How long will African countries exist as nations?

AFRICANS HAVE TO DECIDE their future, whether they can actually operate as one indivisible entity or will forever remain divided. The various fissures, cleavages and fault lines within and between people in various parts of Africa have historical, social and political underpinnings. The scramble for Africa which came to a crescendo in the 1884 to 1886 Berlin Conference has played a major role in exacerbating the continent’s crises. Arising from the conference was the cobbling and stitching together of many unrelated peoples and cultures in the name of newly formed countries. The fundamental differences have lingered over a century and are rearing their heads in new ways nowadays.

From the outside, many people see Africans vaguely as one, like one would recognise the US, Canada, India or China. For many others, citizens of any African country share much in common. They missed it. The reality is that African countries are multi-ethnic and multicultural. They have disparate sociology. While many of the colonialists did not help matters in the ways they handled the self-governance of their post-independence former colonies, they appeared to gloss over the risks inherent in multicultural settings. The social universe was far different from the Western political templates handed down to the emerging African leaders.

In some countries, the departing colonialists created conditions that would keep some sets of people perpetually in advantageous positions of political influence and power. We have heard over and over again about coup d’etat, violent overthrow and transfer of power down to progenies. They have all proved to be disastrous in impacts and consequences. The British in particular have been accused of preferring and favouring some sets of people over others in the twilight of their colonial rule in Nigeria, similar to that of the greater pre-1947 India that is today made up of India and Pakistan. Legends had it that the disengaging British sowed fears in the Muslim minority in India, leading to the protests and demand for a separate state that became Pakistan. In Nigeria, the tribe that they had to govern by indirect rule became their favourite for continued political supremacy after independence.

Ethiopia has more than 10 different tribes, among which the dominant ones are Oromo, Amhara,  Tigray, Afar, Gurage, Hamar and Somali. Over the years, Tigray people had held sway in Ethiopia’s political leadership and their men have occupied many more influential positions that have more or less formed a basis for discontent among other tribes. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed from the Oromo tribe has been at daggers drawn with the Tigray people since he took position as the country’s leader. He was not pretentious about his opinions and sentiments on the Tigray people. The daring Tigray people stoked the crisis by attacking a military base that served as an alibi for Prime Minister Ahmed to launch an offensive against Tigray armed men known as Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).

As if determined to break and level the Tigray people, Ahmed went ahead with a nationwide general election without Tigray and thereafter launched attacks on the Tigray from November 3, 2020 in what he promised was going to last a few days. That war turned out to last two years, with heavy casualties, human displacements and socio-economic crises on all sides. Prime Minister Ahmed had to accept an externally mediated truce with Tigray, thus ending the war – at least after a heavy toll on human lives and property. The economy of Ethiopia has not recovered since last November when the truce and ceasefire took effect. That was a country voted as having the fastest growing economy for many consecutive years before Abiy invaded Tigray.

Nigeria is a country with over 500 tribes and over 20 huge ethnic nationalities of which three are dominant. However, the fragile peace in the country continues to be threatened, more from within rather than from outside. The exploitation of tribal differences by politicians for electoral gains which was prominent in the 2023 general election has widened the gulf between two major tribes in the country’s south, which may take time and concerted efforts to mend. There is little doubt that the country will move forward in the right direction with the seed of discord germinating and growing. The gains made by the rallying of voters around a candidate from one deprived region have further shattered the chances of hope of many Nigerians for a truly united federal republic.

The power vacuum created by the warring factions in Sudan has further revealed the long-standing rifts within the territorial boundaries. The recent attacks on civilian populations in the West Darfur region by armed gunmen have now re-enacted the 2003 Janjaweed era in which the armed Arabs brutally descended on the Darfur people, killing thousands. The battle for supremacy between the military head and his defiant former deputy and head of Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has turned into tribal conflicts which may yet spread to other regions within Sudan. It may split Sudan down the middle like it happened, leading to the independence of what is now known as South Sudan in 2011. The crisis that followed took the pattern similar to what is playing out presently between General  Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo.

The tribal dimension taken by the South Sudan war of 2013 to 2020 was instructive. The needless killing of each other between the followers of President Salva Kiir Mayardit and his aggrieved and deposed deputy was a test case of tribal cohesion or otherwise in a newly formed country that was barely two years post-independence. After the failure of a military solution, the two parties came together again, ended the war and stopped the killings of their followers in a war of attrition. The story of genocide in Rwanda and Burundi was pathetic. Two tribes that have lived together for so long as members of the same countries descended into the trenches, against one another. Combined estimates of the lives lost in the genocides in both Rwanda and Burundi are close to a million.

The internecine crises found in one country or another, irrespective of the differences in how and for how long they are carried out, will continue to provide a fertile ground for unfettered operations of exploiters of Africa’s mineral resources at their own term. The continued armed invasion of the Goma area in North Kivu province of the DR Congo is doing just that. The same applies to the Central African Republic (CAR) where a lot of precious minerals continue to be extracted by non-state actors while the country still grapples with an unresolved internal crisis. Many national leaders appear ignorant about the global dimensions and links of resources to Africa’s crises.

With increasing emphasis on expensive minerals, especially those useful for the next generation of industrial revolution, it is unlikely that pockets of crises in Africa will decrease. Rather, they will increase because demands will keep putting pressures on Africa’s natural resources. These will in turn instigate more vicious and aggressive reactions from those indigenous beneficiaries who will continue to be up in arms against each other. In other words, financial inducements from extractors of these minerals will lure communities into hostilities. It is doubtful if external mediators will succeed in assuring accord and peaceful co-existence on such matters.

Despite all opportunities for the African Union (AU) to make any positive differences in many warring countries, the continental inter-governmental body needs to do extra work to establish its influence and relevance. But that will be an uphill task in over 50 different countries. It is important for national political leaders to be mindful of this time bomb and work towards defusing it in time.  It is a fact that there is now a resurgence of ethnic sentiments in various parts of Africa. This will create more divisions and distrust between people claiming to belong to the same country.

Tackling the rising spate of Islamic extremism, activism and violent attacks by those who have taken the path of terror remains an additional side to the multidimensional crises. The ease of their trans-border movement and violent attacks can be understood within the context of religious sentiments that make it possible for them to blend in unfamiliar environments. The massive funding from international terror networks also helps them navigate difficult political environments as these easily feed on the existing divisions to carry out their missions. For them, states or nations are irrelevant.

This is in addition to the proven inability of many countries to cater adequately to the yearnings of people within their geo-political boundaries who share the same tribe with others contiguous countries. For them, countries are irrelevant. An example is the itinerant Fulani tribesmen who traverse countries in West Africa, claiming everywhere is home. The invasion of Nigeria by this tribe between 2015 and 2021 caused serious security breaches that claimed thousands of lives. The tacit support given to them by the then President Muhammadu Buhari emboldened them to infiltrate Nigeria, compromising the internal security of the country. Their activities raised serious questions on the efficacy of national border security and control of illegal immigrants.

Whether or not the tribal, religious and itinerant migrants are doing their movement legally is immaterial. The issue that has been thrown up – which requires great depth of thoughts and timely policy intervention is that of the threats to national boundaries and the likelihood of ascendancy of ethnic nationalities. Political leaders in Africa need to be awake to the unfolding realities. They need to learn from Europe, particularly those that are members of the European Union.  Although members still exist as countries, the country-level powers have become attenuated while they ceded some of their sovereign powers to the EU. If the AU truly hopes to be Africa’s political face in the future, a proper recognition of the relevance of ethnic nationalities needs to be made henceforth. Country leaderships need also to recognise that it is no longer helpful to subjugate or discriminate against any tribe by dominant tribes within their respective countries. Such an act can only increase the awareness of and demand for recognition of ethnic nationalities. Leaders should no longer wait until this issue causes ruptures in certain countries. They must work actively to prevent them from snowballing into crises which, in many – if not most – cases go out of control.

• business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com