‘The Last King of Scotland’: Revisiting an African Tragedy

By Fitsum G.

March 30, 2007

Ghana heralded the new era becoming the first Black African country to blow the trumpets of independence and sovereignty under President Kwame Nkrumah. Soon most other African countries toiling under colonial control and hoping that their turn would come as well were to follow suit. They thought flying their own flags with their preferred colours and emblems, founding their own local government with indigenous people in the ranks and files, would in fact make them free, independent and happy. As Algeria, Nigeria, Kenya, among others, followed the footpaths of Ghana, the year 1960 was dubbed as the Year of African Independence, the year the Wind of Change blew across the continent, in the words of British PM Macmillan addressing the South African parliament.

However, soon it was to be found that African independence was only an illusion, and a dangerous one at that. It was to remain an unfulfilled dream for decades. It can be said it is still an unfulfilled dream! Every where in Africa, there broke out conflicts motivated by several factors such as power struggle, the way the resources of the countries were to be administered, the way the boundaries of each sovereign State were to be fixed, the way federations were to be established. The bones of contention abounded. To start with, the hands of the former colonial masters were still active in African politics. Their influence in government was overwhelming. Some were real puppet regimes with the umbilical cords of the colonial rulers still attached to the former colonies’ bodies. What was soon aptly dubbed ‘neocolonialism’ was flourishing, and there wasn’t so much mystery about it either. Division among African communities became the rule; democratic representation through free and fair elections an increasingly unattainable utopia. Civil liberties and freedoms were to be sacrificed at the altar of ‘stability, law and order, and peace’. The once seemingly enlightened African leaders turned to be ruthless despots, loathing any criticism of their deeds, intolerant to opposition. In the mean time, abuse of resources, monopoly of certain European companies continued, with overt complicity of African chiefs. Governments and corporations did whatever it took to continue to enjoy all former privileges, milk the fat cow undisturbed as native elite grew greedier and greedier becoming filthy rich at destitute masses’ expence. The fat bank accounts in hard currency in foreign banks were to be among the scandals of these leaders: the Abachas, the Mobutus, the Bokassas, the Amins, you name it. Africans in the meantime could barely avail of enough food to survive on while the above leaders procured multiple castles and villas in the richest quarters in Europe.

Furthermore, factional wars, hostilities among rival ethnic entities became a sad African identity. These continued to claim thousands of lives as the warlords attempted to claim exclusive control on minerals such as copper, gold, and diamond. All of a sudden, Africa discovered that independence had its own cost and, after all, was not what many thought it would be. It was indeed tragically tricky, turning out to be motive for fratricidal violence and massacres. Bloodshed became common, with bodies of slain people strewn here and there. Africa also became the supermarket of guns and ammunitions where brokers and messengers of death made easy money by peddling them on African soil.

Following among the first prominent assassinations of African leaders in the Congo, (Leopoldville, Kinshasa, later Zaire, then DRC) that of Patrice Lumumba, civil war broke out. The UN’s attempt to restore stability in the region partially succeeded, but in the events of those days and subsequent stories should the current instability in Kabilla’s DRC be probably traced. Independence’s price tag was very high. Rwanda and Burundi were characterized by even more horrible genocidal clashes. Atrocities perpetrated still cry for justice, if not revenge. In many African countries, peace expired and the life that many fancied or hoped would come after independence resulted to be only imaginary. The Sudan was afflicted with decades of civil war, and apparently the guns still roar with the suffering of the people at apocalyptic level. Similarly, the Horn of Africa is among the regions of Africa that has experienced some of the worst years of violence, particularly in the past few years without counting the millions who have perished amidst factional conflicts and climatic adversities.

By general standards, Eastern Africa, i.e. Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, had earlier seemed to be spared of such African predicament of violence. There was relative well being with leaders Jomo Kenyatta in Kenya, Milton Obote in Uganda and Julius Nyerere in Tanzania. They seemed to inject hope to the region’s growth and stability. The charisma of the leaders played a big role while elsewhere, coups and counter coups characterized the African nations. Attempts of breaking away from the larger nation became the norm in many areas while Europeans simply watched amused envisaging African leadership as a laughing stock.

One such leader was General Idi Amin Dada, a typical buffoon that by some luck and circumstance became the president of Uganda in 1971. Amin was an almost illiterate person who first joined the Ugandan army during the colonial period as an aid in the kitchen but somehow managed to rise to the ranks of non-commissioned officer first, and later Army Chief also because very tactful and naturally gifted with certain qualities (beside being a sporting icon as boxer). He used his good access to President Obote to build up his image and influence until he resulted indispensable to the president. Eventually, when he realized that he could yield more power than the civil president, he seized the first opportunity to topple Obote and claim his office. Capitalizing on the unpopularity of the president, Amin made the coup without having the faintest hint as to how to lead a country. His empty promises of reform and change made to noisy and enthusiastic crowds all over Uganda were soon to be discovered worthless as harsher days were to befall on citizens and foreigners alike. Amin was unpredictable as much as ruthless while giving the impression that he was a very affable person when he needed it most. However, no one could have imagined that he could be such a crazy disaster (and a disgrace) to Ugandan history, to African history.

The Last King of Scotland is all about such eccentricities of Amin and the predicament of Ugandans. It is more than just a film capturing the emotions of Uganda under Amin. Such story could very easily be lent to other African countries where similar regimes reigned supreme, where power was never controlled nor checked, where excesses were the norm. Although ‘the Last King of Scotland’ (as Amin was fond of portraying himself) is based on the true diabolic traits of Idi Amin, it is in principle a work of fiction. Bearing on the special relationship Amin had with a Scottish doctor (who later became his preferred and trusted advisor), the story amply shows the ruthless and idiosyncratic personality of Amin, his exuberance in relations with people, and his naivety in diplomacy. Basically unfit to lead even a department, let alone any government, illiterate Amin eventually destroyed whatever was positive in Uganda, left by its leaders and the British colonial masters.

The film shows that arrest, detention, torture, massacre, and mutilation of enemies, supposed or real, became increasingly daily practice in Uganda under Amin as his cronies were awarded carte blanche to take any measure they deemed right to protect their leader. All friends and admirers or sympathizers of the ousted leader Obote were on such list. This meant that thousands were killed at the whims and caprices of these ‘officers’. No one could be guaranteed of one’s safety, and one by one, all suspects found their death by the killer squads. The Last King of Scotland shows all this with unprecedented clarity and frankness. With the expulsion empty handed of thousands of Asian community traders, the back bone of the Ugandan economy, Amin simply gave a final blow to the economic structure of the country. No plans, no replacements. For a while, he may have bought easy popularity amongst his soldiers as they plundered the jackpot while those who did not like the wealthy and aloof Asian community viewed Amin as their Messiah for adopting such a bold move.

Anxious only of making the headlines and carrying out what he instinctively decided or dreamt of, Amin became a dangerous curse not only to his country but also to the whole continent until he himself was ousted with Tanzanian support. There was no leader who was not embarrassed by what Amin did and the film shows all that and more in an intense and convincing manner. The most memorable part of the film is however the extraordinary performance done by Forest Whitaker who personified Amin eventually deserving an Academy Award as Best Actor of 2006. In fact, the film acquired all the glory it deserved also thanks to the superb personification of the young American actor with the naïve but ruthless and exuberant dictator Amin.

Indeed, The Last King of Scotland is a description of an epoch in Uganda’s post independence history and recalls those harsh days. They should not be forgotten. It also calls upon all Africans to check with their conscience and watch out against such demoniacal despots, who do not consider human life more than that of flies, not to talk of human dignity and rights. Killing, torturing and inflicting pain on humans bear them utmost enjoyment. Amin was not the only African leader of a certain epoch that somehow made people long for the outdated years of colonial leadership. Factional leaders of rebels or ethnic groups, as in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Cote D’Ivoire, Zaire, Great Lakes, Somalia, Sudan and many others, seemed to imitate Amin. Africa continues to bleed every where, and its people continue to suffer the atrocities of their ‘leaders’. Any one who has watched the Last King of Scotland cannot leave the movie hall without being impressed by what is on the menu, and immediately raise certain questions: until when shall Africans continue to suffer from such personalities as Amin? When shall Africa attain a certain dignity in the world?!

Lately, there is this issue of ‘re-branding Africa’ high on the agenda of many an African leadership. Whether it would succeed or not is something that only time will tell. As Ethiopia is quite active trying to celebrate its upcoming Millennium and many Africans are joining with such celebration we will have to deal well with our past history and not hide from it, or deny it. Positive change can only be attained if we are at peace with the truth first. In this sense, the Last King of Scotland could be considered a starter, no matter how disturbing. Repeating past errors is unacceptable; one may forgive but not forget.