President Macron was in Africa. He co-chaired the Africa Forward Summit with President Ruto of Kenya, the host of the event. The objectives of the summit were clear and, viewed against the many professions of collaboration emanating from Europe and elsewhere about the need to engage constructively with Africa because it is the future, France’s objectives appeared broadly aligned with the trend. After all, there has been an Italy-Africa summit, a China-Africa summit, a Russia-Africa summit, TICAD, Francophone summits and mini US-Africa summits. France, too, in this vein was merely positioning itself strategically on the coveted continent.
Participation in the summit was impressive. The secretary general of the UN, António Guterres, was there alongside more than 20 African heads of state and government from various countries.
In the formal opening, President Ruto emphasised sovereign equality, investment over aid and the need for a partnership built on mutual respect and shared responsibility. President Macron, in his statement, indicated that France wanted a relationship of equals with Africa, built around co-investment, innovation and shared ambitions. The UN secretary general spoke about Africa’s leadership, the injustice of a global system designed without Africa and the need for respect, investment at scale and reform of international financial institutions. The stage was thus set for the summit, with the hope that it would contribute to the professed need to re-engage with Africa on a different footing.
For some reason, France has been bedevilled by its colonial past more than any other coloniser in Africa. Neither the Belgians, the British, the Germans, the Dutch, the Portuguese nor even the Scandinavian countries that passed through the continent with similar intentions get the bad rap that France gets.
France has been criticised for various reasons in the Sahel: investment projects, including uranium in Niger, that were seen as woefully detrimental to Niger’s interests; past presidential visits and statements, including former president Sarkozy’s remarks in Dakar about Africa and history, which were construed as condescending and disrespectful; and France’s double language on coups d’état — supporting one in Chad while condemning those in other countries.
And then there was the whole Sahel debacle. What began as a project of good intentions to help Mali reconquer control of its territory from jihadists and insurgents became, in the eyes of many, an exercise in selective ally-building by France — choosing sides among Tuareg factions opposed to the government of Mali, ostensibly because they were assisting French operations in support of Mali.
The bigger contradiction, frankly, was an asymmetry of objectives between the French operations and those of the government of Mali. While France may have been content with containment — preventing the spread of insurgency and negotiating for captive Westerners — Mali wanted full recovery of control over its territory. Bamako therefore felt France could do more. In the ensuing diplomatic misunderstanding, France was made to leave Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso. For many African observers, the Sahel debacle was reminiscent of the neo-colonial tendencies France is often accused of displaying towards its former colonies in Africa.
And then came the Africa Forward Summit. It was variously billed as France trying to reset its relations with Africa, privileging investment and co-leadership among equals, and as France trying to gain a foothold in Anglophone Africa after being pushed out of parts of its Francophone sphere. This double reading — of a France re-engaging and a France struggling to hold on to something in Africa — was widely discussed in the press and on social media across the continent.
And then came the Macron scream. On the second day of the conference, in a Tower of Babel-like setting in one of the conference rooms, President Macron is said to have mounted the podium to address delegates who were apparently being boisterous, discussing other matters in the same hall while the president of France was speaking.
For one, the cacophony that Macron tried to calm is itself one of the reasons Africa is always admired yet so often poorly wedded in these Europe-Africa marriages. The continent is almost always speaking in a plurality of voices.
Secondly, the Tower of Babel moment in the hall is itself reminiscent of postcolonialism. The delegates were using non-native languages on a continent that is theirs. One could argue that the voices in English, French and Portuguese raised in the hall may have produced a kind of cognitive dissonance in Macron, prompting him to step in.
So Macron shouted. He quelled the riotous delegates, mostly from Africa. The African media reaction was swift and predictable: France has not changed; it is still wielding a neo-colonial influence and this conference was a sham. How dare Macron shout at Africans? This disrespectful attitude of France towards Africa, many argued, must change. It is neo-colonial. It is condescending.
Was there a message missed? First, Africa needs to get its act together in these kinds of summits. What, exactly, is Africa looking for? Does it have spokespersons or representative countries able to articulate its concerns and reduce the spectacle of heads of state trooping to such meetings akin to students summoned by a principal? Second, the cacophony of voices is precisely why Africa remains on the lower rungs of the international relations and trade ladder. The continent is easily exploited because it too often speaks in many tongues and with too little strategic coordination. Thirdly, are these country-continent summits really necessary? Is Africa being reductionist in its quest for suitors, such that any country can simply convene a summit with the continent? Perhaps it is time for the African Union to assert firmer leadership on some of these questions.
Whatever Macron’s scream was — the decibel, the disaffection, the outrance — it carried a message: Africa will have to learn to speak with one voice if it is to shape, rather than merely receive, the terms on which trade and investment are conducted.
Anthony Ohemeng-Boamah is an expert in African development and socioeconomic transformation.
Whatever Macron’s scream was — the decibel, the disaffection, the outrance — it carried a message: Africa will have to learn to speak with one voice if it is to shape, rather than merely receive, the terms on which trade and investment are conducted
