MCEBISI JONAS

In the current global turbulence throwing diplomatic and trade relations into disarray, it is difficult to decipher where exactly Africa stands. If there are African voices offering us direction and leadership, they are not significantly audible above the noise.

We are by no means a homogenous group, but we also cannot be passive spectators as seismic shifts impact the world order. Some countries are opting for survival strategies by succumbing to the weaponisation of trade. What this means beyond the current scramble is not evident. Such deals — if you can call them that — might turn out to be short-sighted and self-defeating, especially if they entail handing over resources in exchange for political cover. History has many lessons in this regard.

The question to be asked is whether Africa and its current crop of leaders are seen as equals, or are they allowing themselves to be relegated to second- and third-tier status in the global pecking order?

In his seminal address at the World Economic Forum in Davos last month, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney said that in the context of the rupture of the world order, it was time to build coalitions that work — “issue by issue, with partners who share enough common ground to act together”. “The middle powers must act together, because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.”

It is not that the new world is suddenly unfair; it is that power is now exercised coercively. The rules-based order is fragmenting and trade, security, and industrial policy are now inseparable.

Some of Africa’s leaders might be at the table, but what is certain is that the continent’s people and resources are definitely on the menu.

For years, Africa’s engagement with the global economy rested on a quiet assumption that markets would stay open, multilateral rules would soften shocks, and goodwill expressed through preferences would hold.

That era is over. It is not that the new world is suddenly unfair; it is that power is now exercised coercively. The rules-based order is fragmenting and trade, security, and industrial policy are now inseparable.

We see this in three key pressure points. Tariffs have returned as a lever of industrial strategy. Preference programmes like Agoa are held hostage by donor-country politics. And forums like the G20 reward blocs that arrive aligned, not countries that arrive hopeful. These dynamics determine who ships, who scales, and who absorbs the shock when rules shift overnight.

The recently released US National Security Strategy affirms that trade, supply chains and industrial policy are now instruments of national security. Europe, Asia and the Gulf are also tightening standards, subsidising strategic sectors, and rewiring supply chains. The direction is consistent: access is becoming conditional.

Africa can argue for fairness — and should — but it must also develop agility and adapt to the new reality.

Currently, Africa is adapting country-by-country, the least efficient response to a more conditional world. This fragmentation persists even as the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) represents a historic leap towards integrated markets. The vision is correct, but its operational pace is out of sync with the velocity of external shocks. AfCFTA provides the long-term runway; it does not yet provide the rapid-response mechanism that the continent needs to adapt.

If Africa can organise quickly through a credible coalition to empower its continental trade vision, it can turn relevance into influence and keep market access on workable terms.

Here is the pivot: Africa does not need more declarations. It needs a mechanism to decide, prioritise, and act when conditions change. The AfCFTA secretariat and the AU’s 55-member political home are central to continental legitimacy. But moving 55 countries at speed is structurally difficult. Consensus-heavy processes fail when timing is critical.

What’s missing is an additional tactical gear, a standing coalition of willing, credible and ideally regionally representative countries. Think of it as an operational arm for the AfCFTA’s strategic ambition — a way to translate the continent’s collective market size into coherent external negotiation. Light on formality, heavy on co-ordination and with a clear compact focused on execution.

This process should not be driven by governments alone. We need Africa’s intellectual, economic, developmental and societal thought leaders to help chart our path. This will broaden thinking and co-operation across the continent and add legitimacy and safeguards over common interests and resources.

The purpose is straightforward. First, define Africa’s external trade posture: a short, genuinely negotiable set of priorities drawn from AfCFTA’s strategic agenda, stated consistently to all partners. This includes AfCFTA’s key goals: market access in targeted sectors, rules that support value addition, standards cooperation that doesn’t price out African producers by default.

Second, provide speed. When external pressure lands a tariff surge, African countries are too often forced into fragmented, reactive negotiations. A coalition makes it harder to isolate individual economies. It enables faster shared assessment, tighter alignment on red lines and co-ordinated choices on when to escalate, hold, or trade. This doesn’t remove pressure entirely, but it reduces the cost of disorder and interrupts the “divide and manage” dynamic that thrives when countries scramble alone.

Over time, such a coalition can shift Africa from defensive reaction to purposeful bargaining: shaping rules where possible, naming trade-offs explicitly, aligning investment with demands at the border.

Safeguards are vital: regional balance, rotating participation, published mandates and routine reporting to continental bodies. The aim is to complement AfCFTA’s inclusive legitimacy with actionable speed, so Africa is not negotiating its future in slow motion.

Even non-alignment needs refinement. It cannot mean ambiguity. It must mean strategic openness with clear interests: working with competing powers on defined terms, without becoming a proxy arena.

As the rules-based order disintegrates, Africa’s people are the most vulnerable and our resources remain a trough for the powerful. Africa’s mineral riches are attracting major new investment. But in the absence of strong rules and institutions, our countries remain susceptible to predators.

We in Africa need to get in the game. If Africa can organise quickly through a credible coalition to empower its continental trade vision, it can turn relevance into influence and keep market access on workable terms. The terms of engagement cannot continue being set elsewhere while Africa pays the price for fragmentation, one country at a time.