WeeklySA_AdminSELF-DETERMINATION: Candidates for coming elections for African Union Commission chairperson, set for February 2025, more focused on possible symbolic victory rather than a chance to build continental unity and challenge Western dominance…
By Nicholas Mwangi
With the February 2025 election for the African Union (AU) Commission Chairperson just four months away, momentum has been building among candidates vying to succeed outgoing Chairperson and former PM of Chad, Moussa Faki Mahamat, who is stepping down after two terms. The candidates for the upcoming race are from Djibouti, Kenya, Madagascar, and Mauritius. The stakes are high as Africa faces critical issues that require visionary leadership, but the campaign dynamics are also highlighting divisions that historically continue to plague the AU in the run up to every election.
The AU, established in 2002 to replace the Organization of African Unity (OAU), was founded with a mission of strengthening integration, self-determination, and cooperation across Africa. Today, its institutions like the AU Commission and the Pan-African Parliament are meant to promote policy across economic growth, political stability, and conflict resolution.
While not new, when it comes to these elections, the current campaigns appear to focus more on national pride and regional dominance. Winning the AU Commission Chairperson role has become an empty symbolic victory for the candidate’s country, often driven by the desire for regional influence rather than a robust plan to concretely address Africa’s pressing issues that are systematic alongside new emerging problems.
Kenya’s former Prime Minister, who leads the country’s opposition party, has emerged as a frontrunner after receiving endorsement from the East African Community’s (EAC) in Nairobi in an event spearheaded by President William Ruto. This backing places him as East Africa’s candidate of choice, poised to bring the region’s interests to the AU’s center stage. Kenya has invested in AU leadership bids before. In 2017, Kenya’s candidate Amina Mohamed was highly publicized and backed with significant resources, yet ultimately lost to the outgoing Moussa Faki. This setback was partly attributed to Kenya’s historically complex relationships with its neighbors and the Francophone bloc’s strategic unity, which has been seen as less cooperative with East Africa.
Meanwhile, Djibouti’s candidate, Mahmoud Ali Youssef, Minister of Foreign Affairs since 2005 is also gathering momentum, especially after the endorsement by Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and possibly Francophone countries. Colonial and linguistic affiliations remain deeply influential, with Francophone and Anglophone countries often voting along these lines. However, the Sahel region’s recent political shifts, where Burkina Faso, Niger, and Mali have left the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), has cast uncertainty on how the Francophone bloc might align in this AU election.
Africa’s challenges demand an alternative vision.
Given that 60% of the population of the African continent is under 25 years and many countries like Congo, Angola, Kenya, Ghana, and South Africa are abundant raw materials, AU leadership should prioritize visionary policies that unleash the continent’s economic potential and tackle its pressing issues. Africa’s Agenda 2063, launched in 2015, aspires to create a self-determined, prosperous Africa. However, progress has been slow, and many feel that the agenda remains more symbolic than actionable. Although calls for continental unity, visa removal, and trade freedom feature prominently in the current race, historically these campaign promises can become just populist rhetoric, as practical implementation has repeatedly stalled and for various reasons.
Critics argue that the AU itself has also become detached from grassroots issues, focusing on corporate-style, exclusive meetings that lack input from everyday Africans on important issues like health, education, and security. The AU’s decision-making process has increasingly become an echo chamber for African elites, promoting a culture of political clout and regional rivalry rather than collective advancement of the continent. In fact, a core requirement is that candidates must have previously served as presidents, prime ministers, or foreign ministers.
This detachment can also be seen in the context of the recent popular anti-imperialist sentiments in the Sahel. The AU’s dependence on financial and political support from Western powers and institutions like the IMF and World Bank has led to criticisms of it as an extension of neo-colonial influence rather than a body fully committed to African sovereignty. This reliance often constrains the AU’s policies, especially when aligning with Western interests means sidelining the voices of African citizens pushing for a more autonomous and assertive continental agenda.
One activist from the social movements in Kenya told Peoples Dispatch,” The African Union’s dependence on foreign funding, particularly from the European Union and the United States, restricts its ability to adopt policies that truly reflect African interests. When you’re reliant on imperialist powers for support, pursuing independent, progressive policies becomes nearly impossible. As Thomas Sankara said, ‘Who feeds you controls you.’”
The activist stated that, “The AU’s endorsement of neoliberal economic policies reflects this compromise. Instead of promoting self-reliant, people-centered development, it pushes for foreign investment, privatization, and market liberalization, aligning itself with global capital rather than the welfare of African people.”
“Its historical reluctance to support anti-imperialist movements shows the AU’s alignment with, or at best, passive permission of imperialist interests. From Western military bases to corporate exploitation, the AU remains silent or compliant. Many African heads of state involved in the AU benefit directly from Western alliances, using these relationships to secure power domestically. As a result, the AU prioritizes stability for the elite rather than progressive change for the many.”
As the AU Commission Chairperson race continues, we are left wondering if the next leader will bring about a substantive shift toward Africa’s true strategic interests, challenge neo-colonial and imperialist interests, and transcend regional rivalries, or simply continue to perpetuate the AU’s symbolic role in global politics. February’s election should mark a shift and not another chapter of continued missed opportunities for Africa’s future.
* Nicholas Mwangi is a member of the Ukombozi Library in Kenya
Comment
LET THERE BE PEACE IN HARTIES
The racial tension, driven by an unrepentant group of Afrikaans-speaking whites in the Hartebeespoort Dam area in North West, which has resulted in several black-owned businesses being set alight, has again confirmed that racism was still a feature of everyday life in certain parts of South Africa.
Despite the dawn of democracy since 1994 and the abolishment of racist laws, the country still experienced acts of discrimination which, in some cases, even culminated in savage attacks and deaths perpetrated by certain whites who still believed that Black people were not human and that South Africa was still being ruled by the apartheid regime.
The racist attacks on businesses owned by Blacks in the Hartebeespoort Dam area are happening at a time when the magistrates courts in several parts of the country were dealing with cases of racial attacks. They included the savage murder of two innocent women who were shot dead and their bodies fed to pigs allegedly by three suspects including two white men and a farm labourer – an illegal immigrant – who were arrested and are currently facing charges of murder and attempted murder.
In another incident, an elderly white farmer allegedly drove over a six – year- old boy and broke both his legs for stealing an orange on his farm. In the Hartebeespoort Dam area, black-owned businesses were being targeted simply because a group of whites believed that this was their enclave and Black people had no right to trade in the area. Deputy Minister of Water and Sanitation, David Mahlobo, has however made it very clear that all the dams in the country belonged to the State but were previously used on a racial basis by the apartheid regime.
Mahlobo and North West Premier, Lazarus Mokgosi, have now launched a committee to look into different issues affecting the stakeholders operating their business at state-owned land around the dam and settlements around the water resource. By bringing together stakeholders from various sectors, the committee sought to encourage economic development and opportunities for all and to ensure the sustainability and health of the dam. The committee will also address disputes among businesses operating at the dam and will strive to promote the harmonious use of the state-owned land and access to dam economy.
We wish the committee all the best in its endeavour to find a solution to the racist tension that has now brought destruction, fear and hatred to this tourist hub.
It would obviously require a lot of commitment to dismantle the entrenched racist and discriminatory systems in the area but we hope members of the committee would have enough wisdom to drive some sense into the heads of those who still believe that apartheid was alive.
Black people have endured racial segregation for many years. And history has proved that racism is a sin that has no room in the world.
Human beings cannot be hated and discriminated against simply because they are of another colour, race or religion.
