Random Wiki tidbits:

The current government has announced an intention to hold elections in 2009. These elections would be the first since 1992 and would serve to elect both a new president and a new National Assembly.

The country is the second-largest petroleum and diamond producer in sub-Saharan Africa, yet its people are among the continent's poorest.

Many African states have developed this tendency post-colonialism:

The concept of a gatekeeper state was introduced by the African historian Frederick Cooper in his book Africa Since 1940: The Past of the Present.

According to Cooper, African governments suffer from a peculiar politico-economic dysfunction that derives from a particular historical sequence. Specifically, he contends "Africa was systematically conquered but not so systematically ruled" (2002: 196-197) and hence "colonial states had been gate-keeper states" (ibid.: 5) which had "trouble extending their power and their command of people’s respect... inward" (ibid.: 156) but could control "the interface of national and world economies" (ibid.: 141). The colonial powers wanted specific things from Africa (e.g. natural resources) and hence had only a limited transformational agenda since extraction could occur in the absence of a strong state. Ultimately, the authority of colonial regimes depended on the superior military forces of the metropole, which could easily defeat organised resistance but could neither routinise authority nor gain legitimacy (ibid.: 157). The survival of each colony therefore depended on external resources and support, not on internal factors like in established states. As a result, colonial governments had weak roots in the African countries nominally under their control and therefore could not really govern the social or cultural realms of their subjects. In turn, this external dependence produced an outward orientation focused on ‘guarding the gate’: colonies collected most of their revenues from taxes on imports and exports, controlled entry and exit visas, distributed foreign aid, decided who could move currency in or out, and issued licenses that determined who could engage in business activities (ibid.: 5, 97, 157).

The post-colonial "successor states," Cooper goes on to argue, inherited the mantle of gate-keeper from their former rulers. Independence, however, greatly exacerbated the negative consequences of gate-keeping because whereas before it was taken for granted who would control the gate (along with the power and wealth derived therefrom), in the post-colonial period there was no external military force to impose order. Furthermore, unlike the colonial powers (at least before the "development era" after about 1940) African rulers wanted to impose their authority internally in order to affect a far-reaching transformation of the economy and society. And given, moreover, that control of the gate was an "either/or phenomenon" (ibid.: 159) or a zero-sum game, the stakes of control were extremely high because the winners gained control of resources they could use to entrench their rule. Consequently fierce competition for control of the gate arose soon after independence, and this resulted in the collectively irrational political instablitity that occurred in Africa after independence as evidenced by, among other things, cycles of coups and counter coups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatekeeper_state

Hate to be critical, but the future-prospects part at the end was wanting. I would suggest for TOD to get someone versed in political-economy to maybe contribute a little bit to relevant articles. I could be available (if wanted) maybe the mods could help facilitate the connection with the relevant parties. (provide them with my email, if its not on display--IDK).

I would suggest for TOD to get someone versed in political-economy to maybe contribute a little bit to relevant articles ...

I’m not quite sure what you mean by ‘versed in political economy’. I hope you don’t mean to include the pundits who write for ‘The Economist’ and who, some 30 years ago, predicted that Mugabe would bring peace and prosperity to Zimbabwe, or who ten years ago predicted that South Africa would become an ‘African success story’, or who can’t write an essay on any African country without including the expression ‘sliver of hope’.

My hunch is that the more ‘versed’ people are in political economy the more bullshit they are likely to spatter about. If you want to know more about Africa, ask somebody who has lived there.

From ‘The Economist’, 8 May 1980:

Mr Mugabe, unlike most African leaders, is in a position to deliver on his election promises of peace and prosperity. Peace is already delicately at hand; prosperity could rapidly blossom […] If the rate of growth that the economy clocked up before the imposition of sanctions can be restored (and that means keeping the whites confident and investing), the country could soon be one of the richest in black Africa.

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?source=hptextfeature&s...

No, someone 'versed' would have thought the opposite; I thought that was rather clear.

I am also doubtful of Angola's future prospects. Nigeria demonstrates just how bad things can get when a state becomes highly dependent on natural resource revenue. From a political economy perspective, government dependence on oil revenue can lead to a lot of negative structural impacts, especially in the context of Africa, its history, and current state. Rising oil production engendered much hope and expectation for positive change in Nigeria. None of it panned out.