Your knowledge of Africa is admirable. However, there are a few points I would like to raise.
1. West Africa was the home to many large states in the pre-colonial era with highly developed social systems. Examples include the Yoruba states, Dahomey, the Benin Kingdom and the Kwarafa Kingdom. Central Africa also had many large states like the Kongo kingdom. The Zulus and Xhosas in South Africa also had relatively well developed societies.
2. I agree that there are communities like the Masai, the Pygmies and Kalahari Bushmen who find it extremely difficult to adapt to modern society. Unfortunately, Western media tends to concentrate on these groups creating a warped view of African society.
3. I don’t agree that African have the same problems with adapting to modern society as the native Americans and Aborigines. The success of the African diaspora in Europe and North America shows that the problem is not the inability to adapt to the twenty first century, but the absence of opportunities at home.
4. Indian immigrants are very active economically in Africa but there are other major players like the Lebanese, the Igbo and the Hausa in West Africa and the Kikiyu in East Africa. Kano in Northern Nigeria was and still is a hub of trade between Northern Africa and the Sudan. The Igbo of Nigeria also have play a large role in trade in West Africa.
It is instructive that the richest African is a Hausa-Fulani from Kano.
5. I believe that the Chinese will be more successful than the Indians in the long run. The Indians have a very long history in Africa but have remained a very closed society. The Chinese (this might surprise you), are considered more open the Indians. You are more likely to see Chinese making attempts to interact with the locals than the Indians (they don’t carry the baggage of the Indian caste system with them). In addition, Chinese are more likely to marry local girls than Indians (Jean Ping, head of the African Union is the son of a Chinese trader).
6. A major problem (some say the major problem) with the modern African state is that most African states are artificial. Borders of African states merely reflect French, British, Portuguese and Spanish areas of influence decided in 1884 - 1885 Berlin conference. For example, the British grouped the traditional slave raiders (the Northern Sudanese) with people who traditionally resisted slave raiding (the Southern Sudanese). The Southern Sudanese had much more in common with the Nilotic peoples of East Africa (like the Luo of Kenya) than with the Arabised Sudanese, yet the British still stuck to their guns.
The end result was that 2.5 million people had to lose their lives before a Southern Sudanese state (which should have been created in 1956) came to be.
So much energy is expended in fighting between different ethnic groups in artificial states that development often takes a back seat. A similar situation existed in Europe until the peace of Westphalia was signed and Africa is moving in that direction, albeit violently.
7. The next few decades in Africa are likely to be more peaceful than the previous two for the simple reason that there is finite amount of violence people can take and the growing role of civil society. I cannot see a situation in which Rwanda would revert to the levels of the 1994 massacre in the next two generations and Nigeria has been spared a full blown Civil War because the memory of the last Civil War in which 1 million people died is still fresh. The 2007 crisis in Kenya was resolved because Kenyan Civil society did not want the gains of steady economic growth to be erased by inter-ethnic fighting and the Congo War is frankly speaking, running out of steam.
To respond to your points:
The absence of opportunities -- this is caused due to bad boundaries cutting across tribal lines and also because some societies haven't progressed beyond clan lines. This is not only an "African problem" but also visible in Afghanistan, Albania etc.