http://afkinsider.com/5663/which-country-will-be-africas-first-great-power/

SOUTH AFRICA
In terms of the two countries traditionally thought of as having the “right stuff” to be potential great powers in Africa, South Africa is probably the one furthest along.

South Africa boasts Africa’s largest and most diversified economy. It has for some time been the continent’s leading economy and is recognized as such by the international financial system, which lumps in South Africa with Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRICS) as “emerging” economies to watch and invest in.

Second, as befitting a relatively advanced middle-income country, South Africa has a strong, well-trained military and the country has demonstrated a command of the high technology necessary for great power status. South Africa under the apartheid regime secretly built, and then dismantled under the democratic stewardship of Nelson Mandela, a nuclear weapons program that had succeeded in producing several atomic bombs.

Third, despite the disquiet over corruption in the ruling African National Congress, democracy in South Africa seems stable enough to continue over the long haul and there are no serious ethnic-based resistance movements challenging the South African state. This relative stability is also reflected in the country’s courts and its feisty press. All in all, South Africa has all the right ingredients for great power status.

A major obstacle, however, stands in the way. South Africa, while being powerful for an African state, is relatively isolated from the rest of the continent. This matters because a great power has to be willing and able to make its influence felt, and Pretoria’s geographic isolation means doing so is difficult – both materially and politically. Much as geography allowed the U.S. to escape Europe’s many problems for more than 100 years, South Africa’s geographic position allows it to ignore events further north if it does not wish to become involved.

NIGERIA
What about Nigeria, the other commonly considered potential great power of Africa? Nigeria is rich like South Africa but its wealth is far more dependent upon a single commodity – oil – than is South Africa’s. Nigeria, however, is growing and could potentially overtake South Africa as the continent’s largest economy in the coming years.

Nigeria also has a huge population and a central location in the heart of West Africa. This means Nigeria has the potential manpower and geographic opportunity to intervene in the affairs of its much smaller neighbors. Indeed, it has already done so on multiple occasions, and as the West African giant increases its heft in terms of wealth and military effectiveness, West Africa and the Gulf of Guinea could become a de facto Nigerian sphere of influence much as the Gulf of Mexico is effectively an American lake today.

Unlike South Africa which, despite its problems, seems stable and legitimate in the eyes of most of its people, Nigeria’s cobbled-together territory is a post-colonial mishmash of hundreds of ethnicities and linguistic groups. Nigeria has gone through periodic bouts of dictatorship and constitutional reorganization, not to mention a bloody civil war in the 1960s over inclusion of Biafra into the Nigerian state and a debilitating insurgency in its Niger Delta region today, precisely due to its polyglot makeup. Until Nigeria can demonstrate that it can keep the peace honestly and effectively within its own borders it is unlikely that Nigeria will be catapulted into the ranks of the great powers soon.

Biafra

A country which promises to be a collection of progressive elites and where meritocracy rules. A country with a people who shares same ideals and aspirations.

Hmmm...

ETHIOPIA

So, if South Africa is potentially too distant from the center of action and Nigeria too unstable, what other contenders could fill the role of Africa’s first great power? Africa’s geography suggests that the Horn region could provide the strategic space necessary for a great power to develop if one of the countries there became dominant enough to outshine its immediate neighbors. Of the countries that could be considered natural candidates for an East African Great Power only two – Ethiopia and Kenya – could conceivably have the right combination of population, economic heft, and geographic position necessary.

Ethiopia, of course, is a huge, ancient country that once ruled much of East Africa as an imperial state. It was the only African society to really effectively resist colonialism and while it currently is poor, weak, lacks access to the sea, and has lost territory from ethnic rebellions, it remains big enough to remain a contender for power in the region and, as such, has received significant military assistance from the U.S. Ethiopia’s importance was even recognized by the former Soviet Union, which dropped its former ally, Somalia, like a hot potato when a socialist revolution in Ethiopia offered the chance for an ideological alliance with Addis Ababa.

KENYA

Still, Ethiopia, too, has many obstacles to overcome before it can hope to re-establish itself as East Africa’s dominant power. Kenya may therefore be a better bet for a number of reasons. First, it is East Africa’s largest economy and its capital, Nairobi, is a regional commercial hub of some importance. While still mostly agricultural, Kenya has a growing industrial base that provides some diversification away from commodity production. It also has a fairly large population – some 43 million – which gives it the weight necessary to strive for great power status.

Kenya, however, also has issues as ethnic clashes there in 2007 have undermined political stability. Further violence has mostly been avoided due to the adroit maneuvering of domestic political players and the watchful eyes of outsiders, but the possibility remains that Kenya could devolve into political violence and ethnic strife if current power-sharing agreements fail. Kenya, like Nigeria, could therefore fail to live up to its great power potential due to an inability to adequately govern itself.

The days when Pretoria and Abuja are considered the equals of Beijing or Moscow are a long way off, but the laws of geopolitics grind away surely, if slowly. As African states emerge from the chaos and conflict of the first several decades after independence to become strong, independent actors, those smart enough to look ahead can already see who the big players of tomorrow are likely to be.

vanbonattel:
Biafra

A country which promises to be a collection of progressive elites and where meritocracy rules. A country with a people who shares same ideals and aspirations.

Well, the post is about presently existing countries and not dream lands which we wouldn't have parameters to gauge their potentials with. However, should their be a Biafra, it will have it's potentials and obstacles like every other African nation and only time can tell what it will become.

Remember that many African nations were "potential greats" at independence. See what became of most of them.

kjhova:


Well, the post is about presently existing countries and not dream lands which we wouldn't have parameters to gauge their potentials with. However, should their be a Biafra, it will have it's potentials and obstacles like every other African nation and only time can tell what it will become.

Remember that many African nations were "potential greats" at independence. See what became of most of them.

Many of them were potentially great, but a marriage of strange bed fellows. Their failure was only a MATTER of time. Biafra has a people with no inhibitions, same ideology and same direction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFDPL0fNOWY

Real Black African Country Takes #1 Richest Spot

The first one to host the world cup.

Africa should. Unite like China did. A single, united African nation will become a major world power immediately.

Biafra

BIAFRA

Rossikki:
Africa should. Unite like China did. A single, united African nation will become a major world power immediately.

look at what this one is saying,nigeria with differet ethnic group has a lot of problem,you now want us to merge the whole continent together.
i prefer the break up of Nigeria sef,not to now talk of adding other countries like ghana,cameroon etc

gurujoe:
Biafra

you dont believe in a country called nigeria cause it was created by the white man,but you believe in christianity a white man religion

walemoney007:
you dont believe in a country called nigeria cause it was created by the white man,but you believe in christianity a white man religion

we don't believe in Nigeria not because it was cobbled together by the whites but because it is not functional.. a failed entity

vanbonattel:


Many of them were potentially great, but a marriage of strange bed fellows. Their failure was only a MATTER of time. Biafra has a people with no inhibitions, same ideology and same direction.

you are kuku right on that point. Many African nations were polyglots at independence with strange bedfellows.

However, a few countries were different in that they had same race, ethnicity and religion yet still fell apart. Somalia is the number one example. Followed by Lesotho, Swaziland, Gambia and a few who were essentially same stock or of very reasonable similarities.

Like I said before, Biafra may have potentials but that is never a guarantee. You never know your differences until you are rid of your common enemies.

vanbonattel:


Many of them were potentially great, but a marriage of strange bed fellows. Their failure was only a MATTER of time. Biafra has a people with no inhibitions, same ideology and same direction.

What do the south east and south south have in common? Even the Igbo are not even one, talk less of the hundreds of tribes in the south south. It will be another version of Nigeria, because there is no place in history where the 2 region have ever United or share the same ideology

victorvezx:

What do the south east and south south have in common? Even the Igbo are not even one, talk less of the hundreds of tribes in the south south. It will be another version of Nigeria, because there is no place in history where the 2 region have ever United or share the same ideology

this they never see...

you can not force anybody to think like you...

they dont understand that europeans are very evil..

their were many tribes and sub tribes in europe like in africa today,before the romans appeared...

the romans killed everybody that didnt surrender to them because of ideologie...

trying this biafran ideologie on other tribes will not work...
igbos should be careful with it....

This is hard questions but I would guess south Africa. Being power takes Economic and millitary might.

Nigeria has potential if it doesn't fracture and gets act together.

Blue3k:
This is hard questions but I would guess south Africa. Being power takes Economic and millitary might.

Nigeria has potential if it doesn't fracture and gets act together.

south-africa is in big trouble because of the startup..

indians,whites,then mullatos...its a matter of time and they will implode...

it never works putting too ambiscious deferent people in one place...

interests will clash sooner or later...

america is already clashing with that multi-culty rubbish...

vanbonattel:
Biafra

A country which promises to be a collection of progressive elites and where meritocracy rules. A country with a people who shares same ideals and aspirations.

Me ihnye di mma biko

victorvezx:

What do the south east and south south have in common? Even the Igbo are not even one, talk less of the hundreds of tribes in the south south. It will be another version of Nigeria, because there is no place in history where the 2 region have ever United or share the same ideology

Biko nna what concerns SE and SS with what he submitted
Can't you afondzha give this hatred a rest??
Gosh!!!

kjhova:


you are kuku right on that point. Many African nations were polyglots at independence with strange bedfellows.

However, a few countries were different in that they had same race, ethnicity and religion yet still fell apart. Somalia is the number one example. Followed by Lesotho, Swaziland, Gambia and a few who were essentially same stock or of very reasonable similarities.

Like I said before, Biafra may have potentials but that is never a guarantee. You never know your differences until you are rid of your common enemies.

The examples you gave had low capacities so no observer would've given them a chance.
The main things about superpower status are
1]multi legged economy
2]population which gives rise to powerful military and big markets
3]homogeneity in which everyone belongs to one ethnicity or in a multiplicity of ethnicities, one dominates by at least 75%.

An interplay of these factors is what gives rise to powerful state. Taking a look at the examples you gave,they're lacking in one or two or even three of these factors, especially no 1&2. Now taking a look at Biāfra as at June 1,1967,she had...
1]the third largest population in Afrika aside Nigeria and Egypt. Her population before the outbreak of hostilities was 14M
2]the fastest growing regional economy in the world according to the times report of April 1967.at the period, she contributed 35% of Nigeria's budget. Also take into note that crude oil exploration was at its infancy then as the economy of Biāfra(former Eastern Nigeria) was built on palm produce and coal
3]the Igbo made up to 70% of Biafra's population.. As at the outbreak of hostilities, the Igbo population was 9M while that of the minorities were 5M. Moreover the human resources of the Biafran state were high compared to other African states

Had the imperial powers left Biāfra alone,she'd have been the first African power

South Africa and Egypt are my probable bets.

cheruv:

The examples you gave had low capacities so no observer would've given them a chance.
The main things about superpower status are
1]multi legged economy
2]population which gives rise to powerful military and big markets
3]homogeneity in which everyone belongs to one ethnicity or in a multiplicity of ethnicities, one dominates by at least 75%.

An interplay of these factors is what gives rise to powerful state. Taking a look at the examples you gave,they're lacking in one or two or even three of these factors, especially no 1&2. Now taking a look at Biāfra as at June 1,1967,she had...
1]the third largest population in Afrika aside Nigeria and Egypt. Her population before the outbreak of hostilities was 14M
2]the fastest growing regional economy in the world according to the times report of April 1967.at the period, she contributed 35% of Nigeria's budget. Also take into note that crude oil exploration was at its infancy then as the economy of Biāfra(former Eastern Nigeria) was built on palm produce and coal
3]the Igbo made up to 70% of Biafra's population.. As at the outbreak of hostilities, the Igbo population was 9M while that of the minorities were 5M. Moreover the human resources of the Biafran state were high compared to other African states

Had the imperial powers left Biāfra alone,she'd have been the first African power

you are 100% right. Biafra was an envy of nations, a country that could had emancipated the entire black race from mental,economic and political slavery.

Let me go and do my research first

cheruv:

The examples you gave had low capacities so no observer would've given them a chance.
The main things about superpower status are
1]multi legged economy
2]population which gives rise to powerful military and big markets
3]homogeneity in which everyone belongs to one ethnicity or in a multiplicity of ethnicities, one dominates by at least 75%.

An interplay of these factors is what gives rise to powerful state. Taking a look at the examples you gave,they're lacking in one or two or even three of these factors, especially no 1&2. Now taking a look at Biāfra as at June 1,1967,she had...
1]the third largest population in Afrika aside Nigeria and Egypt. Her population before the outbreak of hostilities was 14M
2]the fastest growing regional economy in the world according to the times report of April 1967.at the period, she contributed 35% of Nigeria's budget. Also take into note that crude oil exploration was at its infancy then as the economy of Biāfra(former Eastern Nigeria) was built on palm produce and coal
3]the Igbo made up to 70% of Biafra's population.. As at the outbreak of hostilities, the Igbo population was 9M while that of the minorities were 5M. Moreover the human resources of the Biafran state were high compared to other African states

Had the imperial powers left Biāfra alone,she'd have been the first African power

Your points are reasonable but still no guarantees for superpowerhood. Turkey, Argentina & Mexico fit roughly with your points yet they are not even regional powers. While Singapore and New Zealand, who were mostly disadvantaged by your points, have faired better economically and have more influence in their region in comparison.

Secondly, you drew your conclusions on the Biafra of 1967-70 which is surely going to be different from the Biafra of the 2000s. We cannot sit comfortably by our keyboard and assume that a future Biafra will have Eket, Onne or Port Harcourt within ts borders. Without these, that nation will be landlocked, insufficient in energy/food and overpopulated.

If this is the case, the required part to greatness will be very different from the opportunities of the 70s. Not saying no chance, just saying different.

Emekamex:
South Africa and Egypt are my probable bets.

I am actually surprised that the article didn't mention Egypt. Egypt is the genuine contender in consideration with Nigeria and SA. Truth thou is that all these countries are far off the mark presently.

kjhova:


Your points are reasonable but still no guarantees for superpowerhood. Turkey, Argentina & Mexico fit roughly with your points yet they are not even regional powers. While Singapore and New Zealand, who were mostly disadvantaged by your points, have faired better economically and have more influence in their region in comparison.

Secondly, you drew your conclusions on the Biafra of 1967-70 which is surely going to be different from the Biafra of the 2000s. We cannot sit comfortably by our keyboard and assume that a future Biafra will have Eket, Onne or Port Harcourt within ts borders. Without these, that nation will be landlocked, insufficient in energy/food and overpopulated.

If this is the case, the required part to greatness will be very different from the opportunities of the 70s. Not saying no chance, just saying different.

My points were specific for Afrika... If you widen the scope, that means other variables would come into play.
Concerning the port cities you mentioned, we don't really need them within our borders...all we need to do is pay the states(which I know won't be Nigeria) involved for the use of their ports and change our export base to something more favorable.

cheruv:

My points were specific for Afrika... If you widen the scope, that means other variables would come into play.
Concerning the port cities you mentioned, we don't really need them within our borders...all we need to do is pay the states(which I know won't be Nigeria) involved for the use of their ports and change our export base to something more favorable.

Of course, you are correct yet the point still remains that no one knows tomorrow and therefore we cannot know for certain how a future Biafra might turn out.

Unbridled optimism is as much folly as overbearing pessimism.