Africa’s International Relations and the Legend of ‘Common Positions’

Abstract

IR scholars and analysts often view the African Union’s apparent deference to common positions with a collectivist lens. However, in this article, I argue that the legend of common African positions (CAPs) has not yet been animated, as African leaders do not always work collectively for structural and political reasons. Two significant factors complicate analysing Africa’s IR in Africa: first, Africa is not a monolith. With fifty-five states and numerous linguistic, cultural, and historical paths, there is more that is different than is the same. Second, conventional IR theories are rooted in Global North worldviews and are, therefore, not the most appropriate tool to study African countries’ collective decision-making. I focus on the United Nations as the site where the Africa Group’s successes and failures are saliently illustrated, specifically the Ezulwini Consensus. The Africa Group’s contestation within the various UN bodies, particularly with the UN Peace and Security Council, where they have long lobbied for representation, underscores the strength and structural obstacles to Africa’s collective action. Taking an interpretative approach and analysing from an epistemological and normative level, I offer an alternative lens through which to view the CAPs. Leaning on the philosophies of Ubuntu and Ujamaa, I propose a framework to explore the African Union’s process of developing common positions.