TIME TO REDIRECT CONVERSATION FROM “XENOPHOBIA/AFROPHOBIA” TO “SOCIAL COHESION” AND “IDENTITY CREATION” IN AFRICA
MEMORANDUM TO THE AFRICAN UNION COMMISSION IN ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA, ON THE OBTAINING SITUATION IN THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE IMPERATIVE OF AFRICA’S INTEGRATION AS A KEY INGREDIENT TO SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
MORRIS ODHIAMBO, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF DIPLOMACY AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (DDIS), UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI, KENYA
1. Africa is the least integrated region in the world today. It leads from the end – following Latin America, Asia and Europe. This reality is informed by various factors such as the legacy of colonialism and neo-colonialism, the normative framework established by the Organisation of African Unity in 1963 (upholding the sanctity of colonial borders), resource and geopolitical competition within and between African states, the material and economic interests of Africa’s ruling elites, including bureaucrats, dependency as well as the so-called International Division of Labour (for example, Africa’s reliance on export of primary goods), among others
2. Africa’s contribution to the global economy has remained very low at only 2%. In fact, many sources confirm that this contribution has declined from around 3% in the 1970s. The International Division of Labour (for example, reliance on export of primary goods) and the sheer lack of initiative on the continent, majorly accounts for this reality. The continent’s overwhelming reliance on International Financial Institutions for policy direction, has ensured sustenance of this system of exploitation of the continent’s resources for the benefit of other regions
3. Scholarly perspectives that assess the strengths and weaknesses of Africa’s integration processes note a number of factors that inhibit rather than facilitating integration and social cohesion. One of the most important of these factors is the ruling elites’ unwillingness to “pool” sovereignty so as to achieve the greater good for the continents’ largely poor populations. Walter Oyugi (2009) notes that, “the fear of transferring authority to supranational bodies (based on entrenched, narrow politico-economic interests) remains a major challenge that the members have to grapple with…” (Oyugi, 2009: 107)
4. Professor Oyugi goes on to point out the priority given to short-term economic interests of the ruling elites by African states and governance systems as a major factor. He notes that “The African state remains fragile, and leadership is usually used as an instrument that serves the interests of the power holders rather than the national interests. Therefore, there is usually a tendency to resort to short-term economic strategies that serve parochial interests of the regime. Any scheme, therefore, that is likely to weaken the hands of the state in exercising the sole authority in economic decision-making ends up being given only lip service, which is why many regional economic integration efforts have not achieved much in terms of the integration of the economies of member states…” (Oyugi, 2009: 107)
5. Making a direct comparison between the European Union and the African Union, Professor Oyugi concludes as follows: “Therefore, the EU is both in word and deed an economic union but, as a result of steady economic integration, it has concomittantly emeged as a political entity in that ther are areas in which the states have completely surrendered their sovereinty to the EU… He goes on, “In contrast, the AU has not even succeeded in establishing stable free-trading zones, let alone a customs union, a common market, or an economic union. Yet, the AU has been modeled after the EU-but without the implementation commitment (i.e. binding clauses) that make the EU the strong example of regional integration that it is. The AU remains an intergovernmental organisation, which is mainly a cosultative and advisory entity. Therefore, the new nomenclature (that is, the change from the OAU to the AU and the change from the OAU Secretariat to the AU Commission) betrays it, for it gives the impression of an organisation that has reached a higher stage in the integration process, which is not presently the case” (Oyugi, 2009: 105)
6. Professor Oyugi also reflects on the external challenges to Africa’s unity. He notes as follows: “Africa, in its integration schemes, needs to appreciate that its unity is usually seen as a threat to the existing economic interests of foreign capital. Cooperation in whatever field presents a threat to the outside world with which Africa interacts. These actors are usually quick in taking the kind of preemptive measures that would ensure their national interests in the continent are not hurt. And they have by and large succeeded in doing this because most African countries are still dependent on the Western countries and their International Financial Institutions…” (Oyugi, 2009: 106). Needless to say, Professor Oyugi’s views remain relevant not only to Africa’s integration broadly, they are also relevant in deciphering the South African situation
7. Professor Toochi Aniche, who has written numerous articles on Pan-Africanism and regional integration and consistently advocates decolonisation of Africa’s regional integration theory, has grappled with a number of problems and attempted to redirect the theoretical framing of Africa’s integration. On Pan-Africanist solidarity, he points out the following: “The underlying theme of Pan-Africanism is the struggle for social and political equality and freedom from economic exploitation and racial discrimination. Pan-Africanism is originally the perception by Africans in the diaspora and on the continent that they share common goals. Thus, the global dispersal of persons of African descent is partly responsible for the emergence of the Pan-African movement. The movement also emphasizes a celebration of ‘Africaness’, resistance to the exploitation and oppression of Africans and their kin in the diaspora as well as staunch opposition to the ideology of racial superiority in all its forms and manifestations” (Aniche, 2020)
8. To build on the above explication, he adds that, “Pan-Africanism is a recognition that Africans have been divided among themselves, that they constantly compete with each other, are deprived of true ownership of their own resources, and are inundated with paternalistic external actors. Pan-Africanism recognizes that the only way out of this existential socio-political crisis is by promoting greater solidarity amongst Africans. While dialogue and debate in Africa will not always generate consensus, it will at least be dialogue among Africans about possible resolutions to their problems. It holds out the belief that if ideas are not designed by the Africans themselves, it will rarely be in the interests of Africans” (Aniche, 2020)
9. The tragedy of Pan-Africanism is found in both ideological incongruence and the failure by Africa’s ruling elites to make it the mainframe of regional integration despite its rhetorical expression in various policy documents. Africa’s ruling classes have preferred to play the globalist game even though they have understood that this cannot solve the continent’s socio-economic problems – at least not for the majority of poor Africans who survive on the fringes of the capitalist system
10. By and large, Africa’s ruling elites have the tools and capacity to discern that their partial integration in the international capitalist system of production from a subservient position was never a mistake; it was a design. Their acquiescence to it was also their own design to promote narrow material and economic interests thus ignoring a more wholesome approach to the continent’s socio-economic progress. The tragic events in South Africa are both a consequence of this deliberate design and a sign of its sustenance with tragic consequences for the African people today and possibly in future
11. Furthermore, there has been a stack failure of leadership to drive Pan-Africanism on the continent. As Abdul Mohammed (2025) notes in a blog post: “The past decade has seen a degradation of leadership both at national and continental levels. A new era of transactional politics has displaced the Pan-African spirit. The continental project is now dominated by bureaucratic Pan-Africanists-functionaries without political vision or courage” (Mohammed, 2025). It should be noted that Pan-Europeanism played a significant role in the uniting of Europe
12. In addition, “Africa’s position in global affairs has weakened despite symbolic gains such as membership in the G20 and expanded participation in Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – BRICS formation. State capture and corruption have eroded leadership legitimacy. The Pan-African project has been depoliticised, reduced to administrative routine, while external powers continue to shape Africa’s strategic direction through economic leverage and military patronage. The collapse of multilateralism globally has compounded Africa’s vulnerability” (Mohammed, 2025), and
13. Yet prominent scholars of Africa’s politics and development such as Professor Anyang’ Nyong’o write that Pan-Africanism remains the only true logical path to development in Africa. They contend that fragmented nation-states cannot negotiate globally or build necessary industrial capacity alone. This unified approach, they further state, must priorities regional integration and collective political and economic emancipation.
About the author:
Odhiambo lectures part-time at the Department of Diplomacy and International Studies, University of Nairobi, and consults for local and international organisations. His main areas of academic interest are regional integration, Pan-Africanism and collective security in Africa. He has written a number of journal articles on regional integration and contributed to two related publications as a consultant. These are: ‘The Civil Society Guide to Regional Economic Communities in Africa’ (2015) and ‘Towards Greater Civil Society Participation in The East African Community: Challenges and Prospects’ (2010). Recently, he was one of the panelists at a Summer School for Master’s students at DDIS discussing the theme of comparative regionalism. He made a presentation titled: ‘The Philosophical Foundations of Regional Integration: The Case of the African Union and the European Union.’ (odhotiato@gmail.com)
