Year XXXIX, Number 1, March 2026

Oumar Barry

Political refugee and student of International Development and Cooperation Sciences at the University of Turin.

African federalism emerged as a historical response to the fragmentation imposed by the Berlin Conference, which created artificial borders and fragile states. The Pan-Africanist ideal of Kwame Nkrumah, centered on a strong political federation, encountered structural, geopolitical, and ideological obstacles that limited its implementation. Today, experiments such as the AES reflect a pragmatic version of federalism, adapted to contemporary challenges of security, autonomy, and regional integration.

To understand the concept of African federalism, one must go back to the 1884-1885 Berlin Conference, an event that irreversibly shaped the continent’s history. At that conference, European powers – France, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Italy, and Germany – set out to regulate the partition of Africa in order to avoid conflicts among colonial powers. Yet behind this seemingly diplomatic intention lay an arbitrary project of appropriation: Africa was divided like war spoils, without any African representative being invited to participate or negotiate.

One of the most dramatic effects of the conference was the creation of artificial borders, drawn with rulers and compasses, which split apart millennia-old social and cultural realities. Homogeneous ethnic communities were separated across multiple states, while populations historically in conflict were forced to coexist within the same borders. This process of colonial Balkanization produced a fragmented and unstable political map composed of state entities lacking a shared national identity.

The consequences of the conference were not only territorial but also deeply political. The imposed divisions fueled ethnic, linguistic, and religious rivalries that still today hinder cooperation among African states. In response to this fragmentation, the idea of African federalism emerged as an alternative: a political project aimed at overcoming colonial divisions to build a united Africa based on collective sovereignty and shared values. Federalism thus stands as a concrete possibility to heal the historical wounds of colonialism and promote a future of integration, autonomy, and peace.

In a postcolonial context marked by significant political and social fragmentation, Kwame Nkrumah emerged as a visionary and pivotal figure in Africa’s destiny. As the first president of independent Ghana, Nkrumah positioned himself not only as a national leader but as the champion of a broader, more ambitious vision: Pan-Africanism. This ideological and political movement sought to overcome the artificial divisions imposed by colonialism by promoting unity and solidarity among African peoples, so that they might confront the new political and economic threats of neocolonialism.

Nkrumah observed that the independence achieved by individual African states – though significant – was actually incomplete and vulnerable. The newly created states, often small, fragile, and lacking adequate resources, risked becoming pawns in the hands of Western powers that continued to exert masked influence through economic and political tools, that is, neocolonialism. His famous statement, “African independence is incomplete if it is not accompanied by unity,” summarizes this idea: formal autonomy could not be guaranteed without deep integration among African states. In his 1963 essay Africa Must Unite, Nkrumah developed this thesis in detail, proposing the creation of an African federation as the only way to build a strong and self-sufficient continent. According to him, only a unified political structure would allow Africa to have an authoritative voice in international relations, coordinate common defense against external threats, and initiate economic development and industrialization capable of freeing the continent from external dependence.

His vision differed from weaker models of inter- state cooperation – such as confederations or loose alliances based on voluntary agreements. He argued that the African federation should be a strong political union with a central government endowed with real powers, a common army, and a coordinated continental economic policy. This model, closer to the United States of America, would ensure the cohesion needed to overcome the ethnic, linguistic, and political divisions inherited from colonialism.

Thus Nkrumah viewed African unity as a revolutionary project, capable of transforming power structures and creating a new geopolitical order grounded in collective sovereignty and total liberation from old and new colonial constraints. His legacy remains a source of inspiration for many Pan-Africanist movements and for those who believe that integration is the key to Africa’s development and dignity.

In 1958 the Pan-African dream began to materialize with the creation of the Ghana-Guinea Union, the result of a profound political understanding between Kwame Nkrumah and Ahmed Sékou Touré. Their alliance went beyond simple bilateral cooperation: it was conceived as the first step toward the construction of the “United States of Africa,” a federation meant to overcome colonial divisions and restore unity, strength, and international prestige to the continent. In 1961 Mali, led by Modibo Keïta, joined the project, giving rise to the Union of African States, a political experiment intended as an alternative model to the fragmentation of newly independent states.

However, the union quickly revealed its fragility. Ideological differences and diverging national interests undermined the foundations of a still-developing structure. Nkrumah, inspired by strong centralism, believed that only a powerful central authority could ensure the federation’s stability and prevent nationalist tendencies. Touré and Keïta, instead, preferred a confederal approach that safeguarded the autonomy of individual states and respected their newly won national sovereignty. These contrasting visions were worsened by economic difficulties, institutional weakness, and the lack of a shared administrative apparatus capable of sustaining such an ambitious project. Within less than a decade, the experiment dissolved, leaving behind disillusionment but also valuable lessons for the future.

The failure of the Ghana-Guinea-Mali Union, as well as of other contemporary experiments – such as the Mali Federation between Senegal and the French Sudan (today Mali) – shows the deep challenges of African federalism in the postcolonial context. First, national sovereignty proved an insurmountable obstacle: after decades of colonial domination, the new states considered independence a precious achievement to be guarded, fearing that a supranational authority would limit their autonomy and overshadow their still-fragile national identities.

A second critical factor was the colonial legacy itself. The borders drawn by European powers created artificial states characterized by delicate ethnic, cultural, and linguistic balances. In this context, building a broader federal entity proved difficult: instead of healing divisions, union risked multiplying conflicts.

Another limiting factor was the role of political personalities. Charismatic leaders like Nkrumah, Touré, and Keïta embodied Pan- Africanist energy, but their personal strength became a weakness. Rivalries, distrust, and conflicting visions prevented the emergence of collective leadership capable of guiding the federalist project with a spirit of compromise.

External interference also played a major role. Former colonial powers viewed any unification project that could reduce their influence with suspicion. They often adopted divisive strategies, supporting rival leaders or encouraging fragmentation. Additionally, the Cold War intensified ideological divisions: federalist projects became entangled in the logic of alignment with the Western or socialist blocs, losing strategic autonomy.

In essence, the Ghana-Guinea-Mali Union represents a political laboratory of immense historical value: although it failed in the short term, it highlighted both the potential and the concrete limitations of the Pan-Africanist dream. It revealed that African unity, though widely shared as an ideal, requires not only political will but also solid institutions, balanced compromises, and favorable socioeconomic conditions. These difficulties did not extinguish the federalist ideal; instead, they pushed it toward more gradual paths, later expressed in the Organization of African Unity (1963) and, eventually, the African Union.

In recent years, the idea of African federalism or confederalism has regained momentum with the creation of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), established in 2023 by Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger. The three countries, each governed by military juntas that came to power through coups, formed a political and defense alliance in response to three major challenges: jihadist terrorism, internal instability, and international isolation due to sanctions imposed by ECOWAS and other regional organizations.

The AES portrays itself as an alternative to what its members perceive as a hostile and ineffective regional order. It takes inspiration from historical federalist visions through coordinated security policies, common defense, potential economic harmonization, and diplomatic convergence. However, unlike Nkrumah’s ideologically driven Pan- Africanism, the Sahel Confederation is a pragmatic, regional alliance born out of immediate political and military necessity.

Still, the AES faces many limitations reminiscent of earlier failures: a lack of democratic legitimacy, structural economic weaknesses, international pressure, and persistent ethnic and religious divisions. These factors challenge its ability to evolve from an alliance of necessity into a durable institutional project.

In conclusion, African federalism remains an ambitious political ideal. In Nkrumah’s vision, it was the only way to secure economic independence, political stability, and social progress for the continent. But history has shown how difficult it is to turn this vision into reality. Rivalries among leaders, national sovereignty, economic fragility, and external interference have repeatedly obstructed progress toward an African federation.

Today, in a world marked by new economic competition, environmental challenges, and regional insecurity, African integration remains a strategic necessity rather than a mere ideal. Institutions like the African Union, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), and regional alliances such as the AES – despite their limitations – may be viewed as building blocks of a more gradual, pragmatic federalism. The goal is not to replicate Nkrumah’s utopia but to adapt it to present conditions, creating spaces of cooperation that strengthen Africa’s voice and autonomy on the global stage.

To understand African federalism is to recognize that its starting point is not neutral: it is a response to a historical wound – Berlin 1884–1885 – that continues to shape contemporary governance challenges in Africa. As Kwame Nkrumah reminded us: “Africa must unite – not only for the sake of its peoples, but for the sake of all humanity.”