Op-Ed Series – Vol.5 Issue: 1
August 06, 2020
Covid-19: How the East African Community’s convoluted response has exposed the slow integration process
Sylvanus Wekesa*
In Summary
-
The leadership deficiency at the regional level has resulted in efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic being left to the custody of individual member states.
-
The COVID-19 pandemic has made it clear that at the leadership level, the EAC’s tenets of good neighbourliness and solidarity are built on a fragile and ‘shifting’ foundation.
-
The diminishing role of the EAC in coordinating the response mechanisms to combat the spread of COVID-19 has birthed numerous challenges and outcomes.
-
While it is expected that in some cases, the interests of the community can be regarded as inimical to those of individual member states, it is important to institutionalise a culture which regards the interests of the community as preeminent.
-
It is disconcerting to realise that the spirit of East African solidarity has receded, with mutuality and good neighbourliness appearing to have remained largely among the citizens.
According to the 2019 Africa Regional Integration Index (ARII), which assesses the regional integration status and efforts in Africa, the East African Community (EAC) has the highest average score on the five dimensions of regional integration; the free movement of people, infrastructural integration, trade integration, productive integration and macroeconomic integration. Its strongest dimension is the free movement of people while its weakest dimension is productive integration. This ranking shows that the EAC remains one of the most progressive regional economic blocs on the African continent with the main goal of becoming a political federation. On the one hand, some analysts believe that the COVID-19 pandemic can and should be used by Africans as an opportunity to ‘complete what their ancestors started’, with the acceleration of regional integration as one of the cardinal steps which should be taken to achieve this non-negotiable dream. On the other hand, some analysts believe that the pandemic may provide a momentum for ‘a new scramble for Africa’.
Ideally, the EAC should use the COVID-19 pandemic as an opportunity to strengthen and accelerate regional integration efforts. At the very least, it should collectively exercise influence and agency in the fight against the pandemic. This is especially considering that it has laid down strategies and plans of dealing with epidemics like Ebola outbreaks in Uganda and other infectious diseases like Cholera, Marburg, Dengue Fever and Marburg that are prevalent in most member states. The multidisciplinary ‘One Health’ approach which was adopted in 2014 is one strategy that the EAC has used to prevent and control communicable diseases that can cause epidemics and pandemics. It was therefore expected that the EAC will use these strategies and plans to mobilise the whole region to take a coordinated response to the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. The Joint Statement by EAC Ministers of Health which was released on March 25th 2020 was intended to ensure that the region takes this path. That is why it includes a strategy which aims, among others things, to ‘ensure a joint and well-coordinated plan to combat COVID-19 in the region’.
However, it is important to note that before the arrival of COVID-19, there were deep rooted disputes over governance, borders and competing economic interests among EAC member states. Burundi, for instance, has on various occasions delayed the holding of the Heads of States Summit, and calling for the removal of the speaker of the East African Legislative Assembly. Rwanda and Uganda are still haggling over the Gatuna border dispute that has witnessed its closure. The recent decision by Kenya to launch negotiations on a free bilateral trade agreement with the United States of America has strained its relations with other member states. It is therefore not surprising that the EAC has been struggling to find a common ground among the competing interests of member states as the leaders continue to pull in different directions. These disputes have the capacity to influence how the citizens of member states perceive and participate in the regional integration process, with many of them likely to take the position(s) of their leaders.
It is in this context that the COVID-19 pandemic has slowed down the EAC’s integration efforts and exposed the weak co-operation and unity among the leaders who are the main drivers of the integration agenda. The COVID-19 pandemic has made it clear that at the leadership level, the EAC’s tenets of good neighbourliness and solidarity are built on a fragile and ‘shifting’ foundation. The EAC has once again exposed its unpreparedness in promoting solidarity among member states by failing to provide leadership in the mobilisation of a collective and coordinated framing and response to the COVID-19 storm. The leadership deficiency at the regional level has resulted in efforts to combat the pandemic being left to the custody of individual member states. This has imposed a difficult-to-bear burden on individual member states. To exacerbate this, in some cases, states and citizens have expressed serious concerns and fears in respect of how other countries in the region have framed and responded to the pandemic. They have jeered at each other’s response to the pandemic. A regional approach to the fight against COVID-19 could have minimised such problems.
The EAC has almost been rendered dysfunctional by the pandemic. This has weakened its capacity to take a collective approach in the fight against COVID-19. For example, the Extraordinary Summit of the Heads of States was constantly postponed despite that it needed to be held urgently. After multiple delays and postponements, the Summit was finally held on 12 May 2020. However, the virtual meeting was not attended by all the presidents of the respective member states. The presidents of Tanzania and Burundi failed to attend and did not send their representatives. President John Magufuli’s lack of participation was explained by his Foreign Affairs Minister to imply that the meeting was a ‘Northern Corridor affair’ while Burundi was in the middle of an electioneering period. Failure to get all EAC presidents to attend such an important meeting shows the disconnect that is persistent in the body. Without all the leaders speaking in solidarity and standing on a common goal, the hope of the EAC to provide meaningful leadership is diminished.
The diminishing role of the EAC in coordinating the response mechanisms to combat the spread of COVID-19 has birthed numerous challenges and outcomes. Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda appear to have implemented robust measures that include lockdowns of the most affected cities. However, radical measures such as the closure of borders were not received well by some member states, especially Tanzania. This resulted in the rising of border tensions between Kenya and Tanzania. At the heart of this is the dispute over the testing of truck drivers whilst keeping them open for cargo movement. Initially, Tanzania released the figures of COVID-19 cases in the same way that fellow EAC members did. President Magufuli later declared that Tanzania was free from COVID-19 as the disease had been ‘defeated through prayers’. In Kenya, the government has maintained that a COVID-19 test is mandatory before being allowed entry. Kenya took a hard position in late May 2020 when in just one day, 50 Tanzania truck drivers tested positive for COVID-19. This witnessed the doubling of the number of positive COVID-19 cases in Kenya at the time. Kenya decided to ban Tanzanian truck drivers unless they re-took the COVID-19 tests on the Kenyan side and Tanzania responded by banning Kenyan drivers from entering the country.
The Communique from the Extraordinary Heads of State Summit that called for ‘Partner states to adopt a harmonised system for certification and sharing of COVID-19 test results’ has not stopped Kenya and Tanzania from bickering and haggling over the testing requirement at the border point. It is not verifiable whether the EAC has set up a harmonised system to share the COVID-19 results. The lack of coordination by the EAC in managing the situation has created embarrassing scenarios where the Tanzanian government claimed that Kenya is tampering with the COVID-19 results of Tanzanian truck drivers. It alleged that Tanzanian drivers who were tested by Kenyan officials got positive results, but when the tests were done in Tanzania, they got negative results.
Such accusations and allegations could have been avoided if there was political goodwill and solidarity within the EAC in terms of implementing the strategies such as the establishment of a synchronised testing centre which is acceptable to both countries. The newly created one-stop border posts should have played a major role because of the integrated management of the border as agreed by member states. This would have been a great opportunity for the EAC to test how functional and well-integrated its systems are. When Kenya opened its sky for international commercial passenger flights, it insisted that all passengers from Tanzania should be quarantined upon landing in Kenya. Tanzania responded by rescinding approvals for Kenyan Airways flights.
There are a number of challenges which have to be dealt with if the EAC is to provide meaningful leadership in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. First, finding a common ground among the EAC leaders remains the biggest challenge to the implementation of its agenda. This has weakened their capacity and prospects of creating and institutionalising good neighbourliness among the citizens of member states despite that factors such as their shared history, culture and language provide a good foundation to facilitate this process.
Second, the re-emergence of opposing camps within the EAC is reminiscent of the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ (Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda grouping) era of around 2013 which almost caused a ‘split’ of the organisation. Personality differences between the presidents was at the centre of the emergence of the ‘Coalition of the Willing’. If it is to achieve the objectives which are stated in its founding treaty, the EAC needs to ensure that its framework transcends the personal interests of its leaders. While it is expected that in some cases, the interests of the community can be regarded as inimical to those of individual member states, it is important to institutionalise a culture which regards the interests of the community as preeminent. There is need for dialogue in cases where such clashes can threaten the interests, purpose and unity of the community.
At the moment, it is disconcerting to realise that the spirit of East African solidarity has receded, with mutuality and good neighbourliness appearing to have remained largely among the citizens. The lack of solidarity in dealing with the pandemic is exposing the whole integration agenda that is so much vested in the hands of the individual leaders and the delicate balancing of their friendship.
There is need for the EAC leaders to rise above parochial interests and speak with a consolidated voice in the implementation of the integration agenda and the combating of challenges confronting the region such as COVID-19. The interests and aspirations of the EAC should be built on what the citizens of the community want because this is what strengthens its goal of emerging into a people-centred bloc. The interests of individual member states should be framed and pursued in ways which contribute to strengthening the unity, solidarity and common good of the community. What is being witnessed in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is reminiscent of the 1977 collapse when individual differences corroded and overrode the collective good of the community.
*Sylvanus Wekesa is a Research Associate and PhD Candidate with the African Leadership Centre, King’s College London.
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
Download the PDF version of the article here
 Op-ed Vol 5 Issue 1.pdf | [ ] | 136 kB |
