Regionalism as a Tool of Global Governance and Development:  The Case of a Divided Africa

Bola A. Akinterinwa

Governance is the art of government. Government is the institution while governance is about how the institution functions. It is about system of rules, structures, especially decision-making, processes, accountability, management of resources and information to build public trust. In terms of typology, there are three main types: public sector governance, which deals with the management of resources, delivery of services, and enforcement of rule of law by Government.  The second type is corporate governance, which is about business involving the direction and control of companies in the balancing of interests of shareholders, customers, suppliers, and customers. The third category is global governance.

Global governance is about the application of international rules, conduct and management of processes, and administration of institutions in order to maintain global peace and security. The rules, processes, and institutions are not centralized and are basically tools for the management of global affairs, such as climate change, human rights, peace and security, economic security, etc. Global governance is sometimes referred to as ‘governance without government,’ and, therefore, largely relies on cooperation, rather than on any supranational government. Global governance is not at all state-centric and is mostly concerned with questions that transcend national borders.

More concernedly, in addition to the state-, or nation-state, actors, there are also international organisations, such as the United Nations (UN), African Union (AU), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), European Union (EU), World Trade Organization (WTO), World Health Organisation (WHO) which deals with health crises, International Monetary Fund (IMF) which deals with financial management. There are also the non-governmental organisations and multinational corporations.

Thus, global governance is complex and challenged by problems of power imbalance, lack of, or poor enforcement mechanisms, coupled with increasing nationalism. In spite of its consideration as inefficient and pro-market, as well as not responding to the concerns of the needy, there is no disputing the fact that global governance still helps in controlling, if not, in preventing international chaos. It is in an attempt to ensure efficient global governance that the idea of regionalism was promoted and considered a possible and potent mechanism in ensuring good global governance. 

Regionalism and Global Governance 

The study by Timo Behr (Research Fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, FIIA) and Juha Jokela (Programme Director of the European Union research programme at the FIIA), on Regionalism and Global Governance: The Emerging Agenda, has provided a summary of an expanded analytical definition of regionalism beyond the scope given by Joseph Nye. Nye defined regionalism purely from the perspective of geographical contiguity. As he put it in 1968, ‘a region consists of ‘a limited number of states linked by a geographical relationship and by a degree of mutual interdependence.’ More important, he said a region is the ‘formation of interstate associations or groups on the basis of regions.’ 

From the work of Behr and Jokela, both of the Institut Jacques Delors (Notre Europe) founded in 1996 as a European Think Tank, the definienda go beyond geography to include intensive economic, political, and cultural interactions, shared political values and perceptions, as well as ideational character of regions. Grosso modo, the consideration of regionalism as a potent tool for the conduct and management of international questions led to its promotion in international relations to the extent that both concepts have sometimes become intertwined. Put differently, regional organisations are main pillars of modern international system. They complement global institutions by helping to manage international problems at the regional levels. They are also important actors in global governance. Their operations are multi-layered. Their growth prompted the redefinition and emergence of what is now called new regionalism. The old regionalism was trade-focused in essence, while modern regionalism is new and multifaceted as from 1990. New regionalism underscores political security, normative institution-building, and social questions.

What is important to note here is the differentiation between regionalism and regionalization: regionalism concerns ‘intergovernmental top-down, political and usually highly institutionalized practices,’ regionalization is about the ‘societal, bottom-up and often economically-driven process that is in constant flux,’ in the words of Behr and Jokela.

Even though regionalism and regionalization are sometimes interchangeably used, it is important to note that there is a strong linkage between regionalism and global governance: there is the first linkage and argument that a single state is incapable of handling complex international issue. Consequently, such issue requires collective international intervention, which may also require going to the extent of negotiating an international treaty on the issue. The popular thinking is that, through a strengthened regional cooperation, most nations can jointly and effectively solve economic, political, security, and environmental problems than by acting single-handedly. In essence, regionalism is an effective instrument for the promotion of global governance. Besides, with a well-structured regional integration, peace, prosperity, as well as global influence can always be fostered. 

For example, one main objective of the UN is the maintenance of international peace and security. The achievement of this objective in Africa has been largely helped by the AU, in general, and the ECOWAS, in particular, in the area of maintenance of continental stability and regional peacekeeping. In the same vein, while the EU serves as a model for comprehensive political and economic integration, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) underscores regional diplomatic and economic cohesion. Thus, regionalism involves many pursuits and stages. It begins with the establishment of Free Trade Area (FTA), Customs Union (CU), and then to Common Market (CM), Economic Union, and ultimately to the level of total policy integration. 

In this regard as well, Yaroslav Lissovolik has noted in his Regionalism in Global Governance: Exploring New Pathways, published in 2019, that there is neither vertical nor horizontal connectivity between regional organisations and global institutions. As he put it, ‘regionalism is a force that has largely eluded regulation from the multilateral international organisations, while at the same time taking on ever greater authority in driving economic integration blocs and the global organisations. Additionally, Lissovolik has it that ‘aside from the low degree of vertical connectivity with global institutions, there is also a lack of horizontal coordination among regional economic blocs, which hampers the implementation regional/continental integration projects.’ 

What really does regionalism and global governance mean in Africa? The main purpose of specially promoting both regionalism and regionalization in Africa, and particularly for signing the 1991 Abuja Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community and dividing Africa into five regions is continental integration, continental unity with the expectation of being able to speak with one voice. Today, can South Africa come out to seek nomination to represent Africa at the UN Security Council? This is most doubtful. Can there be really people-to-people direct relationships in the face of this developing hostilities? Can Africa really stand in the face of the emerging new American world order? Can Africa speak with one voice? How do we explain some Francophone countries rejecting France and France quickly shifted to the Anglophones and France was friendly accepted? The warm reception of France in Kenya encouraged President Macron to boast of the attendance of Nigeria’s President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Without any whiff of doubt, Africans should begin to learn and avoid being divided against themselves. Africans should learn how to be Africans and authentic in the mania of Joseph Mobutu Seseko. They should not befriend foreigners in order to spite their African counterparts and countries. Doing so is nothing more than accepting to be divided and accepting recolonization by technology and investment partnerships.   

Divided Africa and Development 

Disunity of people of Africa began with the arbitrary partitioning of land and people of Africa during the 1884-1885 colonial Scramble for Africa. The Scramble completely disregarded ethnic, linguistic, and cultural boundaries, as the European colonialists only used longitudes and latitudes in dividing Africa into spheres of influence. One major problem of the Scramble is its outcome of ethnic tension and political instability. Civil conflicts and economic disparities have not at all helped collective development. The Scramble unnecessarily forced different ethnic groups into single nation, thereby fostering competition, rather than sustaining unity.

President Emmanuel Macron told Africans while in Kenya that if colonization was responsible for Africa’s setback before independence, other reasons cannot but be now responsible for the non-change in status. He cannot be more correct. However, if during the same summit held in Kenya, he still had the effrontery to advise in the mania of a colonial master, telling his audience not to make noise or disrespect guests, this simply means that his colonial garment is yet to be thrown into the garbage of history.

Another manifestation of disunity and development setback is the ethno-religious division that have led to civil wars. Many countries are at war with one another. Somalia has not known peace for decades. So has the Democratic Republic of Congo. Disunity in these countries has not only hindered economic growth and development, but has also empowered foreign countries to have a free hand to exploit Africa’s resources, as well as interfere and intervene in the domestic affairs of sovereign African states. Sudan began to witness peace when South Sudan was carved out from it. But the fragile peace has been thrown into the dustbin of history. Sudan is therefore still in trouble. Africa’s shame and problem has been to the extent that African leaders have to accept unwanted convicted criminals from the United States and Europe. Eswatini and Rwanda are cases in point. They accepted some convicted people in exchange for a paltry sum of money. What type of leaders are there in Africa of today, accepting people declared unwanted in foreign countries? Is it presidential poverty or the people’s poverty that explains national impoverishment for accepting foreign convicted   people? Indeed very shameful!

Africa of today is challenged by critical development setbacks, ranging from deepening politics of Afrophobia and disintegration, on the one hand, to the gospel of African unity and integration, on the other. The politics of xenophobia, and particularly afrophobia, not to mention Nigerianophobia, cannot be consistent with the spirit of African unity, African oneness or with African integration. They are directly conflicting and only worsen Africa’s development setbacks.

And true enough, Africa’s development setbacks are most disturbing. They are about political instability in various nooks and crannies of Africa. They are about economic stagnation, which is largely derived from political chicanery, me-tooism, institutional corruption, environmental degradation, and social challenges. In Africa, democracy is no more an asset or legacy, but a heavy burden dividing the people of Africa in an unprecedented manner. Coups d’état in Africa from the 1960s until the 2020s were largely prompted by perceptions and allegations of poor governance, corruption, and political selfishness on the part of government officials and politicians. The story is different today. The reasons for forceful change of government in Africa are no more majorly internally-driven but external-driven.

Based on the experiences of Mali. Burkina Faso, and Niger, the people are much against France and her alleged engagement in neo-colonisation. They complained openly and were oppressed by their governments. In fact, rather than address the people’s complaints, the ECOWAS was only talking about non-constitutional change of government. The people talk about their right to sovereignty, but to no avail. The military juntas took over power with popular support. Consequently. While the ECOWAS wrongly believes that it was fighting the coupists, it was only fighting the people that should be protected. Thus, it is the people in each of the three countries that are against the ECOWAS as a supranational authority.

Right from the time President François Mitterrand of France made democratization a conditionality for the grant of French aid in the 1990s, African leaders have been encouraged to develop a democratic culture in their countries. The quest for democratic governance got to the extent that a policy of zero tolerance was adopted by the ECOWAS. When the policy was adopted in the case of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger Republic, the three countries decided to withdraw their membership of the ECOWAS. The withdrawal was the consequence of the ECOWAS threat to use force to compel the military junta in Niger to return to civilian rule. The three countries refused to return to the ECOWAS in spite of much diplomatic pleas. They have organised themselves into a confederation and have signed the Alliance of Sahel States

Diversus, a Latin word, meaning diversity, is neither a blessing nor a burden in Africa. Africa is a terra cognita of diversity in various ramifications. Africa’s diversity has generally been poorly managed, especially in the area of education and technology. As pointed out by Takalani Samuel Mashau et al, of the University of Venda, ‘with diversity and disunity in the continent, African countries have realized and embraced the fundamental importance of education because without it, there can be no meaningful development. Education is the cornerstone for sustainable development; it is a tool for producing and managing human resources, for inculcating values, thus ensuring the common bond of humanity in the global village.’ But what is the situation of education today in Africa? 

According to the UNESCO, even though primary school completion rates have increased from 52% in 2000 to 69% today, more than 100 million children are still out of school. Learning poverty crisis remains severe with about 80% of 10-year-old unable to achieve basic literacy. Many schools have no electricity and water. From the perspective of the UNICEF, more than 15 million primary and secondary school teachers are still required by 2030. At the level of higher education, in spite of the increasing enrolment in tertiary education at a rate of 9%, Africa’s higher education and employment growth rate of 9% is still far below the 38% global average. What is mostly required is capacity-building in the area of technology and African youth-focused attention in the area of digital transformation.

Africa needs competency-based learning and greater attention on foundational learning in order to reduce drop-out rates. Unfortunately, however, African leaders are investing less in education than needed, with an annual funding shortfall of $77 billion. The problem of widespread poverty, as well as system unemployment which majorly explains the infrastructure deficit and the widespread internal displacement is another kettle of fish entirely. All these challenges undoubtedly raise many questions and eyebrows, especially in light of Africa’s high debt servicing rate, limited fiscal space, and reduced official development assistance.

And true enough, Africa is divided by many issues. Politics divides and hunger also divides. Several millions of people suffer from widespread food insecurity. Severe economic and debt crises still abound. So are humanitarian emergencies. Famine conditions, costs of living, conflicts and challenges of internal displacement, armed violence and refugee crises, etc. all hinder Africa’s development.

In essence, with the projection of an economic growth rate of 4.2% in 2026, compared to 4.4% in 2025, there is still not much to write home about in the various regions of Africa: East Africa remains the leader with 5.9%. West Africa follows with 4.7%. Central African region has 3.8% while 2.1% is estimated for Southern Africa. And perhaps more disturbingly, life cannot but be difficult if the cost of fuel, food, and fertilizer is on the increase.  Africa is talking about African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) in order to promote trade and manufacturing. To what extent can this be made possible continentally with the deepening trend of Afrophobia in South Africa? Ghana has made arrangements to evacuate its citizens from South Africa for fear of afrophobia in that country. Benin Republic is making strenuous efforts to reconcile with the Member States of the Alliance of Sahel States (ASS), while ECOWAS cannot easily reconcile with the ASS. France was declared persona non-grata but has been replaced with other powers, particularly Russia. French and American military bases have also been sent packing and both the Americans and French are desperately looking for alternatives. President Emmanuel Macron has come up with a new France-Africa Forward Summit as a new paradigm. Which way forward Africa? The African Credit Rating Agency was launched in January 2026 with the objective of providing a more accurate risk assessments. Will this help Nigeria that now has a policy of more and more borrowing? Time will tell.