All of the French colonies in Africa accepted the offer except Guinea. Under the leadership of the late Sekou Toure, the little country declared that it preferred starvation in independence over bread in chains. Astonished and angered by Guinea’s defiance, France destroyed the country’s infrastructure before leaving. Utilities, plumbing, the currency, government buildings and much more were vandalized and sabotaged as the former colonizers withdrew from the West African country in a huff, leaving behind widespread poverty and confusion.

As we reflect on Zimbabwe’s recent decision to quit the Commonwealth, it is important that we not permit peripheral issues to cloud our analysis. Bitter, emotional debates during the past year about Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe’s conduct have the potential of preventing the African World from understanding what is really at stake in this stand-off. Regardless of one’s feelings about President Mugabe, there should be concern that in the 21st Century, the British Commonwealth remains as the embodiment of institutionalized European capitalist arrogance, paternalism, and a relentless determination to dominate every aspect of every society governed by people of color. Even more alarming is the extent to which many African heads of state have failed to shake a slave mentality that drives them to not only accept, but enthusiastically embrace an institution that preserves European hegemony.

The power imbalance is readily apparent. When the question arose of whether a 20-month suspension of Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth should be extended, South Africa, Mozambique, Kenya, Ghana and Gambia joined in a demand that the suspension be lifted. Notwithstanding the collective opinion of these respected African countries, it was the will of England, Australia and Canada that prevailed, and the suspension was extended. In the tradition of Dred Scott, the message came through loud and clear: "A black country has no rights that a white country is bound to respect."

The original purpose of the British Commonwealth was to preserve the British Empire in a different form. Even today, it is expected that member states will have some level of allegiance to the British Crown. Although the Commonwealth purports to provide services in the form of technical training and assistance with elections, from an outsider’s perspective it appears that the primary attraction is the opportunity to be part of "the club." It is understandable that in an increasingly complex world with an ever-changing political landscape, most countries attempt to avoid isolation, and they are drawn to the Commonwealth for purposes of diplomatic and economic security. However, the difficult – even embarrassing – question for African heads of state is why they seek security in an institution that treats them like children. To answer this question, one must inquire into whether, in fact, relationships of dependency are more appealing to Africans because we grew accustomed to them during slavery and colonialism.

If Africa’s true objective is independence (and it should be), then it is imperative that the continent abandon all vestiges of its colonial past. This includes institutions like the British Commonwealth that deprive Africans of the freedom to fully exercise their right to self-determination. Even if one disagrees with Zimbabwe’s recent policies and practices, as a sovereign country, it has the right to pursue them without interference by outsiders.

Jonathan Moyo, Zimbabwe’s Information Minister was quoted as saying: "These racist leaders are using the Commonwealth to try and punish us over our land reform program... Our problem with Britain and Australia is over the land we took over from their white kith and kin to redistribute to the indigenous black people of this country..." It matters little whether Moyo’s assessment is accurate, the fact remains that European countries possess the wherewithal via the Commonwealth to do precisely what he describes. This is not healthy for an Africa that must chart its own course into the future.

For purposes of security and future prosperity, Africa does not need the guidance and protection of its colonial masters. Africa must unite as never before and strengthen the relationships between African countries and other underdeveloped countries throughout the world. To hell with the Commonwealth! Africa has its own future to build.

Mark P. Fancher is the author of "The Splintering of Global Africa: Capitalism's War Against Pan-Africanism."