Ethnicity_Reflection Memo

The following incredibly relevant question, ‘How did ethnicity gain so much prominence in African politics’, was asked during our last session but I believed not enough was contributed to understand the phenomenon. It is indeed important to understand the role of ethnicity in the current African political scheme, ethnicity being a category of people (or a community) which shares a common language, culture and/or ancestry. But Ethnicity doesn’t only rely on the previous elements I mentioned but also most importantly includes the manifestation of common values, it defines the heritage and history of a people in particular, and ethnicity therefore also defines their aspiration. This is a rather summarised and shortened definition of the term in question but it lays a good basis for basic understanding.

African societies have traditionally functioned on and embraced a sophisticated social and political system based on the (sense of) belonging to a tribe, clan or family where members would benefit from a common language and culture, therefore would have a common ethnicity. However, this system was soon overshadowed by State formation during colonialism which led ultimately to the division of groups and communities and to the assimilation of different ethnic groups into one and only heterogeneous mixture under the control of a foreign power, leader. This was obviously a threat to and undermining the traditional tribal based system which had long been the norm on the continent.

Moreover this bringing together of different ethnic groups under one apparatus would be a source of conflict in the post-colonial era after the independence of many countries from their former colonial masters. Some examples involve Sudan with a dominant North mostly inhabited by Arabic-speaking Muslim communities with a common cultural and religious background. However, it seems that there was no particular dominant culture in South Sudan (mainly dominated by a couple of ethnic groups which shared Christian values and beliefs). Ultimately, this staggering difference in religion and ethnicity between the North and the South (accompanied by disparity in levels of education, of economic growth and investment) led to a civil war and ultimately, to the fragmentation of Sudan into two independent countries. Another non-negligible illustration of this division as source of conflict is the Rwandan Genocide in 1994. The killing of between 500,000 and 1,000,000 Tutsis by the Hutus was on a basis of ethnicity. A last example which is a bit more recent here would be the attempt of the Touareg (Arab Berber population) in Northern Mali to take over control of the North and major cities in a bid to proclaim independence. Inequalities between a poor Arab-Muslim North and a more developed South mainly home to ethnic groups such as the Bambara, Malinke and Sarakole which represent around 50% of the total population. Ethnic divisions, lack of trust of the North towards Southern Mali and social & economic differences between both latter regions lay the foundations for tension and conflict.

Despite the above examples, it is however important to point out the fact that many other African states, despite diversity in ethnicity, still enjoyed a certain degree of homogeneity such as the case of Ghana, Botswana, Kenya and so on where despite ethnic diversity, the State and the Government maintained its legitimacy.

The examples of conflicts due to ethnic pluralism illustrate indeed a common thinking that the wide variety of ethnic groups in a country is or can be source of conflict. However, it seems that there is also a rising trend in believing that ethnicity is also embraced by politicians and is thus seen as an advantage.

Indeed, just as discussed during our previous session, Ethnicity plays an important role in the structure of political parties in Africa. Ethnicity plays a vital role when it comes to the support for a party. We have witnessed and are still witnessing today an ethnic related vote in many cases. However, I should point out that it would be more beneficial for a ruling party to gain a multi-ethnic support as this will most probably guarantee more legitimacy and control, and the ruling party would face a weaker party which potentially would attract one or few ethnic group(s). Leaders representing more than one ethnic group would be seen as national leaders (and not regional only leaders which weakens their influence). However the current trend we have been witnessing in many States is a leader appealing to one particular ethnic group, usually being the leader’s own community, clan, tribe or ethnic group.  However, such functioning will lead to tensions between those who will be included in the leader’s programme and those who do not appeal to his political objectives.

Stating that ethnicity is the only drive in the voting behaviour of people in African would be an overstatement as it also heavily depends on the performances of the party itself as a ruler especially in States which are experiencing further democratisation with the implementation of performing institutions. However, the ethnic element in voting is something we can’t ignore as it is very well present today and is still one consequential drive in the voting behaviour of people. This trend is slowly but surely changing.