Fela Aníkúlápó Kuti’s 1983 song Perambulator comes to mind whenever I see the childlike glee of Africa leaders and their aides (and carefully selected civil society actors), during the so-called Africa+1 summits in Euro-American and Asian capitals.

In Perambulator, Fela mocks African politicians whose default approach to finding solutions to domestic issues is to catch the next flight to Europe to “learn how English carry dustbin”.

Although the cities may differ, the script of these summits remains the same: The bear hugs, grand speeches, frank gazes during negotiations, quotable statements (Africa is rising/Africa must rise/Africa is ready for business/Stop disrespecting Africa, etc), photo ops and grandiose declarations.

In describing the futility of such exercises, Fela concludes about such officials: “im just dey perambulate/ and im still dey/ same same place” (meaning that all that has been achieved is performative motion without any meaningful progress). 

The eagerness to attend these summits shows elements of unseriousness and inferiority complexes on the part of our leaders.

There have been several narratives about the usefulness, or otherwise, of these summits. One is the “scramble for Africa”, with superpowers and emerging powers competing for strategic geopolitical and economic influence in Africa. This has seen an increase in the number of military bases, embassies, bilateral trade deals and defence cooperation agreements in African countries.

In some instances, global actors such as the US, China and Russia have accused each other of having ulterior motives in their dealings with African countries.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz (second from right) and Kenyan President William Ruto (second from left) at the start of their meeting as part of the fourth edition of the G20 Investment Summit – German Business and the Compact with Africa in Berlin on 20 November 2023. (Photo: EPA-EFE / Filip Singer / Pool)

Another narrative is that African countries have been able to use these Africa+1 summits to their advantage by attracting more foreign investment and diversifying economic partners. Similar to this is the idea that African governments can exploit the US-China rivalry to enhance their geopolitical and economic positions.

Third is the point that these summits and commitments are not exactly enough to significantly change the landscape of investment in Africa. In this sense, they are seen as nothing but a public relations boost for whichever country is arranging/hosting them.

Last is that some of these summits are, in substance, delinked from Africa’s ambitious plan for collective negotiations and implementation of continental trade arrangements.   

The points above are the hardware aspects of Africa+1 summits. However, the software components are as important, yet little attention is paid to them.

Psychological dimension

Beyond the analysis of whether these summits result in real, quantifiable economic development or the enhancement of Africa’s global political status, it is important to understand the psychological dimension. This dimension plays out in a variety of ways that leads one to seriously question the genuineness of African political actors to development.

The eagerness to attend these summits shows elements of unseriousness and inferiority complexes on the part of our leaders. This is symptomatic of a dysfunctional and misplaced worldview, one that reifies performatives over actual gains.

A progressive worldview requires not only a proper understanding of those we are dealing with, but more fundamentally, getting our house in order. As Julius Nyerere said in a 1969 speech: “We recognise that we are involved in the world and that the world is involved in us. Involvement without understanding, however, can be embarrassing and even dangerous.”

While the optics of African leaders rushing to the Africa+1 summits, smiling like children in a toy shop as they pose for photographs, is nothing short of embarrassing, it is pure gold for the host, proof of its importance.

External parties dealing with the continent operate within the context of their own worldview, one that is shaped by economic, sociocultural and political factors essentially aimed at enhancing their geopolitical strengths.

The European Union/Europe’s neoliberal worldview underlies its interactions with the continent, especially the framing of its “assistance” programmes. Funding of projects in Africa is often anchored to adherence to neoliberal objectives, even if it is only in the form rather than the substance.

China, India, Russia and Turkey all approach the continent from the position of their own strategic worldviews, largely shaped by their own cultural perspectives and ambitious aspirations to enhance their respective geo-economic and political global stature. The ability of a single government to convene a meeting with all African presidents is a useful display of such a government’s soft and even hard power.

While the optics of African leaders rushing to the Africa+1 summits, smiling like children in a toy shop as they pose for individual and group photographs, is nothing short of embarrassing, it is pure gold for the host, proof of its importance. In a world where perception is as important as reality, the host’s ability to demonstrate that “I too can get all the African leaders together under one roof” is an essential bragging and negotiating point.

The simple point is that it is not and should not be the role of external partners to help construct, or even encourage, the development of a strategic worldview by those charged with enhancing the global relevance of the African continent.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and heads of African states and delegation members pose for a family photo before the start of the G20 Investment Summit – German Business and the Compact with Africa in Berlin on 20 November 2023. (Photo: EPA-EFE / Filip Singer)

It could be argued that it is not even in the geo-economic and political interests of external partners for African actors to develop a meaningful and useful worldview. The onus of placing dignity at the heart of how we frame a pan-African worldview in terms of negotiating with partners, responding to global issues and devolving meaningful powers to continental institutions, falls primarily on those who currently prioritise the performatives of Africa+1 summits over pan-African strategies.

Instead of running around the globe attending these summits (where the hosts already have fixed and national self-interested ideas about the continent), African leaders should focus on developing the right frameworks and mindsets to implement development plans.

The fact that some of these summits attract more African government representatives than the African Union and regional economic communities’ summits clearly shows the extent to which we are not taking ourselves seriously.

Successful implementation of national and continental development goals does not require fancy trips to summits in Sochi, Paris, Beijing, Washington or Brussels. Our problems require us to adopt a progressive mindset, one that prides political willingness over narrow self-interests. 

Until then, we’d have achieved nothing more than “perambulat[ing]… [and] still dey same same place”! DM

Babatunde Fagbayibo is a professor of international law at the University of Pretoria. He is also the 2023-24 Visiting Senior Researcher, African Scholar Programme, at the Nordic Africa Institute, Uppsala, Sweden. The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent those of the affiliated institutions.