The daily newspapers of the world are constantly filled with lurid stories of African corruption. The Nigerian press, in particular, is filled with daily stories about the Halliburton Scandal, the Siemens Affair, etc. or the venality of one of a number of governors who has taken funds from companies for special favours. These are all, by and large, true. It is on record that Halliburton and associated bribes totalled almost US$200 million in commissions for support on the LNG projects. These payments have been admitted to in the several trials held in the US. There have been many other such case but with a lower payout.

While these acts of corruption have embroiled the political leaders in a series of related scandals this has led to a great deal of soul-searching within Nigeria as to where they have gone wrong; how they have allowed such a situation to develop. One of the key problems in making these judgements is that they lack balance; they compare themselves to an absolute standard of honesty and transparency and find themselves wanting. This is reinforced by the harsh judgements of the Western press; especially from the U.S. To any honest observer of the word scene the attitude of the West and its criticism of Africa is pure, unadulterated, pious hypocrisy.

Suppose, for example, the US$200 million paid in commissions in the Natural Gas business was paid, not as a bribe or a commission, but as a lobbying fee paid to Mr. Tesler and Mr. Chodan for using their influence in Nigeria on behalf of Halliburton. That would have been legal and would represent exactly how these companies do business in the US and at the European Community. In the US these lobbyists dispense vast sums of money directly to candidates as contributions to their political campaigns and also to members of committees which control regulations and the awards of tenders.

According to the latest statistics, see especially the website OpenSecrets.org, the number of registered Lobbyists in DC total almost 12,000. More are brought in when important legislation on Wall Street reform, health care, and military procurement is being discussed. Right now in DC their numbers are magnified by the host of additional lobbyists brought in by BP. BP, according to the Washington Post, has hired a who's who of Washington public affairs experts, including a former member of President Clinton's Justice Department and an adviser to former Vice President Walter Mondale hired as lobbyists, and the former press secretary to Vice President Dick Cheney who has been hired to head the PR shop of the company's U.S. division. Others in the oil industry have forked out for lobbyists to make sure they can continue offshore deepwater drilling.

This is big money indeed. If you don’t count direct contributions to candidates campaigns or political party contributions, the level of lobbying averages around US$ 4 billion annually. One can add about US$3.5 billion in direct payments to candidates and their parties (more during election years). Foreign governments pay these lobbyists an additional US$3.8 billion. So, in a normal year one can assume a gross lobbying pot of almost US$11.5 billion. That is a US$11.5 billion paid to lobbyists for distribution to politicians and political parties.

Another big pot of gold is found in Brussels where over 15,000 lobbyists ply their wares trying to influence the European Union. There are fewer contributions to individual MEPs because they mainly have sinecures, not elected seats so don’t really need cash for elections. They do like to travel though so corporate sponsors are free with cash to their lobbyists to ferry MEPs and Commission people on a whirlwind of travel and associated perks. It is small wonder that the EC hasn’t actually submitted a budgetary report that has been ratified in years. Vagueness is the rule and the nudge, nudge, and wink policy the rule Russia is less subtle. They don’t need lobbyists. According to Putin, a high proportion of the Russian economy is simple corruption. Every day in India and China there are exposes of systemic corruption.

So why is Africa being singled out for blame? As I once asked at a Transparency International meeting as it was being formed,” Why are you focussing on Africa? There is more money diverted into corruption in places like Milan, Paris, Chicago or Washington in one day than in a year in some African countries?” I was politely hushed up with the statement that donor countries wanted to make sure their money was being spent wisely and it was they who would fund Transparency. When I asked if that applied to Zaire (now the DRC) I got no reply.

So yes, corruption in Africa is a curse; a tax on development and a barrier to growth. However, in the bigger world the money wasted on corruption in Africa is chump change when compared to others. There are usually two sides to corruption. To concentrate on the recipients is not necessarily the best way of controlling it. We live in a world of self-righteous hypocrisy and there seems to be no end in sight.