To contextualize this struggle, one might draw an allegory to the 1884 Berlin Conference—a historic gathering where the European powers came together to partition Africa. While the Berlin Conference was undoubtedly exploitative and left devastating consequences for Africa, it was nevertheless a structured and goal-oriented process. Why can’t the leaders of Delta APC adopt a similar sense of purpose, organization, and inclusivity to resolve their differences and establish peace within the party?
Lessons from the Berlin Conference
In the late 19th century, European nations like Britain, France, Germany, and Belgium were competing fiercely for colonies and resources. Africa, with its abundant natural wealth, became the epicenter of these ambitions. German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck convened the Berlin Conference in 1884 to regulate this competition and avoid open conflict among European powers.
The goals of the conference were clear:
1. Establish principles for claiming African territories.
2. Prevent conflicts among European powers.
3. Secure access to Africa's resources and markets.
The resulting agreements led to the systematic partitioning of Africa into colonies. Borders were drawn, often arbitrarily, using natural landmarks, with little regard for the cultural and social realities of the African people. While the conference had catastrophic consequences for Africa—loss of sovereignty, cultural erosion, and economic exploitation—it also provided a framework that allowed European powers to achieve their goals with a degree of order and mutual understanding.
The Berlin Conference exemplified a quid pro quo approach. After rounds of negotiations, handshakes, and the clinking of glasses, European leaders left with their interests secured. Their actions, though morally questionable, ensured relative peace among European nations and maximized their collective exploitation of Africa’s resources.
A Missing Framework for Delta APC
The ongoing power struggle within Delta APC lacks even this rudimentary sense of structure and purpose. Instead of engaging in constructive dialogue or reaching compromises, the party has become a battlefield of chaos. Leaders and factions wrestle for control of "structures," but the question remains: control to what end? Without a clear agenda, their infighting risks not only internal disarray but also consistent failure at the ballot box.
The Berlin Conference offers a critical lesson: even competing interests can be harmonized when there is an agreement on principles and a willingness to compromise. Delta APC’s leaders must recognize that their shared goals—whether it is political dominance or policy influence—can only be achieved through collaboration. Sitting at a round table to discuss areas of influence, roles, and responsibilities could pave the way for lasting peace and a stronger, more unified party.
The Consequences of Neglect
Failure to emulate such a model of compromise and organization will only result in the party’s continued decline. Without resolving its internal conflicts, Delta APC risks alienating its members, eroding public trust, and ultimately losing its competitive edge in the state’s political landscape. The leaders must understand that persistent squabbling only guarantees electoral failures and a weakened influence in the political arena.
Conclusion
The Delta APC’s internal conflicts serve as a cautionary tale of what happens when leadership fails to prioritize collaboration and inclusivity. The Berlin Conference of 1884, for all its moral failings, underscores the importance of structured dialogue and compromise in managing competing interests. Delta APC leaders would do well to emulate this approach—setting aside egos and personal ambitions to prioritize the collective good of the party. Only then can they hope to achieve their political goals and remain relevant in the state’s political equation.
Dr. ‘Tonye Timi
Comments
Post a Comment