Photo credit, AFP
Soldiers received a warm welcome following seizing power in Guinea last year
Following military takeovers in five different African countries over the past year, some have suggested that democracy may not be the best form of government on the continent. But Leonard Mbulle-Nziege and Nic Cheeseman argue here that, despite these setbacks, democracy is the way forward for Africa.
Africa has been hit by a series of coups that threaten to drag it back to the 1980s and the era of military rule. Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea, Sudan and Mali have all seen their governments overthrown and replaced by a military junta.
The situation might have been even more alarming, as failed coup attempts were reported in the Central African Republic and, only a few days ago, in Guinea-Bissau.
To read especially on BBC Africa:
With each country that is added to this list, the voices that say democracy does not – and cannot – work in Africa grow louder. After all, the overthrow of civilian presidents has been followed by celebrations in the streets of some countries, with citizens applauding the downfall of elected leaders.
But if it is tempting to interpret the wave of coups as proof of the death of democracy in Africa, that would be a mistake. Even in countries where a coup has taken place, a majority of citizens want to live in a democracy and reject authoritarian regimes.
What’s more, despite growing frustration with multiparty politics, democracies on average generate higher economic growth and provide better public services, according to a study by Cornell University in the United States.
In contrast, military regimes have a long history of human rights abuses and economic stagnation.
Photo credit, AFP
These supporters of the Mali football team held a photo of coup leader Colonel Assimi Goita before a recent Africa Cup of Nations game
In other words, Africa can and does reap a democratic dividend – the problem arises when supposedly democratic leaders start using anti-democratic strategies to hold themselves in power once morest the will of their people.
This is a critical point. In countries like Guinea and Mali, the rulers did not lose their popularity because they established real democracies which failed because this system of government is somehow incompatible with African realities. On the contrary, presidents have lost support because they have undermined their own democratic credentials amid growing instability and – in the case of Burkina Faso and Mali – jihadist insurgencies.
This becomes clear if one goes beyond the headlines to ask why some of the recent coups have been publicly celebrated.
In Guinea, former President Alpha Condé controversially changed the constitution in 2020 to allow him to run for a third term. This was an unpopular strategy, not least because neither the constitutional referendum nor the general elections he subsequently won were free and fair.
Mr. Condé had also become increasingly authoritarian in the months leading up to the coup, imprisoning and wreaking havoc on his political opponents and anti-government activists.
Similarly, former Malian President Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta has been accused of rigging the 2020 legislative elections. Along with concerns regarding growing corruption and growing insecurity, this has undermined his personal legitimacy.
In both countries, civic leaders have lost popularity partly because they have moved away from democracy, not simply because citizens have lost faith in it.
Indeed, it is telling that while many people supported the coups that removed Mr. Condé and Mr. Keïta, the most recent surveys by Afrobarometer found that 76% of Guineans and 70% of Malians reject the military regime.
These same polls also reveal that support for democracy stands at 77% in Guinea, 70% in Burkina Faso and 62% in Mali – further evidence that citizens supported the military intervention in the hope that it paves the way for a more efficient form of civil government, not because they aspire to live under authoritarian rule.
Tellingly, when coups have been seen as usurping democratization processes, they have been deeply unpopular.
Photo credit, Getty Images
Sudanese protesters continue to risk their lives to demand an end to military rule
In Sudan, for example, thousands of people took to the streets to protest a military takeover in 2021 that undermined the supposed transition of power into civilian hands following the ousting of longtime leader Omal al -Bashir in 2019. Although hundreds of people were injured and at least 79 killed, the people of Sudan continue to demand their democratic rights.
One of the reasons democracy may remain the favored political system of so many African societies – even in countries where it has yet to be achieved – is the poor performance of authoritarian governments.
Rwanda is often cited as an example of what a “strongman” can do in the African context – delivering economic growth while reducing corruption.
Photo credit, AFP
Rwanda presents itself as a high-tech hub, but there is no room for criticism of the government
Yet Rwanda is the exception rather than the rule. In general, the absence of accountability under dictators and military juntas leads to increased corruption and less effective economic policy.
As a result, African democracies achieve on average higher levels of economic growth while providing better public services. They are also less likely to experience damaging conflict and perpetrate widespread human rights abuses.
The poor performance of authoritarian forms of government on African soil and the universal desire to have a say in the decisions that affect our lives are part of the reason why support for democracy remains high.
This, in turn, is one of the reasons why military juntas usually justify their actions by claiming that they were intended to restore the rule of law and save democracy from itself.
Another reason is of course the need to try to avoid international condemnation and sanctions by promising a return to multi-party elections and democratic governance. However, by invoking democracy to legitimize the takeover by the military, the perpetrators of coups d’etat put themselves in the way.
In many cases, but not all, new military rulers end up delaying the return to civilian rule. In some cases, it’s because they value the personal benefits of power and don’t want to give it up. In others, it’s because they have political projects they want to see through that are taking longer than expected.
Yet, having promised to pave the way for a more stable and inclusive government, it inevitably disappoints pro-democracy citizens, to the point that the putschists themselves risk being overthrown.
Military takeovers are unlikely to be an effective way out of this dangerous spiral, as each coup weakens democratic institutions and reasserts the power of the gun at the expense of the power of the ballot box.
To emerge from instability and insecurity, it will therefore be necessary to establish stronger democratic institutions capable of resisting the manipulations of political leaders, and not authoritarian institutions which exclude citizens and run counter to their aspirations.
Leonard Mbulle-Nziege is a research analyst at Africa Risk Consulting (ARC) and Nic Cheeseman is Professor of Democracy at the University of Birmingham, UK.
