Douglas Yates' lengthy review of Oil, Democracy, and Development in Africa reminds me that when we publish, readers interpret or misinterpret our ideas according to their ideological bent or professional capabilities. Still, reviewing any book requires the critic's diligence to read the work with especial care. Mr Yates failed in this regard. Contrary to what he has written, my goal is not to refute the resource curse, although I do discuss it. Rather, my goal is to take a thematic approach that argues ‘to understand the likely path of any country that discovers significant oil reserves, it is necessary to consider conditions the day before the discovery’ (p. 4). A long-term perspective allows an assessment of conditions in countries prior to the discovery of hydrocarbons and considers conditions after production begins. The obvious counterfactual is what would these countries be like now without oil?

Mr Yates misrepresents my book and my views. He lifts fragments from sentences and misquotes my work for his ideological platform. When he accuses me of ‘praising’ Obiang Nguema for hiring a public relations firm to lobby the US Congress, he fails to understand that I am showing how the ruthless regime has tried to subvert US policy. He engages in vulgar invective when he calls me dishonest and disingenuous. Because I discuss commonly known risks oil companies face when drilling, Mr Yates implies I am an agent of the petroleum industry and privy to its secret information. Obviously, he has failed to benefit from his proximity to the Institut français de pêtrole and La Défense to learn much about oil production.

His essay recalls long past debates in African Studies. Mr Yates falls into an all-too-common trap of portraying oil companies and multilateral banks as pernicious organisations. When he says that ‘poor and downtrodden’ Africans are victims of contracts with ‘unconscionable terms’, it reads like the polemics about the continent I seek to dispel. Worse, he condescendingly depicts the Africans as passive dupes. When he asserts Ghana is a cocoa economy, he shows a shocking ignorance. Ghana is a middle-income democracy that exports gold, diamonds, cocoa, and every day over 100,000 barrels of sweet, light crude. My analysis of the Kosmos Controversy confirms that business in Africa is changing; companies can no longer breach contracts and ignore laws at will. He is apparently unaware that different countries post their petroleum laws and contract templates on-line.

Mr Yates is particularly negative about my assessment of democracy in Nigeria and Gabon. He disputes my proposition that the political machines in Nigeria and Gabon are indicative of emerging pluralist democracies. Yet, it is indisputable that vibrant electoral competition in these two countries distinguishes their people's efforts to establish representative governments. Given his misunderstandings, I would guess it has been a long time since Mr Yates last visited the continent. I suggest he do so and re-read the book on the flight.