F

rench President Emmanuel Macron recently completed a five-day trip to Africa, visiting Gabon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Republic of the Congo, and Angola on March 1-5. Macron’s trip to Africa excluded several countries in the Sahel region, including Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, where there is significant tension with France.

Macron faced by criticism and protests

French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent trip to Africa aimed to deepen cultural connections and the exchange of ideas between France and African countries. He promised to end the “Françafrique” policy, which has long been criticized for enabling French political and economic influence in Africa.

His recent visit to Africa was met with criticism from numerous regional political analysts, who argued that his promises lacked new substance and were simply a repackaging of previous pledges. Many have expressed disappointment that Macron did not offer concrete plans or policy changes to address the complex issues facing the continent.

African political analyst Amir Nourdine Elbachir pointed out that Western nations are still discussing plans for Africa without involving Africans, suggesting that Macron’s new policy for Africa was prompted by threats to French interests in the continent.

Meanwhile, President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Félix Tshisekedi urged Macron to treat African nations as equal partners. Tshisekedi’s statement was made during a press conference with Macron held in Kinshasa on Saturday, March 4, 2023.

Tshisekedi called for France to change its “protectionist” attitude towards African countries, adding that France needs to see African countries as partners rather than in a paternal relationship.

The critiques suggest that while Macron’s new policies may be a step in the right direction, they may not go far enough in addressing the root issues of French interference and neocolonialism in Africa.

Despite Macron’s promises to end “Françafrique,” the French practice of maintaining economic and political influence over its former African colonies, Macron faced criticism and protests throughout his trip.

Lingering colonial legacy

France’s history of colonialism in Africa has left a legacy of resentment and distrust towards the West. Many African nations feel that their resources have been exploited and they have been left to deal with the aftermath of the colonial era leading to a deep and ongoing mistrust toward Western countries, and primarily Europe.

As competition for influence in Africa grows more intense, African nations are increasingly seeking partners who prioritize African interests and treat them as equal rather than viewing them as pawns in a neocolonial game.

Protests erupted during Macron’s visit to Gabon, where some demonstrators held placards stating “France get out.” The country’s opposition leader Jean Ping accused France of having a “neocolonial attitude” towards Gabon.

China and Russia on the rise

In recent years, China and Russia have expanded their presence in Africa, raising the concerns of European countries and the United States.

An interesting video circulated on social media showing some of the protestors who were chanting slogans against Emmanuel Macron’s planned visit to the Democratic Republic of the Congo carrying Russian flags in their hands. The protest highlights the growing influence of Russia and China in Africa.

China’s economic policies in Africa focus on extracting natural resources, expanding the Chinese consumer market, and ensuring economic and political stability. Through President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative, China has expanded its economic cooperation with various African countries.

On the other hand, Russia’s approach to Africa involves business opportunities, arms sales in exchange for diplomatic support for Russia’s foreign policy preferences, political support for authoritarian leaders, and security cooperations. Russia’s relative popularity in the Global South has disappointed Western observers, and its attraction strategy has been fueled by the “memory diplomacy” approach whereby it highlights positive historical narratives such as its lack of involvement in the slave trade in Africa or colonialism in the region, and its role in supporting African countries during their struggle for independence.

In contrast, the European Union is trying to establish a broad political and economic relationship with African countries based on trade, investment, aid, and technical support, aiming to achieve better control over irregular migration.

The changing dynamics of Africa

African countries increasingly seek to assert their independence and pursue their own economic and political agenda.

The rise of China and Russia in Africa poses a challenge for the United States and EU countries by adding another layer to international African politics. They now have to re-adjust their approaches  to engage with African countries, taking into consideration their expectations and diplomatic needs.

The ongoing resentment towards the West in Africa highlights the need for a more equal and respectful relationship, one that both acknowledges the ongoing impact of Western colonialism and aims to help Africa address the root causes of poverty and instability.

People who are seeking refuge in the UK are now to be transported to Rwanda under a contentious new system slammed by international human rights organizations as “shockingly ill-conceived idea” and in violation of international responsibilities.

In a speech on Thursday on April 21, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson described the initiative as an “innovative approach, driven by our shared humanitarian impulse and made possible by Brexit freedoms” adding that with the UK’s assistance, Rwanda will be able to relocate “tens of thousands of people in the years ahead.”

Priti Patel, UK Home Secretary, said during a joint press conference in Rwanda’s capital Kigali on April 15, that persons transferred to Rwanda “will be given the support including up to five years of training, integration, accommodation, health care, so that they can resettle and thrive.”

Under the new Asylum Partnership Arrangement, people arriving in the UK from January 1, 2022 may be transferred to Rwanda on a one-way ticket to have their asylum application investigated and, if found to be refugees, to be granted refugee status there.

According to the Home Office report published on April 15, it states that “the UK is investing  £120 million into the economic development and growth of Rwanda,” which will cover funding that will assist the delivery of asylum operations, housing, and integration, which will be equivalent to the expenditures paid in the UK for these services.

Despite previously holding negotiations with a number of African nations including Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Tunisia, the Nordic country has yet to reach an agreement with any of them.

The Scandinavian country, which has shifted to the right, has taken increasingly punitive measures against asylum seekers. It enacted a bill in 2021 allowing migrants in Denmark to be transferred to asylum centers in a partner nation. The concept of delegating responsibility for processing asylum applications to asylum seekers is both arguably negligent and inhumane by intentional law.

Similar models, such as the Australian model or the so-called “hotspots” in the Greek islands, have resulted in major episodes of imprisonment, physical abuse, and a lack of health care.

Reaction from human rights organizations

The Asylum Partnership Agreement proposed by the Home Office in the UK is in violation of asylum law and the Geneva Convention, to which the UK is a signatory. Those who cross the border illegally to seek refuge, according to the Geneva convention should not receive punishment, stated by Article 31.

Human Rights Watch has criticized the disparity between refugees fleeing Ukraine and those fleeing other conflicts outside of Europe. According to the organization, “at a time when the people of the UK have opened their hearts and homes to Ukrainians, the government is choosing to act with cruelty and rip up their obligations to others fleeing war and persecution.”

In a statement, the Danish Refugee Council said that sending asylum seekers overseas for processing is “both irresponsible and lacking in solidarity.” The NGO also questioned the practicality of the plan, saying, “it is also still very unclear how a possible reception center in a third country would be administered.”

Amnesty International UK said in a statement, “Sending people to another country – let alone one with such a dismal human rights record – for asylum ‘processing’ is the very height of irresponsibility and shows how far removed from humanity and reality the Government now is on asylum issues.”

Almost immediately after the announcement had been made that a new variant of COVID19 – Omicron, as it was later named by the World Health Organization – had been identified, wealthy northern nations rushed to impose travel bans on a number of southern African countries and, later on other African nations as well.

In some very undiplomatic language from African governments, the move was labelled racist, hypocritical, unsupported by science, “travel apartheid” and even “swart gevaar” – particularly because these same northern states did not impose similar bans on each other, despite their infection rates being hugely higher than in southern Africa. The opprobrium was subsequently also extended to countries of the global South that also imposed travel restrictions on southern African states.

It is difficult to believe that the quick actions of the governments imposing the restrictions were not racist; it is even more difficult to believe now it is known that many of these countries already had cases of the Omicron variant before it had been identified in Botswana and South Africa, and seemingly without any spread from southern Africa.

The drama around these travel restrictions began when, on November 23, scientists from Botswana uploaded three Sars-CoV-2 genome sequences to a public database that looked different from the other 96 uploaded that day, which were of the Delta variant. The database had been receiving regular uploading of such sequences since March 2020. On the same day, a South African team uploaded seven genomes that were almost identical. Scientists around the world began discussing the new variant and, within three days, the WHO had named it Omicron.

The teams from the two southern African countries alerted the world because of the need for rapid responses to COVID19 and its various variants, despite the fact that they understood the risks, as indicated by a tweet from a member of the South African genomics team, Tulio de Oliveira. Announcing the variant, he added that the world should support these efforts by South Africa “and not discriminate or isolate it! By protecting and supporting it, we will protect the world!”

Nevertheless, by November 24, dozens of countries imposed travel restrictions not just on South Africa and Botswana where Omicron had been detected, but also on other southern African countries with no confirmed cases: eSwatini, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia and Zimbabwe. Angola and Zambia were subsequently added on, and, later Nigeria and Egypt.

This did not prevent Omicron being referred by western media as the “South African variant” or “the virus from Africa”. A Spanish publication, Tribuna Albacete, published a cartoon of a boat with the South African flag named Omicron filled with caricatured Africans shaped as viruses, approaching Europe, thus combining its racism, xenophobia and hatred of refugees into one image.

Some of this racism was reminiscent of the outbreak of HIV in Africa. In 2001, the head of USAID opposed funding ARVs for Africans, suggesting we would not be able to maintain a disciplined treatment regime because we did not “know what watches and clocks are”.

Many African leaders – especially in southern Africa – have responded with (in some cases uncharacteristic) anger. South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, and foreign minister, Naledi Pandor, were, perhaps, most forthright on the issue. Ramaphosa, during a recent tour of West Africa, called the travel restrictions “harsh”, “unfair” “arbitrary and discriminatory”, “unscientific” and “counter-productive”, and suggested that the leaders of Nigeria, Ghana, Senegal and Cote d’Ivoire agreed with him. He also evoked the colonisation of Africa to make his point.

“[The world] says, ‘No, we know what is good for you, we just want you to do fill-and-finish [of vaccine doses], that’s it,” Ramaphosa said at the opening of the Dakar International Forum on Peace and Security. “We say, ‘We no longer want that. You did that long ago when you colonised us, and when you raped and pillaged our countries’. We say ‘no’ now, we have the capability [to manufacture vaccines] and we want to make full use of it.” Africa, he said, wanted to do business with the West on a respectful basis, but “maybe that is why we were colonized, because we respect too much, and [now] we say, ‘Respect us as well.’”

The South African president said he agreed with UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres that the travel restrictions were “travel apartheid.”

The South African president said he agreed with UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres that the travel restrictions were “travel apartheid”, and drew attention to a term previously used by South Africa’s apartheid government: “Swart Gevaar” – Black danger/threat. “It is an Afrikaans language term used by our former oppressors to scare the white population about the perceived threat of black majority rule, and to keep themselves in power.”

His criticism was not limited to northern states; he accused certain African states of behaving “like our former colonizers”. He was referring to Rwanda, Mauritius, Seychelles and Egypt, which followed the European example and also imposed travel restrictions on southern Africa.

On 4 December, the U.K. added Nigeria to its “red list”, followed by other states. The Nigerian health minister responded with similar language to Ramaphosa, and Nigeria’s aviation minister, Hadi Sirika, announced on 12 December that he planned, in retaliation, to ban flights from Argentina, Britain, Canada and Saudi Arabia.

For Africans in general, and southern Africans in particular, there is no question that the response of northern states to the detection of the Omicron variant is racist, with no concern by, especially Europeans, for the destruction of African economies and livelihoods. Suddenly, overnight, many middle- and upper-class Africans discovered the cold, unwelcoming reception, and lack of concern for African lives, that poorer Africans had discovered for decades in their attempts to migrate to Europe.

The limited understanding of African migration continues to hinder effective policies, far from addressing the current lived realities and migration drivers. Often, Africa is negatively represented as a continent of mass migration to Europe, lacking nuance and depth to the existing drivers and patterns.

According to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division (2020), Africans migrate more within the continent than overseas. According to the Africa Migration Report, African migrants comprise no more than 14 percent of all global migrants. An African perspective is needed to demystify all myths, fears, and misconceptions, especially during this pandemic.

Prior to COVID-19 pandemic, socio-economic conditions, climate change, and internal conflicts served as significant push factors for most African migrants. However, the sanitary crisis has resulted in unprecedented socioeconomic impact across the African continent and brought a new driver for a wave of migratory flows. The restriction on human mobility and other measures imposed to tackle the pandemic have impacted the overall economic activities and livelihoods. The situation became alarming for the vulnerable persons in the African countries.

In parallel, as internal conflicts intensify in the Sahel, the region’s socio-economic conditions worsened, and hundreds of thousands of people are awaiting the opportunity to migrate for a better future inside the continent or through Morocco on to the European continent.

Despite the regularization of 50,000 migrants during the two campaigns of 2014 and 2016 launched by the Moroccan government, estimated numbers of irregular migrants in Morocco demonstrate a significant increase of migrants without legal status.

However, it is important to note that the exact percentage of migrants who have been smuggled and trafficked could not be calculated at the national level, whether for those crossing the perilous Mediterranean and the Atlantic, the desert, or those crossing borders in Ceuta and Melilla.

The general trend of migrants opting to reach Europe through Morocco are men and women under the age of 35 and more recently young couples. Migrants mainly from Congo Brazaville, Guinea Conakry, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Cameroon, Mali, Liberia, Nigeria, Gambia, Eritrea, Sudan, Tchad seek to reach Europe by landing on the Moroccan coasts or through the borders of Ceuta and Melilla.  Sometimes, migrants could be minors, especially from Guinea Conakry and Senegal.

“I was working as a maid before the pandemic, I tried to save money to pay my journey to Spain, but I couldn’t work during the confinement, it was challenging and hard to cover basic needs ( food and rent ), I was forced to do prostitution to get some money for a living.”

African countries are most affected by poverty, famine, desertification, and various deadly pandemics, resulting in a high percentage of Africans deciding to migrate and are forced displaced.  Due to the failure of effective policies to address the root causes of irregular migration, migrants are victims of traffickers and smugglers along the routes. According to the Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2020, migrants are at more risk for human trafficking, disappearance, and loss of life.

As an example, a migrant recounts his dangerous and hell-like journey from Cameroon to Morocco stating to Politics Today that:

“From the beginning of the journey, you are the target of organized criminal groups, you can come across smugglers who take all your money, torture you, and ask you to call the family to send them money so they can free you. I faced the same treatment along the route, it’s Bis-Repitita, in front of me. Two migrants lost their lives as a result of multiple tortures.”

The African countries cannot curb these problems without good coordination between different institutions and adequate support for local development efforts. Without shared responsibility, African countries will not be able to put in place a model that ensures the prevention of irregular migration and the assistance and protection of migrants. In addition, African countries also have to cooperate in developing initiatives to realize the vision of Agenda 2063 of an integrated Africa. The African Union revised Migration Policy Framework (MPFA 2018-2030), and the African agenda on migration was adopted in 2018. In his capacity as an African leader on migration, King Mohammed VI, through the African Agenda on Migration, proposed the creation of The African Migration Observatory in 2018. The official inauguration was under the African Union’s aegis on 18 December 2020 in Rabat, Morocco.

The African Migration Observatory is envisaged to develop a mechanism of collecting, analyzing, and sharing information between members to promote controlled management of migration flows. The Observatory will generate geographically balanced information on migration that responds to the continent’s needs in terms of factual management of the phenomenon. 

It is a real challenge for African Union to develop autonomous institutions, such as the African migration observatory. As such, the implementation of these policies needs to be funded by African funds. Efforts should be made to ensure the complementarity of financial and technical resources between African countries.

They also need to improve the coordination control systems to improve data collection and information exchange. But, in the scarcity of national migration observatories, the African Union members have to create national institutions as focal points of the African Migration Observatory.