Our African ethnic identities are a mixed blessing.           

On the one hand, in Africa as elsewhere, ethnicity has provided identity, legitimacy, solidarity and security probably since before humankind emerged.

To rationalize their overlordship, European colonizers denigrated small African nations by recasting them as ‘tribes’ or groups that had rudimentary institutions reflecting a primitive stage of human evolution.  Over time, this caricature was embedded in scholarship and media.  It persists and it is the lens through which most non-Africans see Africa and Africans.     

All ethnic groups, African or otherwise, have always competed over living space.  Out of the resulting warfare, conquest and assimilation emerged groups whose population today can be larger than that of some nations or countries. 

In Africa this includes Hausa (74m), Yoruba (40m), Oromo (35m), Igbo (30m), Fulani (25m), Amhara (25m), Hutu (25m), Somali (20m), Berber (20m), or Zulu (10m). 

In Kenya five groups account for 72 percent of its 58 million people: Kikuyu (22%), Luhya (14%), Luo (13%), Kalenjin (12%), Kamba (11%), Meru (6%). 

Africans and Kenyans wear these identities with pride much like other people worldwide.

On the other hand, ethnic boundaries can be physical and mental enclosures.  Breaching one’s ethnic boundary, a physical and metaphysical barrier, can carry considerable risk.  In this sense, ethnic identities can be confining and restrictive.  

Competition between ethnic groups creates an opportunity for invaders. The newcomers support one ethnic group to subdue a rival group.  In the process, the invaders gain leverage which is eventually used to subjugate all.  This is how empires have been built or destroyed.  It is how Africa was colonized over the last two millennia. Divide and conquer exploits faultlines and ethnicity is has always been a prime one. 

To shake off the latest colonizers, the Europeans, Africans had to cooperate across group boundaries.  The drive for independence required the transfer of some trust or loyalty from an ethnic group to a non-kinship and ill-defined entity: a nation state in the making. It was an important transition.  It is a universal work in progress.  Most of today’s economically advanced countries made this same change through centuries of brute force, feudalism, autocracy, colonization, assimilation and far more bloodshed than Africa has seen so far.

Not surprisingly, managing the transition from the certainty of ethnic solidarity to national identity continues to be the continent’s major test of statecraft.  And

  

most African policy makers would agree that if it is poorly managed, ethnic identity can lead to civil unrest, wars or stunted socioeconomic development for generations.  Critical or foundational development projects – roads, railroads, hospitals, schools – have been held hostage for years, modified or abandoned altogether because of the perception that the benefits would accrue to some ethnic group and not to others.  Ethnicity, and particularly its territorial dimension, has been a major cause of instability in many African countries and elsewhere. 

Not surprisingly, countries that have offered aid or assistance to Africa sometimes exploit or exacerbate ethnic tensions so as to advance their own agenda in a host African country.

In addition, some of the literature that has been produced under the aegis of the leading aid and development assistance agencies, both bilateral and multilateral, conveys the false impression that ‘tribalism’ is a uniquely African phenomenon, an indicator of underdevelopment.  In fact, ethnic solidarity is universal in time and space, differing only in saliency.

All in all, a major lesson in African post-colonial statecraft is that ethnicity has two faces.   It can be a building block or a stumbling block to building national identity.  The genius and the test of African statecraft is to harness its positive aspects while downplaying its negative attributes.

In our daily routines, we should not confine ourselves to ethnic silos.  We should continue to encourage social, economic, and political interactions and build confidence leading to the erosion of ethnic barriers.  We should continue to learn by doing.

For example, African policy makers have learned that administrative units that are coterminous with ancestral ethnic boundaries reinforce ethnic identity over national identity. Conversely, administrative boundaries which transect ancestral group territories dilute ethnic solidarity thereby creating opportunities to elevate national identity.

Breaking down ethnic boundaries, like building highways, hospitals, universities and processing African minerals in Africa, is critical for the modernization of our countries and the continent itself.  It should be encouraged and even celebrated.  It tempers our faultlines.  

Lowering the saliency of ethnicity is critical for the modernization of our countries and the continent as a whole.    If throwing off European colonization required the energy which is released from collaboration across ethnic faultlines, the steep climb that Africa must undertake to modernize and ensure its very survival requires even more energy.  Much, much more.  And one way to release that energy is to reduce ethnic chauvinism at every opportunity.