Book Review

rrhe paradoxical results of sup porting the idea of freedom for people who don't in the least care to preserve it are spelled out in great detail in Dr. Franco No186 gueira's remarkable little book, The Third World (Johnson Pub lications, London, England) , which comes to us with an enthusiastic foreword by former U.S. Secre tary of State, Dean Acheson. Dr. Nogueira is the Portuguese For eign Minister, a job to which he succeeded after a scarifying ex perience as a delegate for his country at the UN General Assem bly. In the UN the nations of the "third world" form what is known as the AfroAsian bloc. The Afro Asian nations are loud in praise of democracy, liberalism, and other Western concepts, but in Dr. No gueira's experience they don't un derstand anything they say. As a Portuguese Dr. Nogueira had, of course, to defend the rec ord of his countrymen in Africa, where Portugal retains its hold on Angola and Mozambique. Unlike the white Rhodesians and the Boers of South Africa, the Portu1969 TRIBALISM IN AFRICA 187 guese are champions of a real mul tiracialism. They don't care who marries whom. They extend the same liberties to everybody, whether white, black, brown, or yellow; and they consider their African soil to be part of the grand cosmopolitan nation of Greater Portugal. Yet, in spite of practicing the sort of liberalism which the nations of the "third world" say they want to see re stored all over Africa, the Portu guese find themselves denounced in the UN as "reactionary coloni alists."

Myth 01 Democratic Development Dr. Nogueira makes his points about Portugal's record in Africa succinctly. He believes his coun try is still in Africa precisely be cause it has had a policy that does justice to the concept of multi racialism. But this book is not an apologia. It is mainly devoted to an exposure of the myths that con trol "almost all aspects of life" on the African continent outside of the Portuguese territories. When Britain, France, and Bel gium decided to withdraw from Africa, the theory was that new multiracial states would respect the individual, leaving him in pos session of his vote, his right to a representative political party, his civil rights, and his property. In Western Europe, the individual had increased his liberties in di rect relation to his ability to make a living for himself by dependence on his unhampered skills and his own means of production. But in the new Africa of recent years, nationalist freedoms have been linked ,vith the cause of socialism (African socialism in the subSahara region, Arab socialism in the North along the Mediterra nean). Not surprisingly to liber tarians, the socialism of the new governments has proved incom patible with everything the lead ers say they want for their people.

There is the myth of democratic development. In Africa, the tribe was always more important than the individual. Parliamentary free dom in the new African countries has invariably succumbed to tribal strife, with the big tribe setting up a despotism on the basis of a single mass party. The Ibos of Ni geria weren't strong enough to maintain themselves as a separate bloc in a democratic state; hence, the necessity of recourse to tribal warfare to preserve their very ex istence. In the Congo, Moise Tshombe's tribe wasn't powerful enough to establish a separate statehood for Katanga. And in Kenya and Tanzania, the cattle herding Masai are clearly an an achronistic element, doomed to eventual extinction as the more settled tribes such as the Kikuyu 188 THE FREEMAN March learn to work the levers of a cen tralized government. Rapid Industrialization Another African myth is that of rapid industrialization. The idea was that if the West were to pour in external aid, there could be a quick movement to what Walt Rostow has described as the "take off point." But, as Dr. Nogueira points out, industrialization de pends on a healthy agriculture, a strong middle class to supply the "appropriate cadres" to operate industry, and an efficient and un corrupt government. There is no sense giving Gabon, say, a factory to make television sets when there is no local market for them, and no technical intelligentsia to sup ply repairmen.

What particularly amuses Dr. Nogueira is the myth of land re form. The idea that land is monop olized in Africa "is demagogy pure and simple," for there is no scarcity of land in the African countries, there is only a scarcity of people. The extent of African underpopulation is apparent when one considers that with only 250 million inhabitants, the African continent controls almost one-third of the votes in the United Nations. In another few years the U.S. will be more populous than all of Africa. Another African myth concerns higher education. The theory is that if universities are created by government fiat, an effective in telligentsia will be produced in due course. But before you can have a university you have to have primary, rural, and technical schools. Africa is turning out doc tors and engineers who are only so in name and in the diplomas they receive. In an Africa so controlled by myth it is hardly strange that what we are seeing is the re emergence of the tribal chief. The coming of "uhuru," or freedom, has deprived Africans of the "mod erating" power of the colonial ad ministrator. When the state is taken over by the dominant tribe, the government exercises its new dominance with a harshness and despotism that may very well end with the enslavement of minori ties. Opposition to the dominant tribe becomes a form of treason, to be punished as such.

On the wor ld scale, the new tribal nations of Africa become pawns in the struggle between Moscow and the West. They are promised much, but actually get very little that they can use. Ironi cally, the small-scale agricultural missions sent to Africa by the Free Chinese of Taiwan have done more good for the new African nations than all the money poured in by the big powers that pretend 1969 OTHER BOOKS 189 to have African interests at heart. Dean Acheson, in his pungent and lucid foreword, wonders why his own country, the United States, should lecture Portugal about her role in Africa when Angola is so much more peaceful than the Congo. It is a legitimate wonde~ • OTHER BOOKS ~ DAGGER IN THE HEART: AMERICAN POLICY FAIL URES IN CUBA by Mario Lazo (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1968), 426 pp., $5.95. Reviewed by BeUina Bien To DEMONSTRATE that even disin terested eye-witnesses to an event may disagree as to what really happened, a professor of journal ism stages this incident for his classes: A neighboring professor is loudly accused of indiscretion; he and his "attacker," brandishing weapons, dash out into the hall within sight of the future jour nalists. When the commotion sub sides, the students are asked to report what took place and the differences in their accounts make the point for the teacher.

The writing of history, like the art of journalism, involves report ing events as accurately as possi ble. But it also calls for selection, interpretation, and evaluation. It is difficult enough to describe a simple, witnessed incident; it is even more difficult, if not impossi ble, to learn precisely what hap pened when witnesses and report ters of complex historical events are personally involved and when reputations and lives may be in jeopardy. Lincoln's assassination has never been completely ex plained, nor has John F. Ken nedy's; historians still debate the significance of events leading to World Wars I and II; and the as signment of blame with respect to U. S. intervention in Cuba is one of many matters now in active dis pute. Several associates of John F. Kennedy have published ver sions justifying his actions; and now we have the views of a close observer not responsible in any way for U. S. diplomatic decisions.

Mario Lazo, author of Dagger in the Heart, is a man of two na tions. A noted Cuban lawyer, born and educated in this country, a U. S. Army officer in World War I, he has close ties to both countries. Although he recognizes that every historian has a national "bias," reports on Cuba since the late 1950's contain what Mr. Lazo con siders "planned distortion" - in Castro's favor. Mr. Lazo traces Cuban history briefly from the Spanish-American War. No lover of Batista, he was nevertheless 190 THE FREEMAN March deeply concerned at the prospects of a Castro takeover. There were other potential leaders available. But one by one they were effec tively eliminated by U. S. action, or inaction. Finally, when Batista was deliberately ousted, nothing stood between Castro and his sei zure of power. Mr. Lazo names names and places blame - principally on New York Times correspondent, Her bert Matthews, and U. S. State Department officials, Roy R. Ru bottom, Jr. and William A. Wie land - for concealing the true situation in Cuba and for issuing reports obviously contrary to fact.