On Xenophobia and Tribalism in Africa: Causes, Consequences, and Geopolitical Impacts

It would be manifestly incongruous to speak of a dichotomy between peoples who share in common the experience of colonization and the transatlantic slave trade; yet Africa is defying all logical theories. The rise and resurgence of xenophobia and tribalism have created a real fracture between peoples long united by their shared history.

Several factors may explain these two antisocial phenomena: economic crisis, with unemployment as its corollary; borders inherited from colonization; identity withdrawal and nationalism; political manipulation; and stereotypes.

Long prevalent in several countries, xenophobia today appears to find its most marked expression in South Africa. For years, African nationals of various nationalities have been subjected to violence, murder, and expulsion under the fallacious pretext that they occupy jobs that rightfully belong to nationals. While South African authorities have indeed condemned these acts of violence on multiple occasions, the repetition of attacks against foreign nationals and the lack of durable results in their prevention fuel the perception of an insufficient state response to this phenomenon. South Africa, moreover, has marked the continent through its tragic apartheid past and the liberation struggles led by Nelson Mandela within the African National Congress (ANC).

From hero to pariah, South Africa is gradually facing rejection from several African countries. These latter have indeed chosen to retaliate against xenophobia that persists despite numerous denunciations. Thus, several South African artists have seen their concerts canceled in different countries on the continent, while some South African nationals have also been subjected to rejection in other African states.

Alongside xenophobia, tribalism represents another hideous face of the difficult coexistence within African nations. Understood as interethnic rejection and hatred, it manifests primarily among citizens of the same country, thereby hindering national construction and social cohesion. Like xenophobia, it relies on justifications as numerous as they are irrational. Yet the most troubling element lies in the manipulation by public authorities. Tribalism often stems from the desire to preserve the power and privileges of an ethnic group, or even to ensure its domination over others.

Africa, however, draws its wealth and singularity from its cultural diversity. Over the years, this diversity seems to have been perceived less as an asset than as a weakness. In response to this situation, several opinion leaders converge on the idea of a common national language, drawn from local languages, such as Wolof in Senegal or Lingala in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. For its proponents, such a policy could help strengthen national cohesion and mitigate the identity fractures plaguing many African societies.

Yet some countries, such as Cameroon, face difficulties in adopting a common national language due to the multiplicity of ethnic groups and, consequently, the diversity of local languages. Cameroon, in fact, counts nearly 280 national languages.

Moreover, would the adoption of a single common language suffice to mitigate tribalism? Assuredly not. One would also need to uproot from each individual their tribal fiber and excessive attachment to ethnic considerations at the expense of the national interest.

In any case, xenophobia and tribalism have become for Africa true sociopolitical and even economic cancers, encouraging the cult of hatred and the brutalization of relations between Africans long considered descendants of a shared ancestor.

At a time when several African countries are considering the elimination of visas for continental nationals to strengthen pan-Africanist ties, in line with the ideal espoused by Kwame Nkrumah, first president of Ghana; Ahmed Sékou Touré of Guinea; Patrice Lumumba of Congo-Kinshasa; Julius Nyerere of Tanzania; Cheikh Anta Diop and Léopold Sédar Senghor of Senegal; and Frantz Fanon of Martinique, Africa seems more than ever to be drifting away from this ideal, which for many remains at the stage of myth.

The manifest impotence of the African Union (AU) only further emboldens xenophobes and tribalists in their designs, giving the impression that these deviations can thrive without meaningful institutional opposition.

Geopolitical Implications

It is therefore worth considering the geopolitical implications of xenophobia and tribalism. These two phenomena are all the more concerning as they arise in a context where the continent is attempting to accelerate its political and economic integration. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), presented as one of the most ambitious projects of the African Union, is precisely based on strengthening exchanges, mobility, and trust between peoples. Yet the rise of xenophobia and tribalism risks undermining these ambitions by reigniting divisions and identity withdrawal reflexes.

There is no doubt that xenophobia weakens diplomatic relations between African states. Several governments have thus found themselves compelled to repatriate their nationals to protect them from an imminent danger. Likewise, protectionism and identity withdrawal contribute to the hardening of visa policies, hinder international trade, and slow cross-border cooperation.

Moreover, the instability that ensues, the challenges related to human security—particularly internally displaced persons and refugees—as well as the loss of moral credibility of xenophobic states on issues of human rights, all constitute obstacles to harmonious cooperation between states.

Tribalism, for its part, may not have as global an impact as xenophobia, yet it remains a brake on integration. Indeed, several foreign investors hesitate to invest in a country deeply divided by tribal rivalries. It fosters, among other things, the fragmentation of societies, the emergence of internal armed conflicts, the weakening of republican institutions in favor of nepotism, and the blocking of regional integration.

Conclusion

Africa, through its multiple divisions—both internal and continental—once again proves its inability to unite in order to address crucial challenges such as peace promotion, the construction of genuine democracy, socioeconomic issues, and the free movement of persons and goods. Yet the continent’s future will largely depend on its capacity to transcend ethnic and national divides that hinder its development. Failing this, pan-Africanist ambitions risk remaining mere slogans, while the common challenges facing Africa will continue to demand collective responses that have yet to materialize. Long awaited as one of the great emerging powers, the African continent seems, however, to be mired in its contradictions, while several of its states appear to settle all too comfortably into a secondary role within the international balance of power.