Building Blocks

Editor’s note: This essay is available in our print issue, Pan-African Dreams. Buy the issue here.

In a similar vein, the pan-African dream of economic integration through the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) might seem constrained when viewed from 2019. After the deposition of the 22nd instrument of ratification by the Saharawi Republic on 29 May 2019, the AfCFTA agreement came into effect. Yet, four years on, the AfCFTA is still not fully operational. Some might see this as another broken promise.

However, let’s embark on an exploration together and rewind the clocks by 60 years. What happens when we evaluate the AfCFTA from a different point in history? By exploring the essence of pan-Africanism and its changing practical manifestations within African economic integration over decades, we can fully appreciate what role the AfCFTA plays.

Tim Murithi, a peace and security expert, who wrote the leading paper on institutionalizing pan-Africanism, aptly notes that pan-Africanism defies a singular definition, encapsulating a wide range of ideas and aspirations. At its core, pan-Africanism reflects the profound belief in the unity of Africans both on the continent and in the diaspora, based on a shared history of exploitation in differing forms from slavery to colonialism. This history creates a common objective and a collective vision for a brighter future that can only be achieved by working in unison.

The roots of pan-Africanism took hold in the late 1800s, and its growth gained momentum through a series of influential pan-African congresses held between 1900 and 1945, spanning Europe and North America. These gatherings welcomed the rising stars of African leadership, including Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Nnamdi Azikiwe of Nigeria, and Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya, who would later champion independence movements in their respective nations. The congresses echoed the vital call for African self-reliance and collaboration as the solution to crises that plagued the continent. While these congresses lacked tangible financial or political power, their ideas seeped into the hearts and minds of people, shaping the course of history.

1961 was a decisive year as the battle played out on how to translate the ideals of pan-Africanism into practical institutions. Independent African states stood united in their support for African unity, but core differences emerged regarding the path to achieve it. Nkrumah, an ardent advocate of pan-Africanism and socialism, spearheaded the Casablanca group, advocating for a bold vision of complete political and economic integration, culminating in the formation of a formidable federal state—the United States of Africa. The main drive for this political unification was based on the recognition that arbitrary divisions during the infamous Berlin Conference (1884-1885) had fragmented ethnic groups across multiple countries with small populations, leaving them without meaningful political clout.

On the other side stood the larger Monrovia bloc led by Nnamdi Azikiwe of Nigeria. While the Monrovia bloc also championed African unity, they embraced a more tempered approach, prioritizing progressive unification and economic integration. For this bloc the idea of pan-Africanism as a federal political union sat at odds with the cherished notion of national sovereignty, which many African nations had longed for and yearned to safeguard.

In 1963, the two divergent blocs found common ground and forged the Organization of African Unity (OAU)—a historic amalgamation that required compromise and consensus. As with any merger, there are concessions; so this organization stood more akin to the Monrovia vision of pan-Africanism. The bedrock of the OAU as stated in Article II of its Charter, rested on the pursuit of progressive unification, driven by the overarching mission to liberate African nations from the clutches of colonial rule and support their relentless journey towards independence.

Amidst the grand tapestry of African economic integration, the AfCFTA stands as a symbol of unity—as the flagship project of the African Union’s Agenda 2063. Yet, it is anchored in foundations laid by the OAU.

The OAU and the AU are de jure two different institutions, existing at different points in time with similar membership. Beyond their official titles lies a lingering debate in scholarship, about the de facto differences between the two. Some view the AU as nothing more than a ‘cosmetic rebrand’ of the OAU—a superficial transformation with unchanged essence. Others, like political scientist, Paul Adoghame, herald the AU as a new paradigm, wielding the power to interfere in grave circumstances within member states, an unprecedented departure from the OAU’s principle of non-interference. Indeed, the OAU’s reluctance to act decisively in critical security matters led to the escalation of turmoil and tragedy on the continent from numerous civil wars, such as the 27-year-long Angolan Civil War, to the Rwandan genocide. The AU and the OAU are critically different in their priorities. While the OAU’s priority was independence, the AU has a different vision of pan-Africanism in the age of globalization, which is a struggle for unity and sustainable development. However, attempts and failures at economic integration during the OAU’s lifespan create a direct link to economic integration projects within the AU’s timeline.

It’s the year 1980 in Lagos, Nigeria, a global oil price decline has created a dire economic situation leading to sanctions by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. This crash in prices, termed the oil glut by The Times, is hitting Algeria and Libya, Nigeria’s African counterparts, just as hard. Amidst these economic challenges, African leaders convened under the OAU’s auspices to forge a pan-African economic development plan culminating in an African Common Market by 2000—a vision known as the Lagos Plan of Action. Rooted in self-reliance, the Lagos Plan sought full continental economic integration. A decade later, in 1991, the Abuja Treaty was adopted to establish the envisioned common market—the African Economic Community.

However, as ambitious as the Lagos Plan and the Abuja Treaty were, they struggled to translate ideals into tangible economic integration. Amidst their pursuit, the World Bank’s 1981 Berg report championed Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs)—advocating externally oriented, market-driven policies as the means to African economic development. The allure and accessibility of SAPs, backed by global financial institutions, eclipsed the Lagos Plan’s noble intentions. Financial constraints and a lack of political will, hampered the Plan’s execution, halting continental economic integration, while regional economic integration continued to forge ahead.

The last few decades of the OAU’s existence were dark. Security challenges, from armed coups to genocides, tore at the fabric of African unity, seemingly defying the essence of pan-Africanism. Yet, the OAU remained unable to effectively intervene, leading to its disbandment in 2002, paving the way for the inception of the African Union.