Earlier quoted context omitted.
A "devil's advocate" can refute that by either narrowing or broadening the scope to great individuals/civilizations. When was the last time you heard about african Nobel prize winners? Or african artists/composers? African philosophers or generals? The asians have Confucius, Sun Tzu, etc. speak for them. Whom do the africans have?
You asked "when was the last time..." for Africans as if you were referring to recent history, then went back to Confucius and Sun Tzu for Asians? That's pretty funny. So, are you including Ancient Egypt for Africa or only later? Because, as you know, so much is derivative of that civilization. Otherwise, slightly more recently, do Shaka Zulu, Ras Mengesha Yohannes, and Tariq ibn Ziyad, count for generals? How about…
Asians still have advanced countries, on par with the biggest and largest white majority countries, do they not? Modern Egypt is a backwards country that is not even in top 100 countries by GDP, HDI, or whatever combination of meaningful metrics to describe a country's civilization level you might choose.
Peace prize is meaningless since Arafat and Obama got one too.
Literature prize is better (though nowhere near as good as hard sciences).
In Soyinka's case though, you don't have much of a leg to stand on, because he was educated in a British dominion and moved to the UK at the still tender age of 20.
> do Shaka Zulu, Ras Mengesha Yohannes, and Tariq ibn Ziyad, count for generals?
No. The first two were either backwards (Shaka argued for strategies that were essentially a zerg rush vs firearms) or woefully unequipped by the standards of the time. Indeed, Shaka's most known victory featured 10:1 numerical superiority. It was also a pyrrhic victory in the grand scheme of things, as the British sent competent officers later and steamrolled the Zulu.
As for Ziyad, few things are known about him and where's his "Art of War" or "On War"?