When Tanganyika and Zanzibar united in 1964 the Ruling party in Zanzibar, the Afro-Shirazi Party and Tanganyika African National Union (TANU) on the mainland were both center-left in their political outlook. Tanganyika and Zanzibar did NOT have ideological differences.This luxury does NOT exist in the EAC. The idea to fast-track the EAC into a political federation is misguided. The region needs time to harmonize its ideological differences and to build trust.…
By Jaston Binala
Good intentions do not always bring good results. This is likely to be the outcome from fast-tracking the East African Community (EAC) political federation. The call is a wishy-washy tall order. The EAC contains serious ideological differences where greed conflicts between member states lurk all over the place.
The EAC set out in 2005 a four-step process to climax into a regional political federation. The steps included first a Customs Union, then a Common Market both of which appear to be making headway. There is now a common EAC passport, economic products appear to be moving comfortably within the region. The third stage, an envisaged monetary union appears stuck. It appears to be a hard bone to chew.
EAC Central Bank Governors met in Arusha in May of 2024 to deliberate on various aspects of the envisaged monetary union. The Committee reaffirmed its dedication to fulfilling “remaining objectives” outlined in the East African Monetary Union roadmap. EAC Central Bank governors appear to confirm stage number three is still a work in progress.
This begs an important question: Why is a political federation such an urgent matter needing the fast-track treatment–jumping the third stage unfinished; and all this happening amid facts and circumstances which indicate rushing the EAC political federation will most likely lead the region into conflicts. What’s wrong with nudging region into political federation as earlier planned, instead of pushing? Instead of fast-tracking.
Greed conflicts have impeded smooth operationalization of the union between Zanzibar and Tanganyika (now mailand Tanzania) for years. And some are still unresolved up to this moment. .A fast-tracked EAC political federation is likely to see repeat of the greed conflicts experienced in Africa’s first and only union—the difference being that this time the conflicts will be between eight sovereign nations or more, instead of two.
Good friendships thrive on commonality of principle; friendships blossom on commonality of world view between participating friends–it does not matter whether those commonalities are built on a sober philosophy, built on a flawed philosophy or nestled on a dilusion. This explains why the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) still exists today in the absense of its original enemy— which were communism and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Communism, at least as practiced in the USSR, no longer exists but NATO has stayed.
Where commonality of principle, commonality of world view lacks, conflict between the presumed friends is likely–which should explain why ECOWAS– the Economic Community of West Africa–is fructured. Those nations share no common principle. They do not share a world view. This explains why some have split to form a differenct grouping.
At the time of writing this post the East African Community contains eight member countries with quite a diverse world view. I do not see a comfortable commonality in political philosopy or governing method. Fast-tracking a political federation in this dispensation is a flawed tall order. What’s the rush for?
One prolific political commentator in Tanzania, Evangelist Kamara Kusupa is pro-fast-tracking the East African political federation, although he acknowledges the EAC contains nations plagued by conflict—nations which include tribalist Kenya, the terrorist-invested Congo DRC and the unstable Somalia and South Sudan.
Evangelist Kusupa believes fast-tracking EAC federation with these troubled nations will quell domestic problems in those countries as local issues are over-ridden and swallowed by the bigger nation that will be EAC federation. I called Evangelist Kusupa to share with him the following reality in nature: Fresh water from the rivers eventually mixes with salty water in the oceans.
What eventually happens is that fresh water is swallowed by the salty water and no trace of fresh water is found in the ocean because oceans are more salty than fresh water from the rivers. Fresh water from the rivers will never change the taste of ocean water.
A greater number of nations in the EAC are unstable. This is the salty water in the ocean. South Sudan, Somalia, Congo DRC and even Kenya are both unstable in my view. Any pockets of stability that may exist in the region will be swallowed by the chaos coming in with a fast-tracked political federation.
Acolades are shouted from roof tops to praise the union of Tanganyika and Zanzibar but one thing is missing from these roof-top songs. Bickering between Zanzibar and Tanganyika has continued from 1964 to this day on various issues mainly economic. And yet Tanganyika and Zanzibar had an advantage when the union was consumated 60 years ago.
The Ruling party in Zanzibar, the Afro-Shirazi Party and Tanganyika African National Union (TANU) were both center-left in their political outlook. Tanganyika and Zanzibar did not have ideological differences.This luxury does NOT exist in the EAC. The lofty idea to fast-track the region into a political federation is a wishy-washy tall order.
A fast-tracked EAC political federation will bring with it ideological conflicts and greed conflicts.
Some artists in East Africa have expressed their concern in drawings. But, as always, politicians tend to be louder–even when wrong; politicians almost always dwarf subtle messages that may carry better truth and meaning burried in drawings, in coffee bar chatterings and even in posts like this one.
The East African Community is a grouping of nations in which some bilateral friendships can be considered Urafiki wa Mashaka’, a Kiswahili phrase which may translate into questionable friendships. One artist presents Kenya and Uganda to be one of these ‘Urafiki wa Mashaka’ couples in the region. But Kenya and Uganda is not the only couple in the EAC embrased in Urafiki wa Mashaka. Kenya and Somalia have never really been friends; there is a lot of distrust between them–but they are all in the EAC now. One would think these nations need therapy before mixing.
One former civil servant in the Tanzania Government during the Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere rule says distrust between Kenya and Somalia is long-standing and difficult to resolve. There are Somali communities on the Kenya side of the- Kenya-Somalia border. These communities have relatives inside Somalia and it is difficult to tell who is Kenyan and who is Somali.
Somali criminals can cross into Kenya with so much ease Kenyan authorities are helpless. This has created tension between Kenya and Somalia.
But Kenya’s conflict with Somali began in 1991 when Mohamed Farrah Aidid led the ouster of Mohammed Siad Barre, accusing him of mismanaging Somalia. Kenya collaborated with the United States of America to attempt removing Mohamed Farrah Aidid from power back then. Americans sent commandos to Mogadishu to attempt the ouster of General Aidid. This American effort failed but created a permanent hatred between the General Farrah Aidid clans/tribes in Somalia and Kenya.
A clarification here is that Somalia is a large country. There may be clans which have no problem with Kenya but clans (tribes) associated with General Farrah Aidid do not like Kenya one bit to this day; Kenya is seen as the closer face of imperial America which brought commandoes to kill General Farrah Aidid in Mogadishu in 1993. The Kenya and Somalia friendship is Urafiki wa Mashaka for certain in the region.
But there is also Urafiki wa Mashaka between Kenya and Tanzania, too, as the two struggle for regional economic supremacy. There is Urafiki wa Mashaka between Rwanda and Burundi as well, and between Congo DRC and Rwanda , where the three EAC member states accuse each other of supporting proxies distabilizing the nations. The most famous of these proxies being M23 terrorists in eastern DRC.
Borders between Rwanda, Burundi and Congo DRC are unstable and these are all EAC member states.
Tanzania is still a socialist nation in its constitution, but which has adopted aspects of capitalism to build its economy. Kenya remains an extreme right-wing nation struggling to compete with the neighboring socialist nation which, like China, is rising after adopting elements of capitalism.
Yes, Kenya and Tanzania share some common interests in economic growth, regional stability, and attracting foreign investment. And yes, the two EAC neighbors have made some effort to resolve disputes but ideoligical and economic conflicts linger. Urafiki wa Mashaka is real between Kenya and Tanzania. Conflicts between the two Kiswahili speaking nations include disputes over commodity testing, job losses to foreigners, and bans on goods like liquefied petroleum gas, milk, and cigarettes. Both countries have also imposed non-tariff barriers (NTBs) on each other.
In 2021, President John Pombe Magufuli ordered Kenyan paultry burned at the border claiming they were being brought into the country without following procedure amid the global outbreak of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI). Kenya and Tanzania have also clashed over plans to build dams on the Mara River, a vital resource for the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem and a major tourist attraction. In January 2024, Tanzania suspended Kenya Airways passenger flights to Dar es Salaam in response to Kenya denying cargo flights for Air Tanzania Company Limited (ATCL).
Conflicts between Kenya and Tanzania are largely economic, although a silent ideological conflict simmers beneath, which may be worse than the economic bickering.
Tanzania remains a socialst nation in its constitution but which, like China, has adopted elements of capitalism to build economy. The socialist leaning does not augur too well with Kenya’s ironclad link to the United States. Meanwhile, Kenya’s ironclad ‘bromance’ with USA is also likely to affect relations not only with Tanzania but also with some other EAC member states. Relationships between EAC member states appear to be largely Urafiki wa Mashaka.
Now enter November 25, 2024: Heads of State of the East African Community (EAC) have resolved to fast-track formation of the region’s Political Federation–the fourth and final stage in the EAC integration process. This resolve was announced in late November of 2024 in Arusha, Tanzania, at the climax of celebrations to mark 25 years of revival of the EAC which collapsed in 1977.
The Kenya President William Samoei Ruto said at the celebrations a survey taken in 2010 indicated that East Africans were fully behind the integration process and supported the establishment of a political federation. The Republics of Burundi, Uganda and Kenya, have already undertaken national consultations on the drafting of the constitution for the EAC Political Confederation, Ruto disclosed, adding that Rwanda, South Sudan and Tanzania had set dates for national consultations on the constitutional process.
On business, Ruto said EAC intra-regional trade had scored the highest in Africa standing at between 25 – 28%. He then explained that partner states were especially benefiting from intra-regional trade with Tanzania, which has overtaken Kenya in terms of volumes of intra-regional trade.
But this is not the first time all this has happened. The first version of the EAC in the 1960s and the early 1970s was equally flamboyant– complete with a customs union, the jointly owned East African Posts and Telecommunications, The East African Airways, an East African Railways and Harbors Coropration and even a single currency. Kenya was the main exporter of products in the region back then.
And, by the way, I am not quoting this information from any book or repeating words from some old man in their 90s. I saw it. I lived the first East African Community before it all broke down. I crossed the Kenya-Tanzania border at Taveta several times without a passport using only a student ID. A customs official or some policeman dressed in khaki shorts would ask “unaenda wapi?!” (Where are you going?”). On responding you were going to school the policeman would ask “Wapi ID?” That is all you needed to cross the border–a school ID to go anywhere in East Africa.
Then it all broke down. I remember I had to be flown by charter plane from Dar es Salaam to go back to school in Mombasa after a one month vacation in 1977. The land borders between Kenya and Tanzania had been closed while the skies were still open. A Baptist Mission pilot named Codel Akin flew the Cesna plane with just the two of us on board. It was such a beautiful flight crossing the Lunga-lunga border post in Tanga from above. It was the first time I flew and I never could stop talking about it for a long time.
But what happened exactly? The EAC was a wooden house built of fake friendships, Urafiki wa Mashaka; fake in the sence that the three nations comprising of the original EAC differed in political philosophy and governing method—like is the case now, but in a multiplicity of members and a multiplicity of political philosophy.
Common knowledge says the first EAC version collapsed because member states operated different economic systems in which Kenya was capitalist while Tanzania was socialist. There is a little clarification here from a former Tanzania civil servant present in 1977 when the EAC collapsed. The genesis of the 1977 EAC collapse is rooted in political ideology difference between Kenya and Tanzania.
The Government of the United States of America, working through its Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the Second World War (WW II) allegedly pushed the United Kingdom into giving independence to all of its colonies in Africa—which would include Kenya and Tanganyika. Was it American benevolence? Not really.
British companies had dominated resource bases in Africa and the USA did not see how its companies would get easy access to those resources in the continent. After independence it would be easier for American companies to access resources through weak, corrupt, poorly educated indigenous African governments.
Schemes were put in place at the end of WW II to effect a secret agreement between USA and the UK to give independence to African colonies. Kenya had been declared a permanent colony by the British as opposed to Tanganyika which was designated a protectorate. There were two parallel operations toward independence in Kenya. One operation involved indegenous freedom fighters seeking to root out white minority land occupiers. The other dynamic involved the British grand plan agreed with the CIA. Tanganyika would be independent in 1961 while Kenya would be independent in 1963.
It is understood in Tanzania that Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere asked the lead freedom fighter in Kenya, Jomo Kenyatta, if he would agree to formation of an East African Federation at independence if Tanganyika would delay its independence day for three years in order for its independence to coincide with Kenya’s Independence Day in 1963. Jomo Kenyatta refused. Kenyatta felt Nyerere’s socialist orientation was not palatable to his vision of the Kenya he wanted. He was afraid Nyerere would turn Kenya into a socialist state and he didn’t like that.
Publicly available information presents economic issues as a major factor in the collapse of the first EAC in 1977 with contributing factors including failure by some member states to sustain the General Fund Services budget, disproportionality in the number of seats each country had in decision-making bodies, and that benefits from the EAC were not being shared equally among the member countries. But ideological differences carried more weight in the collapse according the former civil servant.
The new East African Community (EAC), headquartered in Arusha, Tanzania, is a regional intergovernmental organisation of eight partner States which include the Republic of Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Republic of Kenya, the Republic of Rwanda, the Federal Republic of Somalia, the Republic of South Sudan, the Republic of Uganda, and the United Republic of Tanzania.
The Federal Republic of Somalia was admitted into the East African Community on 24th November, 2023. The Federation became a full member after depositing her instrument of ratification of the EAC Treaty with the EAC Secretary General on 4th March, 2024. The region is home to an estimated 302.2 million citizens.
President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda spoke at the November 2024 EAC Heads of State Summit in Arusha, noting that the formation of an EAC Federation had been agreed in 1963 by the EAC’s Founding Fathers –President Jomo Kenyatta (Kenya), Dr. Apollo Milton Obote (Uganda) and Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere (Tanganyika, now Tanzania) – but complained that bureaucrats tasked with seeing through the assignment did not follow up on the matter. Museveni reflected on the missed opportunity to establish the EAC Federation in the 1960s and attempted to answer a critical question: What exactly happened in 1977? Well, “some actors let us down and did not follow up on the…idea of forming a political federation,” he said.
Museveni said East Africa’s Coastline, the Great Lakes and Lake Victoria Basin regions were all a Connected Trade Area (CTA) interlinked by trade routes along the current Central and Northern Transport Corridors extending all the way to Mesopotamia in present day Iraq. The partitioning of Africa into spheres of influence in 1884 by the European colonial powers disconnected the CTA by segmenting it into separate countries. Fast-tracking the EAC political federation would start to undo the damage done by both the partitioning of Africa and by the “actors” who let let us down, he said.
Museveni’s good intensions notwithstanding, however, distrust and political philosophy variences in the region are likely to negatively impact outcomes in the new quest for an EAC political federation. The region needs time to iron out differences.
In June 2024, the Biden Administration in the United Setates published on the White House website a document declaring Kenya a ‘Major non-NATO Ally’, which makes Kenya the first country in sub-Saharan Africa to hold that designation. But this designation only confirms what has existed for years between Kenya and the USA. Kenya was like Taiwan—but in East Africa. The US State Department says it treats Taiwan as a Major Non Nato Ally without formal designation.
A major non-NATO ally (MNNA) refers to a country that is not part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), but has a deep strategic and security partnership with the US. It is a designation that denotes a high level of trust.
Britain maintains a military base at Nanyuki in Laikipia County, Kenya. The United States of America maintains a military base at Lamu County on the Kenyan coast.
With these foreign bases on its soil Kenya takes the posture of a British-American proxy in the region, creating fear Britain or the United States of America or both might take steps to exert their influence in the EAC through Kenya, which will most likely ruffle feathers in Somalia and other nations in the region.
The Federal Republic of Somalia can not be described as a very good friend of the United States. The US embassy in Kinshasa was recently burned as Congolese vented anger against the USA. This could mean Congo DRC, a new member of the EAC is another country in Urafiki wa Mashaka with Kenya. Which brings the number to three EAC countries in questionable friendship with Kenya that is obvious.
Nairobi defines itself as a friend to all nations of the world–a friend to China, a friend to the USA. Jackson Okata, an independent Kenyan journalist based in Nairobi, Kenya, quotes one Dennis Muniu, a policy analyst at the Global Centre for Policy and Strategy (GLOCEPS) as warning Kenya its stance will cost the country. Absence of a well-defined foreign policy framework guiding Kenya’s engagement with major geopolitical actors, such as China, Russia, the UK and the US, leaves the country vulnerable to external pressure and influence. Kenya thus lacks the ability to assert its interests independently, which increases its susceptibility to shifting global dynamics.
At the regional and continental level, Kenya’s foreign policy inconsistency risks weakening its continental standing, particularly if it is seen as indecisive, or opportunistic at a time when the country is seeking to take over the leadership of the African Union Commission. Other pro-East nations might view Kenya as a proxy of the West and this could alienate African leaders aligned with Russia and China, particularly in West Africa, Okata writes.
Distrust among friends can be costly. And I have two examples in this regard. In 1962 a Mozambican national named Samora Machel collaborated with a Mozambican history and anthropology university lecturer named Eduardo Mondlane to found a political-military organization called FRELIMO to liberate Mozambique from portugues rule.
In the 1960s, the portugues colonizing Mozambique and Angola had vowed they would stay in Africa for another 500 years. But freedom fighters in Mozambique and Angola had decided they would cut that stay short. This is what brought Samora Machel and Eduardo Mondlane together.
Unfortunately, however, Eduardo Mondlane was married to a pretty American woman named Janet, and she was white.
It is strongly speculated to be true that members of FRELIMO found it extremely difficult to trust Eduardo Mondlane in their ranks because he was married to a white woman. Frelimo could not trust Janet. But Mondlane was FRELIMO co-founder. Then FRELIMO made a difficult decision at one point to protect the liberation movement’s military operations. Mondlane was killed allegedly through a covert operation. It is strongly speculated that FRELIMO sent a parcel bomb from Tukuyu in Mbeya region of Tanzania, to Mondlane in Dar es Salaam, where the bomb exploded and killed him.
One version of this story claims the portugues killed Mondlane but a source usually truthful says the Mondlane assasination was an ‘inside job’ to deal with distrust.
Back in the early 1950s Belgian and American spies started to prepare Joseph-Désiré Mobutu to become a Western ‘asset’ in the African Great Lakes region. As still a young lad, the future dictator in Congo-Zaire, now Congo DRC, stumbled into hands of a benevolent Belgian woman who taught him to read and write fluent French. Mobutu later joined a church school where priests running the school found him naughty.
The Belgian priests sent him to a Belgian army camp as punishment. But in a twist of fate the punishment opened Mobutu’s door into the Belgian Sûreté and the American CIA. In the army corps the future Sûreté and CIA asset was trained as a non-commissioned accountant typist; never a lesson in military tactics and strategy. Mobutu became a military man without useful military competences—a fake soldier of sorts.
But his French writing skills paid off. After leaving the military corps Mobutu took a short course in accountancy then he turned to journalism, writing under a pseudonym for the popular Actualités Africaines magazine. It was during this time that he married his first wife, Marie Antoinette allegedly with some help from the Belgian Sûreté in dowry payment.
In 1958 Mobutu travelled to Belgium to cover the World Exhibition in Brussels, his first time leaving the Congo. He stayed in Brussels for some time to train as a journalist while continuing to publish articles in Actualités Africaines magazine in Congo Zaire. Some public documents contend it was during this time in Brussels when the American CIA assessed the future dictator and agreed with the Belgian Sûreté Mobutu was ‘a good catch’ for a secret agent.
In 1961, Belgian and American secret agents ploted a succeessful scheme to kill Patrice Émery Lumumba, the first prime minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Conditions were then created to place in power the poorly trained military officer-cum-accountant cum- journalist. Mobutu became president of Congo Zaire. But in the wake of Patrice Lumumba’s murder, African freedom fighters across the continent had figured out Mobutu was an agent of the enemy; an agent of Western emperialism.
Mobutu would never be trusted by the African National Congress (ANC), he would never be trusted by the South West African People’s Organizaton (SWAPO), He would never be trusted by the Tanganyika African National Union (TANU–which would later become Chama Cha Mapinduzi, CCM). But the Organization of African Unity (OAU), now AU, allowed all leaders from independent African nations to attend OAU Summits in Addis Ababa.
The OAU had formed a special committee to spearhead liberation of all African countries still under colonial rule in Southern Africa. A Tanzanian named Hashim Mbita chaired the committee co-ordinating weapons imports and shipment to all armed groups in Southern Africa.
One day the Liberation Committee presented a request in the OAU general assembly calling for volunteer nations to join a group of nations which would lead others in the struggle to liberate South Africa, Angola and Southern Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe which were still under foreign occupation.
Presidents from Zambia, Tanzania and Uganda had met earlier at the small town of Mulungushi in the Central Province of Zambia to discuss African liberation. This is where the idea to create the Frontline States was born–and this is why the three presidents who met here became known as “The Mulungushi Club”.
Mobutu volunteered to join the Frontline States at the OAU Summit in Addis Ababa. But…did anybody want Mobutu in the Frontline States? You guessed right…nobody wanted Mobutu in. What followed was a series of political pranks to avoid him. And the reason was distrust. African liberation was more important to this continent than risking to allow a known, Western emperialist proxy, in the works.
The Mulungushi club invited all volunteering Presidents to the first Front Line States meeting in Arusha, Tanzania. A specific day was set for this meeting. President Nyerere announced the meeting date and invited Mobutu as well. But the timing was changed; all wanted delegates were redirected to Mwanza in northern Tanzania in the middle of the night one day before the scheduled date.
President Mobutu flew all the way from Kinshasa to Arusha on the scheduled date only to be met at the airport by security personel who informed him the meeting had been postponed. The Mulungushi Club refused to trust African Liberation to a known agent of Western empirialism.
The East African Community needs more time to build trust between member states, and to work toward harmonization of governance method and political ideology. Fast-tracking political federation will not give the region time to build trust, and time to harmonize political ideology. This should lead the region in the direction of gradual integration–nudging the region into a political federation instead of rushing. Trust is key for unity.
