African Unity

Question: What is the state of relations with your conservative, relatively wealthier neighbor, the Ivory Coast?
Thomas Sankara: What is the Ivory Coast conserving? I know what you meant, but I’d like to know more precisely what ideology the Ivory Coast conserves, in order to better judge the contrast, of there is one, between our ideology and theirs.
Our relations are good, since Upper Volta had relations with the Ivory Coast. Burkina Faso states, as I said in my first anniversary message, that we will be open toward everyone and we will reach out to everyone. In this context, in this spirit, I believe our relations are good naturally, there’s always something that can be done to improve relations. But as far as we are concerned, the current situation is fine with us. And if our brothers in the Ivory Coast wish, we can continue like this and even do better. But I’m not aware of any particular problems between the Ivory Coast and Burkina Faso.
Of course, we have opponents in the Ivory Coast, many opponents. But as revolutionaries, as soon as we began to consider ourselves revolutionaries, we knew very well that the world we live in is not revolutionary. We have to live with realities that are not always to our liking. We have to be ready to live with governments that are not making a revolution at all, or perhaps that even attack our revolution. This is a very big responsibility for revolutionaries. Perhaps those who come after us, the revolutionaries, will live in a better world and will have a much easier task.
For us, anyway, as soon as we accept this reality, that the Ivory Coast is not making a revolution, whereas we are, then everything becomes simple. The difficulties, complications, and concerns are only in the minds of those who are revolutionaries, but who, in a romantic way, hope or think that everyone should act like revolutionaries. But we're not surprised. So we're not bothered. It’s a reality we were prepared for.
Question: Historic ties exist between Burkina Faso and the Ivory Coast. We can see this by the periodic visits you make within the framework of regional and sub regional organizations. But concretely, Comrade President, since the National Council of the Revolution has come to power, how is the Abidjan-Ouagadougou axis doing? Because some people speak of a certain coolness, and it’s even claimed that your absence at the last summit of the Entente Council in Yamoussoukro and the cancelation of a working visit to the Ivory Coast are significant.
Sankara: You ask how the Abidjan-Ouagadougou axis is doing. The axis is straight, when run by Air Ivoire and air Volta (soon to be Air Burkina). The axis is twisting and winding, when represented by the Abidjan-Ouagadougou railway. The axis is chaotic, very difficult, with ups and downs, when it corresponds to the Abidjan-Ouagadougou road, an axis that passes through dark regions, forest regions, and savanna, that stretches from the ocean to the heart of the parched Sahel. So it’s a set of complex realities that each of us must grasp. There you have that axis. You wanted a description, there you are.
You asked me a second question. Some say a coolness exists. You don't specify who says that, which doesn’t make our task easy. Be that as it may, you say that some people or some papers speak of a certain coolness between Abidjan and Ouagadougou.
Here we live in the warmth of the Revolution, and those who are shivering should just protect themselves and take necessary precautions. Between the Ivory Coast and Burkina Faso there are all kinds of relations, geographical, historical, economic, social, and others. These are relations we can't just erase by ringing a bell, relations that Ivorians can’t deny either.
Today Burkina Faso is embarked on a revolutionary road to transform society, to fight a certain number of ills and scourge that we are familiar with here, and we think only Burkina Faso’s enemies are complaining about that. Every Ivorian who loves the Burkinabè people should applaud the Burkinabè revolution. Every Ivorian who does not love the Burkinabè revolution does not love the Burkinabè people. That’s where you must start from in figuring out where it’s cold and who’s getting cold.
Does this mean that the Ivory Coast, which had excellent relations with reactionary Upper Volta, is suddenly cooling off because Upper Volta has become revolutionary? That’s a question that can only be asked of Ivorians. We are living in the warmth of the Revolution, warmth that we gladly share with anyone who is willing to accept kt. But we can’t impose it on anyone, and it would really be a shame if fraternal people’s, neighboring peoples, were not to share in the same joy, or to benefit from the same warmth.
Question: In contrast to the Ivory Coast, Ghana and its president are welcome in Burkina Faso. We even saw Ghanaian troops on parade during the commemoration of the Revolution. Where does support end and interference begin? In a word, can Ghana become a liability for your young country?
Thomas Sankara: Support to whom? Interference in the affairs of whom? Interference begins when a people feels treachery is being committed against it. As long as this is not the case, there will never be enough support.
Ghana comes to Burkina Faso, shows up here whenever an occasion warrants it, on happy occasions and also on not-so-happy occasions. Because, we have no doubt about it, and I think you gave no doubt either, Burkinabè and Ghanaians share a deep affinity. As long as this affinity lasts, we can only deplore the fact that we have not done enough to increase the amount of support.
We don’t have a chauvinist view of things, and we condemn sectarianism. For those reasons we see borders as administrative lines, perhaps necessary in order to limit each country’s sphere of activity and enable it to see things clearly. But the spirit of liberty and dignity, of counting on one’s own resources, of independence, and of consistent anti-imperialist struggle should blow from north to south and from south to north, crossing borders with ease. We're happy to say that’s the case between Burkina Faso and Ghana, and it must continue to be the case.
Do you think our country would have any problems or difficulties in it’s relations if that wind were to blow through our country and all the other countries? Do you think countries would have gotten to the point of threatening each other with the apocalypse today if this same wind were blowing through all the countries of the world? Currently we're talking about Iran and Iraq, don't you think it would be good if Iranians could go visit Iraqis in the same way that Ghanaians go visit Burkinabè and vice versa?
We believe it’s an example we'd like to see repeated. We think it’s in the interest of the people’s of the world. Those who lose out may be the people who would like to set Ghana against Burkina Faso for their own ulterior motives.
Question: What does Burkina Faso think of the current crisis within the organization of African Unity [OAU]?
Thomas Sankara: We think that it’s a completely normal and welcome crisis, because there’s a revolutionary process going on that requires calling into question and redefining the goals of the OAU.
The OAU cannot continue to exist as it has. The desire to engage in unity-mongering won out too quickly over the desire to realize unity. Many things were sacrificed in the name of unity and through unity-mongering. The people’s of Africa are increasingly hard to please today. And because they are, they're saying no to meetings and conferences whose function is to adopt resolutions that are never acted on, or whose function is to not adopt long-awaited resolutions that could be acted on.
Africa stands face to face with its problems, problems the OAU always succeeds in avoiding by putting off their solution until tomorrow. That tomorrow is today. We can no longer put all these questions off until tomorrow. That’s why we find this crisis to be quite normal. It may even be a little late in coming.
Question: Could you tell us Burkina Faso's position on the conflict in Western Sahara?
Thomas Sankara: We have recognized the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic [SADR] and we feel there’s no reason to hesitate on the question, when a people has decided to choose an organization, it’s a duty to recognize it. So we feel there can be no OAU summit without the SADR. Someone would be missing. If someone is missing and the reasons for that absence aren’t legitimate, Burkina Faso won't play along.
Question: You've spoken several times about aid and cooperation, whether African or non-African, but not just of any kind of aid. What do you mean by that?
Thomas Sankara: Aid must go in the direction of strengthening our sovereignty, not undermining it. Aid should go in the direction of destroying Aid. All Aid that kills Aid is welcome in Burkina Faso. But we will be compelled to abandon all Aid that creates a welfare mentality. That’s why we're very careful and very exacting whenever someone promises or proposes Aid to us, or even when we're the ones taking the initiative to request it.
You cannot make a revolution or gain your independence without a certain amount of stoicism and sacrifice. The people of Burkina demand such stoicism of themselves, precisely so as to avoid such temptation, to avoid taking the easy way out, as some aid would encourage us to do. These mirage have done a lot of harm to our country and to others. We want to put a stop to them.
Question: Comrade President, during your retreat in Koupéla you received a member of the International Court of Justice. He must have talked to you about the Burkina Faso-Mali problem. So how are the deliberations coming along? Are you optimistic about the outcome?
Thomas Sankara: Forty-five days after we took power in Burkina Faso, we expressed to the Malian people our utmost willingness to work on finding a fair solution to this problem. We lifted all the vetoes, all the bans, and all the obstacles that prevented a frank, constructive dialogue around this question. I should say that spontaneous gestures are generally the most sincere.
We consider it important to assure the Malian people of our will, our sincerity, and our profound desire to live in peace with them. That’s why we got rid of this ball, which was in Burkina's court. That issue for us is over with. We're looking to the other partners, whether they be the International Court of Justice or Mali. We're giving them time to act or react. We’re not worried about it.
Question: Your counterpart from Zaire recently requested that a league of Black African states be set up. We’re you consulted, and what do you think of this initiative by President Mobutu? Specifically, do you think that such a league could resolve the problems Black Africa is facing? And do you think the conflicts in Western Sahara and Chad are the causes of the OAU's current situation?
Thomas Sankara: Your question disturbs me a great deal because you seem to be saying once again that the heads of state consulted one another around this famous proposal for a league of Black African states. That’s what your question seems to imply. At any rate I wasn’t consulted, luckily for me! Perhaps only those who had something to “contribute" were consulted.
We're not opposed to Black Africans getting together, since the reality is that there are Black Africans and white Africans, but we don’t know exactly what this would accomplish. We don’t know what purpose it would serve to keep repeating that we are Black’s, as if the problems facing the OAU are due to the fact that there’s a two color OAU, and that we should be thinking of forming a single-color OAU. This is surrealism, which produces a certain kind of painting that we don’t find appealing.
You and Jeune Afrique seem to be saying that the conflict in Western Sahara, we call it the conflict between the SADR and Morocco, just so we understand each other, and to a lesser extent the conflict in Chad, could explain why the OAU is beginning to come apart. It’s a little as if these two questions, Chad and the SADR, were ones that involve non-Black Africans and that by tossing them out of the OAU, we could harmoniously find ourselves back among Black Africans. I'm not sure relations between the SADR, which is African and mostly white, and certain Black African countries are worse than between some Black African countries and other Black African countries. So it’s not a question of color. With regard to how we conceive of the OAU, there is no room for the color-sensitive. There is only one color, that of African Unity.
Question: What is your view of the evolution, particularly the failure, of the Brazzaville conference?
Thomas Sankara: As you know very well, we supported the efforts in Brazzaville. We said the Brazzaville conference should not be a boxing ring from which a heavyweight champion would emerge. We gave full support to [Congolese] President Sassou Nguesso in his efforts to establish conditions for a dialogue allowing the Chapman’s to sort things out amongst themselves. But we also said that in order for the conference to be of use, it would have to recognize the Chadian people's success over its enemies.
Question: Concerning your relations with Libya, could you mention an example of aid from that country to Burkina Faso?
Thomas Sankara: You're asking me a very delicate, very difficult question. There are so many examples. We could spend hours and hours, if not days and days, telling you about that aid. We have very good relations, which have only deepened as each country has asserted its own personality, as each country has asserted its own independence. We're very satisfied, very pleased that Libya respects our independence.
We visit Libya often. Not long ago, I met colonel Gaddafi. We discussed many questions and made some mutual criticisms. We're also ready to engage in self-criticism when we feel the criticism is well-founded and should prompt us to change our position. Just as we invite Libya to do the same. Among revolutionaries we should engage in criticism and self-criticism. This doesn’t mean Libya is perfect, because nothing is perfect in any country of the world. And this gives rise to discussions. So our relations continue to be as they have been, and have even taken on a new aspect with this form of mutual criticism and fruitful debate.
Question: During a tour of Africa you visited Mozambique and Angola. However, we know these countries have signed pacts with South Africa that seem, at first sight, to be unnatural. What is the position of Burkina Faso on those accords?
Thomas Sankara: We've already expressed our position. There’s a basic question involved here. Racist South Africa will never cease being a poison, a thorn in the side of all Africans. As long as this thorn, this barbaric, backward, and anachronistic ideology, Apartheid, has not been removed, racism will not cease. So there’s no room to hem and haw, to change positions on that question.
The ways and means to resolve this problem are tactical questions for each country. But fundamentally, the fight against racism must continue. Furthermore, tactics and strategy should not be confused with one another. That’s why, while avoiding giving lessons or criticizing our Angolan and Mozambican comrades, we do remind them of their duty to struggle against racism, and that whatever tactics they use, they must wage a permanent fight against that racism. Any other position would be a negation of the sacrifices made by the African martyrs. It would also be a negation of everything being done today and everything done yesterday.
At the same time, we don’t hesitate to criticize the other African states for having failed to offer effective, genuine, and concrete support to these countries at the front, who have watched over everyone’s security with regard to racism. It’s because Mozambique dared to support other struggles that what used to be Rhodesia is living a different reality today. It’s because Angola stands guard against South Africa that the rest of us, as far away as western or North Africa, can escape the direct threat of racism. But if those two countries should fall, if the Frontline States were to collapse, it would mean a steady, dangerous, and incursionary advance of the racists real borders.
So we ca only encourage both countries to continue their fierce struggle against racism, against racist South Africa. And while we're at it, we can only hope that they exercise all the necessary vigilance. When you deal with the devil, you must take care to have a spoon with a very long handle, long enough, at any rate.
Question: What does Burkina Faso think of the precondition raised by South Africa for the independence of Namibia, the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola?
Thomas Sankara: The precondition South Africa raises is a red herring, because it has feelings with countries, including African countries, that have foreign troops on their soil. Why is their no problem in these cases? Why do they want to prevent Angola from calling on troops that it feels make a useful contribution, and give useful support? It’s their right. Calling on Cuban troops is a question that involves Angola's sovereignty. It’s to the Cuban’s credit that they agree to go die for another country when they too have dangers on their doorstep and on their coastlines.
As far as the question of the presence of foreign troops in this or that country is concerned, we think there are countries that have the right to raise the question and others that don’t have the right, especially when they have foreign troops in their own countries. Cuban troops are no less legitimate than those seeking to extend their policy of domination.
Question: You made reference in your speech to countries that greet you with the kiss of Judas, or those that support the enemies of your people. Do you count France among those countries, and how do you envision relations between France and Burkina Faso?
Thomas Sankara: Perhaps at the time only Jesus spotted Judas. I’m not sure the other eleven disciples did. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. We don’t put words in anyone’s mouth. But we're also aware that the Judases know who they are and perhaps, having been caught red-handed plotting against us, they'll betray themselves one way or another.
Since we're on the subject, a person can deny everything, but their deepest intentions will come out in the end. The first of the twelve disciples, Peter, was caught himself. When Peter pretended he wasn’t with the person who was the subject of Popular condemnation, he was told, “Your accent betrayed you.” Well, you've read the Holy Scriptures like everyone, so I won’t go on.
France has relations with us that some may find surprising. We think these relations could be better. We do want to improve them. We've repeated this many times. But for those relations to improve, France has to learn to deal with the African countries, at least with us, on a new basis. We deeply regret the fact that if May 1981 made it possible to transform France, you’re the only ones who know it. As far as France's relations with Africa are concerned, at any rate, may 1981 changed nothing.
The France of May 1981 is following practically the same course as the preceding governments. It is also dealing with the same spokespeople representing the various African groups. The France of today is no different from the France of yesterday. That’s why we, who are expressing, who are conveying a new African reality, are not understood. Perhaps we're even stirring up the tranquil pond of Franco-African relations a bit.
We turn up using the language of truth, a truthfulness that is perhaps direct and somewhat forthright, but a truthfulness coupled with sincerity not found elsewhere. For too long France has been accustomed to the kind of language used by, I wouldn’t quite call them sycophants, but …. France was often used to the language of the local lackeys of neocolonialism. In such conditions it can’t understand that there are some who don’t want to get in line.
If France were to make the effort to understand this new reality, which is viewed in Burkina Faso as a reality largely shared by many other African countries, if the effort were made to accept this as is, many things would change. But unfortunately, they want to dismiss Burkina Faso as a minor glitch, a fluke, perhaps a temporary one. No, that’s the reality in Africa, and so relations between Africa and its other partners must evolve accordingly.
Question: You said you were open to countries with different ideologies. In May 1981 the socialists took power in France. Yet your country's ideology is opposed to that of France. Would it be right to say that there should be a friendship between the two countries, one that might be characterized as conditional? If so, what would be the conditions?
Thomas Sankara: I think there’s no such thing as unconditional friendship. Even love at first sight has, I believe, certain conditions, which, when they wear off, bring human beings back to earth and to surprisingly cold realities.
Friendship between Burkina Faso and any other country is a friendship conditional on respect for our sovereignty and our interests, which in turn compels us to respect the other partner. These conditions are not a one-way street. We think that the dialogue with France must be frank. Truthfulness, as long as both partners are really willing to abide by it, could lead us to a program of friendship.
France's representative, it’s ambassador, has calculated that from August 4, 1983, until today the balance of diplomatic exchanges between France and the former Upper Volta has shown a big deficit to our disadvantage. That says a lot. France continues to believe that the positions of Burkina Faso can be guessed at, interpreted through, or expressed by this or that big shot. Which means that on this level France has not considered Burkina Faso to be something new, something new that reflects a certain reality in Africa.
Question: Upper Volta decided not to participate in the [1984 Los Angeles Summer] Olympic Games. Why? How do you explain the fact that other African countries decided to go?
Thomas Sankara: Upper Volta decided not to participate, and Burkina Faso upholds that decision. Not because there wasn’t much hope of us bringing home medals, no! But out of principle. We should use these games, like any platform, to denounce our enemies and the racism of South Africa. We cannot participate in such games alongside supporters of South Africa's racist policies. Nor alongside those who reject the warnings and condemnations that Africans have issued in order to weaken racist South Africa. We do not agree and chose not to go, even if it means never going to the Olympic Games.
Our position was not dictated to us by anyone. Each country that refused to go has its reasons. Ours have to do with the relations between British sports authorities and South Africa. Great Britain has never accepted the various warnings and numerous protests. Great Britain had not budged and neither have we. We will not stand at its side to celebrate. We can’t go to that celebration! We don’t feel like celebrating.
Question: You know that what often scares the West, Europe, and France, is the term “revolution.” In your speech, you said that “revolution cannot be exported.” Is this a way of reassuring the countries that are a little afraid? Is it possible to not export revolution, when borders are merely administrative lines?
Thomas Sankara: Revolution cannot be exported. An ideological choice cannot be imposed on any people. Exporting revolution would also meant that we Burkinabè think we can go teach others what they have to do to solve their problems. This is a counterrevolutionary view. This is what pseudo revolutionaries, the bookish, dogmatic petty bourgeoisie, proclaim. It would be saying that we imported our revolution, and that being true, we're now supposed to continue the chain.
This is not the case.
We've said that our revolution is not unaware of the experiences of other people’s, their struggles, their successes, and their setbacks. This means the revolution in Burkina Faso therefore takes into account all the revolutions of the world, whatever they may be. The revolution of 1917 teaches us many things, for example; and the revolution of 1789 provides us with many lessons. Monroe's theory of “America for the Americans" teaches us a lot. We're interested in all that.
We also think that having borders are simply administrative lines does not mean our ideology can invade other countries. Because if they don’t accept it, if they reject it, it won’t make much headway. For these borders not to be a barrier to ideas, as well, they have to be understood on both sides of the line as merely administrative. If Burkina Faso sees this or that border as being only an administrative line, whereas on the other side it’s seen as a protective rampart, the result will not be what happens between Ghana and Burkina Faso.
The better the revolution is known, the better it will be understood that its not dangerous, that it’s good for the people’s of the world. Many men fear revolution because they're not familiar with it, or because they're only familiar with the excesses as reported by columnists and newspaper correspondents looking for something sensational.
Let’s be clear. Although our revolution is not made for export, we don’t intend to go out of our way to shut the Burkinabè revolution up inside an impenetrable fortress. Our revolution is an ideology that blows freely and is at the disposal of all those who feel the need to take advantage of it.