The DRC Accession to the EAC is Yet Another Cycle of Political Leadership Crisis in The Context of African Regional Economic Communities (RECs)

We now know that the Democratic Republic of the Congo has made an official application to join the East African Community (EAC) endorsement. And following a review of the application, the Summit of EAC Heads of State welcomed DRC on Tuesday, 29th March 2022, following a proposal by the Council of Ministers during their 19th Ordinary Summit. In order to have a more comprehensive perspective, it is necessary to examine the historical context of the RECs arrangement, particularly the paradox of the DRC stance. The conundrum of RECs is not unique to the Democratic Republic of the Congo; most African countries fall into the same category.

The concept of RECs originated with the treaty establishing the African Economic Community (AEC), commonly known as the Abuja treaty. The pact was signed on 3rd June 1991 and became effective on 12 May 1994. At the time, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) suggested the establishment of five regional economic communities comprised of countries from North, West, Central, East, and Southern Africa. The primary objectives of these RECs were to establish a free trade zone, harmonise tariff and non-tariff systems, establish a common market and adopt common policies, integrate all sectors, establish a central bank and a single African currency, to establish an African monetary union, and to establish and elect the first Pan-African Parliament. None of the RECs has met any of the above targets, even the initial steps, over the last two decades, and the projection period will expire in the next ten years. Originally DRC belonged to the Central Africa region Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS). The member States of ECCAS are Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Rwanda and Sao Tome and Principe. Like all other RECs, this bloc suffers from poor governance, a weak institutional framework, insufficient public expenditure, inadequate physical infrastructure and utilities, a lack of resources, and overlapping membership. The DRC, as the region's most populous and geographically extensive country, should have taken the initiative to strengthen its own ECCAS bloc rather than joining SADC and EAC. A similar saying that I adapted to the DRC scenario: "Some countries seek beautiful communities; others build beautiful communities."

?RECs are not an entity that can be joined arbitrarily without considering the long-term impact on national benefit and African unification. The DRC's first membership in SADC was a grave error, but naturally there was considerable pressure from powerful countries in the region. However, the situations are much better now for the DRC to stand on its own two feet and make the correct decision. It was a mistake and miscalculation to bring the DRC into the EAC, just like it was to bring South Sudan. Such a haphazard step that will impede the modest success that EAC has over other similar RECs. By implication, it will wreak havoc on the internal processes of many RECs, most notably ECCAS, which will lose its already precarious status. As a result of current duplication of membership, this generates conflict of interest between SADC and EAC. Additionally, one nation joining multiple blocks results in a delay in the implementation of AfCFTA and a delay in the formation of a continental economic community.

The DRC's socio-cultural boundaries are more compatible with Angola, Congo Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, and Sao Tome and Principe; this covers topographical, psychological, historical, political, and economic parameters. Given these realities, the DRC has only a tenuous connection to the EAC and SADC, and incorporating the existing ECCAS setup does not make sense. The "OAU-AU" has set a lofty target for African RECs. Still, they have fallen short for various reasons, including the top-down approach and lack of citizen participation, clientelism, unnecessary enlargement, and membership duplication. Primarily, imperial ideology regards expansion regimes as African, which is entirely superfluous. Because if the AU succeeds in establishing a single economic society for all Africans, every nation benefits regardless of whether it is a member of the same RECs. The most perplexing aspect of this matrix is that when countries join or leave RECs, they do so without consulting citizens or appropriate national bodies or the AU. What matters in the contemporary framework of African politics is the sole duty and willingness of the head of state because popular opinion is irrelevant in the absence of accountability that requires an adequate response. Thus, the AU should establish a committee to examine and recommend appropriate reconfigurations of RECs. This step will assist in reducing duplication of effort, resource allocation, and confusion in the pursuit of a single economic community.

Yours in Pan Africanism

Seife Tadelle Kidane (Ph.D.)

President of Africa Speaks ?

?

?