Peace made mention of a half dozen countries in Africa which he considered reasonably run. That's a good start.

I would add Tanzania to Peace's list, and go on to say that it has been reasonably governed since its independence in the early 1960's. It's not a rich country but they seem to make do with their resources, and they have no record of civil war, tribal raids and retributions; they did cross over the border once into Uganda and chased Ide Amin out of that country, and then withdrew after a short period of occupation. The island of Zanibar tried to break away at some point and some might allege that their national aspirations were unfairly suppressed. Not a bad record by World standards.

But I also agree that far too many African countries have squandered their resources to the benefit of a small elite, and played one tribe against another, or invaded their neighbors or supported civil strife beyond their borders. And sometimes they have functioned as proxies for the big industrial countries, as is demonstrated by Ethiopia's invasion of Somalia, only to find themselves immersed in a never-ending war.

I must say that I find much of the discussion above abusive rather than informative. I'm not surprised that many of us have only a shallow understanding of history in Africa since the rise of independent states from 1960 on; many of us are totally ignorant of Africa's pre-colonial history. But what I do find appalling and offensive is the willingness of some to generalize from such shallow understanding.

Charley Noble