The rules of engagement between nations and international cooperation are evolving. At present, there are at least three major geopolitical centers shaping global interactions.
First, the Russia-Ukraine war and ongoing efforts at peacebuilding are redefining the power dynamics in Europe. Second, the Israel-Palestine conflict, particularly with former U.S. President Donald Trump’s controversial proposal to turn Gaza into a real estate hub, poses a significant challenge for the Arab nations.
While it does not receive the same level of international attention, the crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is a crucial test for Africa’s ability to navigate this shifting geopolitical scene. Multiple global powers including the U.S., China, the EU, the U.K., and other European nations have vested interests in the DRC. Additionally, within Africa, more than ten countries are involved in one way or another. This put the DRC at the center of a broader struggle, serving as a measure of Africa’s capacity to respond to crises in an era where values are abandoned and diplomacy becomes transactional, and military might and coercive force becomes a go-to solution for everything.
Critical test
The DRC issue is a test for Africa in three ways. First, it measures Africa’s ability to react to and address crises. It evaluates how quickly or slowly Africa responds to regional issues. So far, the DR Congo crisis has shown that Africa’s reaction is too slow to keep up with fast-paced events. This sends a message to the world: as long as events unfold rapidly, Africa’s response will always lag behind.
African unity remains largely rhetorical. While some level of solidarity exists between two or three nations, achieving a collective stance on critical issues appears impossible. This is evident in the weak resolutions from the African Union and the fact that non-African actors have more leverage and willingness to intervene than African nations themselves. Instead of taking decisive action, many African leaders continue to rely on a diplomacy of appeasement.
It still baffles me, that the first public reaction from the Chairperson of the East African Community, President William Ruto, following the M23 advances in Goma was to call French President Emmanuel Macron. While this may highlight the effectiveness of French diplomacy, it just casts a shadow of doubt on Africa’s ability to deliver. So, the second message from the DRC crisis is that Africa is not confident to meet some of its complex challenges, whatever they are.
In desperation, as well as trying to solve the crisis in a pragmatic way DRC president, Felix Tshisekedi, with his team has been moving from Brussels, New York, Munich, London to Washington, enticing global players with a mineral deal, to ensure they don’t make a deal with his nemesis, Rwanda, but also receive as much diplomatic leverage as he can.
New mission for Africa?
And he was right. From the U.S.A., U.K., and the EU have all shown up, I ask myself what if some of these countries didn’t seem to think the Tshisekedi deal is worth anything. The UN resolution on the crisis, sponsored by France, stands as the strongest diplomatic statement in defense of the DRC’s territorial integrity. Yet, this happened in light of the attempts to throttle it from the three African members of the UN Security Council (Algeria, Sierra Leone, and Somalia).
So, message three from the crisis shows that African unity is a facade at the moment, as long as you have one or two or three countries that are against ‘the unity’ it’s enough to make the whole thing blow up. So, the message to the world is clear, get some two or three African countries to accept whatever you are pushing and it’s enough to make the whole African unity struggle.
Borrowing the words from the French President that the world is made up of herbivores and carnivores, that if one remains herbivores, then the carnivores will win, and herbivores will be a market for them. Unless their is deep soul searching in what it means by African Unity, there is a real risk for Africa to just become a food on the table of the world, and frankly speaking, in a geopolitical discussion African is featured as a place, mineral hub, but not people with agency and our leaders seems to be okay about that.
What gives me so much frustration is the current underpinnings in Africa, especially what looks like a complete abandonment of strength in unity, where it matters the most. If there is a call for say Berlin Conference 2.0 today, I believe some African leaders will prepare the agenda of the day, maybe even propose the venue for the meeting.
Furthermore, African leaders have put so much faith in the ‘diplomacy of suitors’ that if the U.S. is acting-up, then there is China and vice-versa, or I will go to Russia, or now Gulf States. But in the shifting dynamic of geopolitics, this is not sustainable for a long run, Africa Unity needs a new mission or the whole continent risks becoming dinner or lunch for some other countries.
Tony Alfred K is a writer and analyst working with The Chanzo. He can be reached at tony@thechanzo.com and on X @tonyalfredk. These are the writer’s own opinions, and they do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of The Chanzo Initiative. Do you want to publish in this space? Contact our editor at editor@thechanzo.com.
