As some Africans are seemingly struggling to accept one another, Africa’s ambitious drive towards continental integration is facing a contradiction that could prove more damaging than tariffs, border controls or trade barriers.
At a June Invest Africa conference in London’s historic Guildhall, governments, investors and business leaders spoke enthusiastically about the opportunities offered by the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), the world’s largest free trade area by participating states. With more than 1.3 billion people and a combined GDP running into trillions of dollars, the continental market is being presented as a major engine of Africa’s economic transformation.
One of the visions presented at the conference was that of transforming Durban into the “Dubai of the Indian Ocean” — a modern hub of finance, tourism, investment and infrastructure serving the wider African market.
Yet, while such visions were being discussed thousands of kilometres away, another reality was unfolding on the streets of Durban. Black Africans from other countries were being targeted by anti-migrant activists and told to “go home” ahead of a looming June 30 deadline.
The contrast could hardly be sharper. At the investment conference, Africa was being imagined as one interconnected economic space. On the streets, however, the meaning of “Africa” appeared to stop at the national border.
Anti-migrant activist Nkosikhona Ndabandaba offered a strikingly different interpretation of the same economic vision. His argument was that foreign Africans could come to South Africa to perform labour while indigenous South Africans, as the supposed owners of the country, would ultimately enjoy the wealth generated.
Remarkably, both visions invoke a similar economic model but assign its benefits to different groups. Investors see Africa as a continent of opportunity and mobility, while some citizens see the arrival of fellow Africans as competition for jobs, businesses and scarce resources.
The people at the heart of AfCFTA — traders, nurses, engineers, builders, farmers, entrepreneurs and other ordinary Africans — risk becoming an afterthought.
This exposes one of the uncomfortable contradictions of contemporary Pan-Africanism. Africa wants foreign capital to move across borders, businesses to expand across countries and goods to circulate freely, yet fellow Africans seeking economic opportunities can still encounter suspicion, bureaucracy, discrimination and, in the worst cases, violence.
The question, therefore, is whether Africa can build a single market without first developing a stronger sense of shared belonging.
When economic hardship becomes xenophobia
The problem goes beyond South Africa though the country reportedly has become one of the most visible theatres of anti-immigrant sentiment on the continent.
Across Africa, economic hardship, unemployment and inequality are increasingly creating fertile ground for resentment against migrants. Instead of confronting the structural causes of poverty and weak economic opportunities, political and social frustrations can easily be redirected towards people perceived as outsiders.
Social media has further complicated the situation. National rivalries, ethnic chauvinism and anti-foreigner narratives can spread rapidly online, creating hostility between communities that, in many cases, share history, culture and even family ties.
This presents a serious challenge to the idea of Pan-Africanism.
Political leaders continue to speak about African unity. Continental institutions continue to promote integration. The African Union has even recognised the African diaspora as the continent’s “Sixth Region”.
But political declarations alone cannot create continental solidarity.
There must also be an ethic that governs how Africans treat one another.
Africa needs a Pan-African ethic
The development of a Pan-African consciousness has received considerable attention, but the question of a Pan-African ethic deserves equal consideration.
What obligations does a host country owe an African visitor, migrant or entrepreneur? And what responsibilities does that visitor owe the society in which he or she lives?
The answers should involve reciprocity.
Hosts should protect the dignity and basic rights of fellow Africans, while migrants and visitors should obey the law, respect local customs, contribute positively to society and recognise that integration comes with responsibilities.
Hospitality cannot mean unlimited entitlement. But neither can citizenship become a justification for hostility towards fellow Africans.
These are not merely immigration questions. They are questions about what kind of continental community Africa wants to become.
The borders inherited from colonial rule divided the continent into separate states, but those borders did not erase the historical, cultural and economic connections that existed long before European partition.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Africans reclaiming their ethnic histories, kingdoms, languages and cultural identities. The danger begins when those identities become instruments for determining who belongs, who deserves opportunity and who should be treated as an outsider.
The transition from anti-colonial solidarity to post-independence competition has made the challenge even more difficult. During the liberation era, African countries often understood their struggles as interconnected. Today, they compete for investment, jobs, markets, resources and political influence.
That competition is understandable. But when it turns fellow Africans into enemies, continental integration begins to contradict itself.
A market without trust
AfCFTA can remove tariffs, simplify trade and encourage investment. It can create new markets and stimulate economic growth but no treaty can manufacture trust between people.
That may ultimately be Africa’s greatest integration challenge.
A common market requires more than the movement of goods, services and capital. It also requires people to move, work, trade and interact with a reasonable expectation of safety, dignity and fairness.
If capital can cross African borders more easily than Africans themselves, then the continent risks building an economic union that benefits investors while leaving ordinary people divided by fear and resentment.
Africa therefore needs to build its economic integration alongside a shared civic ethic — one founded on reciprocity, hospitality, mutual responsibility and respect.
The success of AfCFTA should not be measured only by the volume of goods crossing borders or the billions of dollars in new investment attracted to the continent. It should also be measured by whether an African trader can enter another African country without being treated as an enemy, whether a migrant worker can contribute without becoming a scapegoat, and whether citizens can distinguish legitimate economic concerns from hatred of foreigners.
Africa cannot build one market while maintaining a fractured social consciousness.
The real test of Pan-Africanism may therefore not be whether Africa can open its borders to trade but whether Africans can open their hearts to one another.
AFP
