to most Kenyans, particularly at the Global Entrepreneurship Summit where he inspired thousands of Kenyans to believe in themselves.

It was not until Obama arrived in Ethiopia, however, that he got my full attention. Being the first sitting US President to address the AU, I was keen to observe how he would use his oral skills to address a continent with so much diversity.

In Africa, on one hand, some nations have registered commendable growth, political stability, and much more. On the other, however, other states have all but failed. On their turf, therefore, Obama had to trade carefully, not to bundle countries into one basket.  

So, did he succeed? The jury is still out on that. However, after listening to the 47-minute speech which was full of praise and criticism in equal measure, personally, I believe that Obama, like most western leaders, failed quite bluntly to accentuate the reality of Africa’s political, economic and social diversity.

In his speech, for instance, President Obama stated that: "I believe Africa’s progress will also depend on democracy, because Africans, like people everywhere, deserve the dignity of being in control of their own lives.”

He added: "I have to also say that Africa’s democratic progress is also at risk when leaders refuse to step aside when their terms end”.

On another note, Obama also stated that: "I have to proclaim, democracy is not just formal elections. When journalists are put behind bars for doing their jobs, or activists are threatened as governments crack down on civil society – then you may have democracy in name, but not in substance.”

Of course, Obama’s speech at the AU would have been appropriate had he been addressing an entity with one political, economic and social system. But he was not; he was addressing 54 nations with 54 different narratives.

In Burundi’s case, for instance, it can be argued that the democratic progress was put at risk the minute Pierre Nkurunziza ignored calls from his people to stand down at the end of his constitutional mandate.

However, cases like Burundi’s should not be reason to automatically brand Africa as a place where democratic progress is at risk. That would be like using Greece’s current economic climate as a true reflection of the European Union’s entire economic state.

And so, just like other parts of the world, in Africa, much as we share a lot in common, we also have varied accounts. Enter Senegal’s Abdoulaye Wade, for example; one year after Wade took office in 2000, he amended the country’s constitution to impose a two-term limit for the presidency.

He also reduced the presidential term from seven to five years. However, in 2012, although Wade had successfully changed the rules to allow him to run for a third and final term, at the ballot box, the Senegalese people reminded the rest of the world that in some parts of Africa too, power rests with the people.

Wade failed to win an outright majority in the first round, and subsequently lost altogether in round two. Similar stories have emerged from Nigeria with Olusegun Obasanjo, Zambia under Fredrick Chiluba, and Malawi when Bakili Muluzi was at the helm.

But, there is another narrative emerging out of Africa. It is one of rarity, I must add, where the people have openly requested the incumbent leader to continue leading beyond pre-agreed limits.

Enter Rwanda; motivated by his unprecedented success, millions of Rwandans have openly expressed their desire to have President Kagame lead beyond 2017 when his term ends. In doing so, millions of Rwandans are adamant that in Kagame they already posses a prized asset, an already proven leader who has delivered what they crave; progress.

At the last count, over 3.7 million Rwandans, that is an estimated 72 per cent of the electorate, had petitioned Parliament – in writing – requesting the amendment of article 101 of the Constitution.  To these millions, they do not see the logic in change for the sake of change.

However, Rwanda’s is a narrative so rare that it has already attracted glares of suspicion from outsiders. Their reason is quite simple; contrary to expectations, in Rwanda, business is as usual, there are no old tires burning along street corners and Rwandans have not headed to the Mediterranean Sea in their thousands.

In short, the sky has not fallen yet it is expected to. But why should the sky fall if first it did not fall when a century ago, in America, many Republicans and the American people as a whole clamoured for their beloved Theodore Roosevelt to run for third term as President, or more recently in Germany, when Angela Markel is thought to have expressed ambitions to run for a fourth term? Is it because it is an African narrative?  

As can be seen, Africa, like any other continent, possesses diverse accounts whether politically, economically or socially. Collectively, Africa has in many aspects lagged behind the rest.

Individually too, many African countries, through their governments, have indeed failed to serve their people, have abused human rights, and corruption is deeply embedded.

But this is not unique to Africa; at the hands of America, for instance, activists such as Julian Assange have been hounded and forced to spend years hiding in foreign embassies.

America’s Edward Snowden was also forced to seek refuge in Russia for disclosing unethical mass surveillance programmes in America. Private Bradley Manning is currently in penitentiary for revealing alleged crimes committed by American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So, all in all, Obama et al. ought to recognise that Africa is not homogenous and, therefore, should not be amalgamated. What happens in Mali may not necessarily take place in Malawi.Similarly, Burundi’s descend into chaos should not overshadow or castigate Rwanda’s ambitions to retain a unique leader.

junior.mutabazi@yahoo.co.uk