Why survival of EAC now hangs in the balance

The survival of the East African Community (EAC) probably faces one of its biggest tests due to ideological differences of the current crop of leaders in the region.

Presently, under the Chairmanship of Kenya’s President Ruto, the leaders from the eight member states seems to be cut of the same fabric in the conduct of their national duties, but ideologically worlds apart in driving regional integration.

In different forums, the leaders from the region have traded barbs against peers or harassed citizens of their neighbours.

For instance, Kenya finds itself in a difficult position where her citizens have been accused of engaging in civil activism against the oppression of opponents in neighboring Tanzania and Uganda.

Prominent civil society activists have not only confessed gross violation of their rights in the hands of authorities in both countries, but also a number remain missing while in the two countries.

The Kenyan government, despite being the current chair of the bloc’s top decision-making organ, has been hesitant to demand non-harassment of its citizens by authorities in Tanzania and Uganda, or fair play in the democratic processes in the region. Of course, this would be partly explained by similar challenges domestically, where President Ruto faces a turbulent political environment, especially from the young populace.

The question left for debate is whether the EAC has been reset to the factory settings that led to the collapse of EAC I back in 1977. It is well documented that EAC collapsed due to ideological, economic and political differences among the leaders of the region then.

Case for Integration

Reflecting on the region's leadership on the re-establishment of EAC II, there are reasons to believe it was out of a genuine desire to pursue common economic interest for the region. In 2000, then Kenyan President Moi was in his sunset years as the President and had already committed to retire on the expiry of his second term in office after ceding to multi-party democracy a decade earlier.

For Tanzania, Benjamin Mkapa, who was the President, is credited for his economic reforms and as a peacemaker, despite criticism of his failure to tame corruption. President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni was still in his best element in 2000, serving his first term after Uganda’s first direct presidential election in May 1996, since independence.

Thus, it would appear the timing was not only right to redraw the integration map for the region, but also there was sufficient political goodwill and leadership mix within the member states. Similarly, successive leaderships within Kenya and Tanzania under President Mwai Kibaki and Jakaya Kikwete respectively, were reasonably pro-economic reforms and moderate in their leadership styles. This may explain the expansion of the Community to include Rwanda and Burundi in 2007, and the achievements of a common market and monetary unions under the tenures in 2009 and 2013 respectively.

While the EAC has grown in membership since then to include South Sudan (2016), Democratic Republic of Congo (2022) and the Federal Republic of Somalia (2024), cracks started emerging with the collapse of cooperation on key infrastructure projects, especially among Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda. This resulted in a phenomenon the leaders called a coalition of the willing with landlocked member states flip-flopping between Kenya and Tanzania to access sea transport services.

The region seems to have drifted further apart with new leaders, conflicts at home and accusations of meddling with internal affairs among neighbours. The question then is: will these differences spill out of control or will the leaders rise above their own internal insecurities to promote common interests for the region and her citizens?

Given, economic literature has well documented the enormous benefits of regional integration. However, a report by the African Capacity Building Foundation in 2006 suggests that despite Africa having the highest density of economic integration and cooperation arrangements, they have failed to positively impact on the continent’s economic performance.

The report highlights inadequate political will and commitment to the process, high incidents of conflicts and political instability, poor design and sequencing of regional integration arrangements, multiplicity of memberships, inadequate funding and exclusion of key stakeholders as the main contributors for this failures of the economic blocs.

Looking ahead

What then should the EAC leaders do to salvage the ship from sinking? Arguably, this would not be an easy journey looking at the current breed of leadership. For instance, Kenyan authorities have been majorly accused of meddling with affairs of the other member states, despite being the present chair of the Summit.

Whether these accusations are factual or not, they render President Ruto to lack the moral authority as a neutral arbiter on internal conflicts in member countries, a role that the Chair of the Summit would be expected to play. In addition, his own handling of opponents at home and the excesses of his administration in managing public protests in the last three years in office make him fail the test for a regional peacemaker.

Despite Presidents Moi and Kibaki's weaknesses in dealing with internal conflicts, they still maintained a measured regional respect that allowed them a chance to lead or nominate respectable envoys to broker peace in the region. Unfortunately for President Ruto, the civic engagements of the young generation of today have robbed him of the environment to foster a regional-level peacemaker status.

Furthermore, the handshake version of democracy that worked well for Presidents Kibaki and Uhuru Kenyatta seems to be running out of luck with development partners. Initially considered as a genius towards political stability, it appears to have emboldened incumbents to meddle with democratic processes to retain power, and pretend to embrace opponents without sharing the real power.

There have been rumors that Tanzania maybe heading that route, which will be a record low for the continent. Electoral observers, including delegations from African regional blocs have returned a verdict that what happened in Tanzania on 29th October, 2025 was not only a sham, but a mockery to democracy itself.

How else would any person with basic common sense explain how a winner of an election with 98 per cent of the vote would require a military facility to be sworn into office? Five years ago, the reasonably popular the late President Pombe Magufuli had won 84 per cent of the vote with 12.5 million votes from about 15 million cast in 2020 elections from a pool of 29 million registered voters. How then did this miraculously grow to 31.9 million votes, when the political climate preceding the election had been dampened by a general boycott across all electoral positions by the opposition?

This case of Tanzania is not an isolated one. We are a witness to the same trends in Uganda and other parts among the EAC member states. With Tanzania having gone the basket route now, Kenya’s tribal based voting patterns may now look saintly in a region drowning on leadership deceit and greed.

How then can leaders emanating from such fraudulent processes command respect to champion integration for a shared prosperity? Since the Chair of the EAC Summit is rotational by right, imagine President Samia Suluhu Hassan being the Chair in January 2026 when Uganda goes to the ballot or in August 2027 when Kenyans head to their ballot and there are post-election disputes in either outcomes that requires intervention from the EAC community? How would that look like?