Politics in Central Africa: A Reflective 
Introduction to The Experience of 
States and Region 
Luc Siiuljoun' 
II is timely and appropriate to write on "politics in Central Africa". It is a region 
which is under the spotlight; it is an epoch making region which carries the crisis 
of the Great Lakes states, the destabilisation of Angola, Congo, Democratic 
Republic of Congo and so on. In Joseph Conrad's terms, it is a region which forms 
the "heart of darkness." In the same perspective of gloom and catastrophe, it could 
be said that Central Africa manifests the anarchy prophesied by Morton Kaplan in 
the early 1990s. Such a pathological state has led to the imposition of both real and 
symbolic ways of constructing and analysing reality in African studies (Zclcza, 
1997). The preponderance of the literature of the "pathology" of the Africanist 
"ideascape" is a guarantee of the literary and so-called scientific success of Central 
Africa (Africa Today, 1998; Du Bois, De Gaudusson and Gaud, 1996: Bach et 
Sindjoun, 1997). Having said that, I should also add that I consider writings on 
Central Africa are important and perceptive. Now, I want to shed light on the 
circular relationship which exists between "pathological states" and pessimistic 
social scientists. It is worth repeating that social scientists significantly contribute 
to the construction of ways of analysing and conceptualising their chosen enterprise. 
Consequently, "epistemological" vigilance is required with respect to the 
quality of publications on Central Africa. Is it possible and acceptable in the 
scientific milieu, which has so far dominated the production of knowledge on 
Africa, to write on Central Africa without using, for example, the conceptual 
categories of "dictatorship" "authoritarianism", "civil war", "crisis of nation 
state"? (refer, for example, to the contributions of Anne Sundberg and Owona 
Nguini in this volume). The reality of Africa seems to be already conceptualised 
and I am not sure that, we the authors of this volume of essays, have completely 
1027-0353 © 1999 African Association of Political Science
2 Luc Sindjoun 
escaped this trap of preconceived notions. At least, we are aware of the danger of 
a priori categories. It is important to point out that facilitating repetition and 
routinization of the discourse on Central Africa has to do with the conservative 
functioning of the Africanist community. The normalization of the discourse on the 
pathology of Africa is not only the verdict of reality, but also an effect of 
institutionalisation of a particular tradition of research on Africa through referential 
journals, classic authors, great associations and meetings. 
One must not believe in the fantasy of a plot. Meanwhile, according to Bourdieu 
there can be an orchestration without a maestro (Pinto, 1998), in which case we 
might have an orchestration without a conscious plan, but based nonetheless on 
mutual adjustments inspired by the common sense of the individual members of 
the orchestra. In this regard, it is worth noting that Jean Frangois Bay art influences 
the sense of the analysis in Africa (in French) when he moves from "politics from 
below" to "politics of the belly" and recently to the "criminalisation of the state". 
Such influence is based not only on the pertinence of his argument but also on its 
strength. Jean Francois Bayart is the Africanist "ideascape" (co-founder and 
former editor in Chief of Politique Africaine, Director of a prestigious French 
research centre on International Relations and Comparative Politics, a series 
director of the Africanist publisher Karthala, Director of a journal of international 
relations -Critique Internationale). (Bayart, 1989, 1992, 1997). Central Africa as 
an opportune research theme is the result both of events unfolding in that area, and 
the thematic trend in the Africanist milieu. 
Having in mind these determinations, through a reflexive sociology (Bourdieu, 
1992), the researcher increases the possibility of an objective analysis. Central 
Africa as a unit of analysis then remains questionable. Obviously, "Central Africa" 
implies the regionalisation of African studies, the legitimation of area studies. But 
Central Africa as a unit of analysis is more an abstraction of the reality, a theoretical 
construct rather than a thesis. It is not part of the literature on "out of one, many 
Africas" (Martin and West, 1999). The crisis of the African continental 
metageography (Okafor, 1998), of the African continental metaidentity (Appiah, 
1992) is well documented and convincingly presented. According to the French 
geographer Denis Retaille: (my translation) 
"... the current world-wide simultaneity [due to global isation]reintroduces 
a possible definition of the continent by way of being, by the relation with 
the world instead of inherited lands bearing each one genuine civilisation" 
(Retaille, 1997: 73). 
From this perspective, what is called the African continent is fragmented into 
multiple locations. At this level, the location is defined from the categories of 
spontaneous geography: a location implies a high density of social relations, of
Politics in Central Africa 3 
exchanges and networks (Retaille, 1997: 79-102). In this respect, the use of the 
unifying labels such as "Africa" has the potential of being a source of hindrance and 
impoverishment rather than a helpful tool in articulating this multiplicity of 
locations. Given the reality of the multiplicity of locations in Africa, is it opportune 
to put in-the same semantic basket states and areas which do not form a system, 
having a high degree of interaction? In the sense of the "new geography", the notion 
of "equatorial Africa" proposed by Mahmood Mamdani to redesignate Africa as 
stretching from Sahara to the Limpopo, is contestable (Mamdani, 1998: 2). 
According to Mahmood Mamdani (1998: 2) "stretching from Sahara to Limpopo, 
Equatorial Africa is united by a common century of experience from slave trade to 
a late colonialism already beginning to move away from direct to indirect rule". 
The conceptual difficulty here is the customary recourse of Africanist scholars to 
naturalistic adjectives to characterise what is supposed to be a historical unity as 
Equatorial Africa. This tendency of unifying Africa into homogeneous spaces is 
more the point of view of ardent advocates such as Mamdani than a reflection of 
the reality itself, which is less homogeneous. 
The enchantment with the ideal of "many Africas" seems to be symmetrical to 
the disenchantment with "One Africa". It is a paradigmatic (and political) shift 
from one extreme to another. "Out of one" Africa is a fragile starting point of 
analysis. It is clear to a certain extent that the pan-Africanist ideology (embodied 
politically and scientifically by Kwame Nkrumah and Cheikh Anta Diop, respectively) 
has been an obstacle to knowledge of Africa. From the point of view of 
validation, what is closer to the reality is the dialectics of "One Africa" and 
"multiple Africas". There is a unitary formalisation of Africa which has to be taken 
seriously. That socio-political construction can be ascertained through different 
elements, for instance: 
- the grouping of all the African States around the OAU (Organisation of 
African Unity) which talks in the international arena on behalf of "One 
Africa"; 
the permanence of the pan-Africanist perspective as affirmed by proposals 
for an African Common Market, or United States of Africa; 
- The pan-African imaginary which uses slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism, 
and physical geography in order to construct an African identity. 
But the idea of "One Africa" does not have dominance over the reality. It is as 
much in conflict with, as it is complementary to "multiple Africas". "One Africa" 
and "Multiple Africas" are not immutable categories. They are methods of analysis 
and observation, which refer to different objects. Neither is more valid than the 
other. Each of them is a construct-a researcher's view of reality. Because they arc 
mere constructs, "One Africa" and "Many Africas" are relative. They imply a 
selection of objects. Due to the artificiality of "One Africa" and "Many Africas",
4 Luc Sindjoun 
one cannot claim pre-eminence over the other. They do not imply fetishism of 
cither diversity or homogeneity. The two are different representations of the same 
reality, of the same actions and institutions. What is at stake is the choice of the 
method of observation and analysis. 
This volume is based on "multiple Africas" with neither prejudice to the notion 
of "One Africa" nor making a fetish of plurality. It is a didactic choice, a choice 
whose objective is to help to contribute to the knowledge of specific objects under 
the umbrella of the Central Africa region. 
I should now turn to other issues. What follows introduces two points, which I 
shall substantiate in the remainder of this introductory essay. The first point is 
devoted to Central Africa as a region, and the second one will focus on the analysis 
of politics in Central Africa. 
Problematising Central Africa as a Region 
Conventional African studies and diplomatic practices seem to designate Central 
Africa as a natural region. This geographical and diplomatic entity must be 
questioned. What is Central Africa? Does Central Africa constitute a region? What 
is the pertinence of "politics in Central Africa"? 
The idea ol Central Africa is problematic. It produces competing images of the 
reality. Out of the many definitions of Central Africa I wish to deal only with the 
political and institutional definitions. These are the dominant definitions, which 
shape vision as well as action. This is because politics and institutions arc 
determinants in the construction of reality (Goodin, 1996: 1-53). I shall merely 
sketch my argument that Central Africa refers to a plurality of realities. 
• French colonisation created a specific sense of Central Africa, which is 
linked to a former colonial regrouping "French Equatorial Africa", consisting 
of Chad, Gabon, Central Africa Republic and Congo. After independence, 
Central Africa was then constituted as a sphere of French influence 
(see the contribution of Ayissi Ngah in this volume), as a club of former 
French colonies. This colonial legacy was appropriated by the post-colonial 
slates, and recreated in 1964 as the Central African Customs and Economic 
Union (UDEAC). 
This post-colonial pathway to regional integration has further influenced 
other interpretations of Central Africa, namely: 
the launching of the Economic Community of Central African States 
(CEEAC) in 1987 consisting of parts of Central Africa: Cameroon, 
Central Africa Republic, Gabon, Burundi, Rwanda, Sao-Tomc and 
Principe, Chad, former Zaire and Congo; 
- the formation in the early 199()'s of the United Nations Standing 
Committee for security issues, as part of CEEAC, which included
Politics in Central Africa 5 
Angola (see the contributions of AyissiNgah and Musifiky Mwanasali 
in this volume). 
States which are supposed to be part of Central Africa, arc involved in other 
regional formations. This is the case with the Democratic Republic of Congo 
which is part of regional organizations in Central Africa and in Southern 
Africa (see the contribution of Tandeka Nkiwane). It is also the case with 
Cameroon, which sometimes takes part in regional meetings for West Africa, 
and is represented on organizations such as the Lake Chad Basin Commission, 
which comprises Chad, Niger and Nigeria. Rwanda is part of Eastern 
and Central Africa regional groupings-i.e., a member of both the Economic 
Community of Central Africa Slates (CEEAC) and the Common Market for 
Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), as is the Democratic Republic of 
Congo. 
What follows shows the fluidity of regional identities, where some of states 
straddle multiple regions. (See Tandeka Nkiwane's contribution in this volume; 
also Shaw, 1998). There is also a fragmentation of Central Africa through subregional 
specificities like the Great Lakes Region. The autonomy of the Great 
Lakes region was institutionalised by the Economic Community of Great Lakes 
States (CEPLG) made up of Rwanda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of 
Congo (the former Zaire). The Central Africa of the media and diplomatic 
community seems to be reduced to the Great Lakes region. This definition of 
Central Africa is characterised by the "pathology" of Ihe situation and location on 
the one hand, and the necessity for peacekeeping and conflict resolution on the 
other (Bayart. 1997: 185-202). There is also the tendency to deal with Central 
Africa as news - as a problem for peace and security (refer to the contribution of 
Patrick Quantin in this volume). This perception conflates Central Africa with the 
Great Lakes Region, which carries the guilt of Tutsi genocide in Rwanda, as well 
as the crises in Burundi and DRC. 
Furthermore, "Central Africa" is not a homogeneous entity despite the attempt 
at naturalizing it through "Bantu Africa," as epitomised by Gabon's action in 
favour of an organisation for Bantu civilisation (CICIBA). This is a further 
vindication of the view that Central Africa is indeed a shifting configuration, 
evolving and changing continuously. Consequently, it cannot be comprehended 
outside its historical and material realities. However, I would argue that this 
changing configuration is in accordance with the logic of states. This is why there 
is also a redefinition and transformation of French influence, generally perceived 
as the "gendarme" of the region (see the contributions of Tandeka Nkiwane. Ayissi 
Ngah. and Martin Ebolo in this volume). 
"Central Africa" is a structured context of action and opportunities which is 
subjected to different conjunctures. The current conjuncture of war in DRC and
6 Luc Sindjoun 
crisis in Burundi and Rwanda reveals the fluidity and the porosity of "Central 
Africa". For instance, "Central Africa" interacts with "Eastern Africa" and 
"Southern Africa" through DRC. In this sense, therefore, "Central Africa" is not 
a monolithic entity. (See the contributions of Patrick Quantin and Tandeka 
Nkiwane.) It is an institutionalised fiction which produces effects of reality that 
orientates the actors involved towards a network of regional organisations and 
specific regional identities. (See the contributions of Musifiky Mwanasali, Patrick 
Quantin, and Owona Nguini in this volume). Therefore, each regional organisation 
is a manufactured space. 
The institutionalisation of Central Africa as a region is an excellent case of the 
manufacturing of space. The point here is not the assessment of the degree of 
regional integration in Central Africa. Rather, what is at stake is the understanding 
of Central Africa as a region. This is because it is not possible to talk about Central 
Africa without presupposing a region. Central Africa, as a category of perception 
and a division of space refers to a region; it is an attempt to create an "us" versus 
"them" distinction among states based on geographical solidarity, which is 
politically organized. The region is structured by politics of real or fictive 
solidarity, by a politics of geographic affection and interconnected interests. The 
region connotes different and complementary elements: geographic proximity of 
a group of countries, states with a shared sense of communal identity, etc. 
(Mansfield and Milner, 1997: 3-4). Despite the positioning of regionalism as one 
of the dominant narratives of contemporary international relations (Mansfield and 
Milner, 1997; Lake and Morgan, 1997; Fawcett and Hurrell, 1995), it is important 
to go beyond the fetishism of the word to resist its magic and apprehend its concrete 
existence in different contexts. 
Central Africa as a region is a consolidation of the Addis Ababa order. It refers 
to the formation of a system of states based on non-interference in the internal 
affairs of member states, peaceful co-existence, and respect for each other's 
territorial integrity. Contrary to Bayart's analysis (Bayart, 1998: 55-73), the 
current crisis in Central Africa is not responsible for the formation of systems of 
states. The system of states in Africa has always been part of the post-colonial era 
(Kontchou Kouomegni, 1977; Zartman, 1966). The Addis Ababa order is present 
in Central Africa through the definition of the region by states. The perception and 
the presentation of Central Africa as a region are determined by interstate 
organisations like the Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa 
(CEMAC) (former UDEAC), and the Economic Community of Central African 
States (CEEAC) (see the contribution of Owona Nguini). These organisations 
institutionalise a region and express a degree of "regionality". In the same 
direction, patterns of regional security are important: the Economic Community of 
Central African States (CEEAC) elaborated a non-aggression pact in 1996: in 
February 1999, a security mechanism was launched; and so on. (See the contribu-
Politics in Central Africa 7 
tion of Musifiky Mwanasali). Different institutions and norms indicate the constitution 
of Centra] Africa as a region. This is how "Central Africa" becomes a space 
of "we", of "us", i.e., "a space of sense" (LaVdi, 1998). Above all, the interstate 
normative and institutional culture of Central Africa as regionalism is reinforced 
at the national level by a constitutional law of regional integration. 
The post-Addis Ababa order is not an absolute demarcation from normative 
pillars of the state system; it is an expression which suggests a flexible intellectual 
posture, combining the real and the fictional, the respect for, and subversion of, the 
Addis Ababa order. By post-Addis Ababa, I am referring to the systematisation of 
actions compromising Addis Ababa in terms of non-interference in the internal 
affairs of member states, proliferation of non-state actors and so on. Contrary to the 
notion of a "post-Westphalian order" (Lyons and Mastanduno, 1995), the "post- 
Addis Ababa order" is not completly subjected to transnationalisation. I wish to 
indicate that the Addis Ababa order is dynamic and can be reinterpreted. The 
operationalisation of the post-Addis Ababa paradigm in Central Africa helps us to 
understand conflictual relations (within nation-states - for example, the DRC, 
Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, etc.); as well as transnational conflicts (DRC —Rwanda 
- Burundi - Angola) in the formation of a regional bloc. The regionalisation of 
conflicts is only possible in an area of interdependence. The effects of the conflicts 
(refugees, circulation of weapons, etc.) encourage or justify formal regionalisation 
(see the contribution of Musifiki Mwanasali) (Deng and al., 1996:145-165). In that 
perspective, non-state actors (refugees, mercenaries, etc.) can be actors in a 
regional integration. 
The region, as mentioned above, is influenced by geographic solidarity. But one 
may ask whether the unity among states is a sufficient criterion for tackling 
"politics in Central Africa". The legitimacy of such interrogation is reinforced by 
the diversity of political agendas in Central Africa- from one state to another, even 
within one state like Cameroon (Francophone agenda, anglophone agenda) (see 
the contributions of Anne Sundberg And Owona Nguini in this volume). The 
belonging of states to the same regional setting is not a sufficient condition for the 
generalisation of political analysis. This assertion is validated by the absence of an 
agreed institutional framework for political unity, which the European Union 
provides in the case of Western Europe. 
In spite of the above critque, I submit that the possibility of envisaging "politics 
in Central Africa" remains open. In fact, by using the paradigm of interdependence 
of societies (Nye. 1993: 160-179), it is possible to perceive indirect or direct 
exchanges, communication of political experiences and values. The relative 
diffusion of the politics of civil war in Central Africa has to do with transnational 
linkages between Rwanda and Burundi. Rwanda and DRC, etc. The quasisimultaneity 
of democratisation processes in early 1990's in all the states of Central 
Africa is partly an effect of such geographic proximity. The regional system of
8 Luc Sindjoun 
states exerts a constraint that is more implicit than explicit in this case. The 
constraint is appreciated in terms of honour-seeking at the level of the region. This 
is the trend in parliamentary politics; i.e., the foreclosure of physical violence and 
consolidation of competitive election as the only legitimate political game. The 
notion of "parliamentary politics" (which is borrowed from Norbert Elias' notion 
of "parliamentary states") refers in the Eliasian perspective (Elias, 1994) to the 
"sportization" of politics, i.e., the postulation of the legitimacy of competition, the 
consecration of adversarial politics and fair play. The relative "parliamentarisation" 
of politics in Central Africa is occurring in Gabon and Cameroon. In such 
countries, parliamentary politics is in opposition to military politics i.e., politics of 
normalisation of physical violence and consecration of violence as constituting the 
regime of truth and action in the politics of the nation-state. In contrast, military 
politics is embodied by Rwanda, Congo, DRC, etc. (See the contributions of 
Patrick Quantin; Sundberg; Ebolo, and Owona Nguini in this volume). Parliamentary 
politics and military politics are not necessarily absolutely antithetical in the 
reality. Processes of restoration of authority have resulted political hybridity. 
Recent developments in Equatorial Guinea and Chad (Luckham, 1998: 1-45), for 
example, the dynamics of sultanistic regimes (Chelabi et Linz, 1998) present 
excellent situations where the parliamentary tendency seems to converge with an 
equally prevalent tendency towards totalitarian governance. 
The categories of parliamentary politics and military politics are not the 
quintessence of politics in Central Africa. These two seemingly contradictory 
tendencies in reality aim at helping to make a minimal and modest synthesis based 
on the criterion of state - society relations. "Parliamentary politics" focuses on 
democratisation and its relative consolidation; "Military politics" emphasises 
authoritarianism, diffusion of war culture and privatisation of violence (Mbembe, 
1999: 3-63). Politics in Central Africa is not unidimensional. It refers to a plurality 
of practices, actions, representations and institutions which disrupt social relations 
and create opportunities for dominance. Yet, the emergence of parliamentary 
politics has not succeeded in finally replacing either military politics (see the 
contribution of Anne Sundberg), or the politics of (relative) dependence (see the 
contributions of Ebolo and Ayissi Ngah). I must therefore conclude this section 
with the caution that the complexity of politics in Central Africa, as everywhere 
(Olowu and al., 1999), is confronted with different paradigms. 
Theorising Politics In Central Africa 
It is not my intention to propose a theory nor a paradigm of politics in Central 
Africa. Rather. I wish to take advantage of existing theories and paradigms to 
discuss the subject. I want to narrow my analytical area of investigation by 
postulating that "politics in Central Africa" is not the revenge of regional knowledge 
on continental knowledge of African politics. One level of analysis does not
Politics in Central Africa 9 
include the other; each represents certain possibilities and constraints for the 
researcher. However, it is pertinent to acknowledge that, to some extent, the 
generalisation of ideas and conclusions about politics in Africa has detracted from 
the reality because of its prevailing tendency of universalising what is often 
specific and particular. I think that the tendency to indulge in generalisations about 
African politics is too present in "African studies". One of its most recent 
expressions refers to Mahmood Mamdani's book, Citizen and Subject (1996). In 
his objective "toestablish that apartheid, is actually the generic form of the colonial 
state in Africa" (1996: 8), Mamdani normalises South Africa under apartheid. If 
apartheid is by analogy de-dramatised, and considered as colonisation, then 
homogenisation becomes the regime of analysis. If we accept Mamdani's thesis, 
then apartheid within the iron law of colonialism is an intellectual fallacy due to the 
illusion of generality! 
It is necessary to go beyond the magic of concepts in order to apprehend their 
real social life. In Central Africa, the realities of colonialism differed from Belgian 
Congo (considered at a time as the Belgian King's property) to Cameroon, whose 
status from 1916 to I960 was a trusteeship colonised by the French and British 
under a UN mandate. Colonialism is a complex phenomenon. The different 
practices, which occurred under its banner, defy reductionism and banal analogies. 
What is important and scientifically pertinent is not the "absolutization" of 
similarities or specificities. What is paramount is whether or not we can comprehend 
and operationalise a scientific approach in order to organise the analysis of 
an area or a social fact in such a way that it helps discussion and dialogue in 
comparison with analysis made about other areas and social facts. It is equally 
pertinent to keep in mind that generalisation is no guarantee of scientific truth, even 
if it produces the illusion of a grand theory. 
Now, without any pretension to be exhaustive, I want to analyze some past 
attempts at theorising about politics in Africa. There are no theories specific to 
Central Africa. But it is challenging to see how already existing theories and 
paradigms can be opcrationalised to explain politics in Central Africa. 
Theorizing on politics in Central Africa has been and continues to be an 
enterprise of stigmatisation and denigration. As Zeleza (1997: 125) put it, 
"Epithets, anecdotes, and caricature have replaced sober analysis. Racist and 
racializing tropes have been coined as the most denigrating labels" in the discourse 
on African politics. The state is often described as "predatory", "collapsed", 
"kleptocratic", "precarious", "non-developmental" and so on (Nnoli, 1999: 9). 
The use of epithets is not a priori suspicious. In political science language, the use 
of epithet is acceptable if it is derived from a rigorous observation rather than as 
a conclusion based on imposed realities. However, political science by means of 
epithets is to be questioned. To quote what Edward Said wrote on the "Covering 
of Islam" in the US, politics in (Central) Africa "can be characterized limitlcssly
10 Luc Sindjoun 
by means of a handful of recklessly generalised and repeatedly deployed cliches" 
(Said, 1997). 
It is not scientifically pertinent to organize, in the context of "political science" 
by pejorative epithets, a defence and an illustration of politics in (Central) Africa 
through a political science of "us" against "them". The politics of seductive and 
impressive book's title ["politics of belly" (Bayart, 1989), "Africa Works: Disorder 
as Political instrument" (Chabal and Daloz, 1998)] is determined by urgencies 
of marketing. This is oversimplified and nourished cliche and reductionism about 
politics in Africa and Central Africa. Sensational titles can obscure the complexity 
of the reality and the relativity of scientific knowledge. "Politics of belly" or 
"criminalization" do not subsume politics in Africa. Even more striking is the 
tendency of conceptualization and innovations in African studies. To be precise, 
these are parochial conceptual innovations that sometimes "break the doors" 
already opened by sociological theories. What does the expression "Politics of 
belly" brings other than finding new ways of using the Weberian category of 
patriarchalism? (Bozzoli, 1998). 
"Political science of pejorative epithets" introduces a problem of validation. As 
a consequence, denigration and being pejorative are rendered possible when value 
judgement replaces observation and analysis. The challenge is to make politics in 
(Central) Africa as intelligible as the reality, and not to measure the gap, which may 
exist between it and what is considered as the model. The dichotomy of the 
enchanted model and the disenchanted reality is common in the analysis of states 
in Africa. States are generally compared with the so-called Western model. The 
analysis is either a celebration of the extent to which the model has been reproduced 
in the local milieu; or it is condemnation of the differences between the Western 
ideal and the reality. In this way, the real life of politics in a specific milieu is 
ignored. The validation problem arises from the fact that the celebration or the 
denigration of the distance between the supposed trademark states and the real 
states, as the case may be, is not based on objective analysis. According to Patrick 
Chabal and Jean - Pascal Daloz (1999: 11) 
"... it is clear that the type of state established in Africa turned out to be a 
mere shadow of the original". 
Such assessments ignore tragically the local dynamics of state appropriation 
and reinvention from which local actors make meaning. I would interpret the state 
in Africa differently from Bayart (1989). For example, the way he uses the concept 
of trajectory of African states minimises rupture with the colonial system, and 
privileges the "longue duree". My approach to the reinvention of the state in Africa 
emphasises the colonial rupture as a determinant point, and seeks to make sense of 
the re-appropriation of pre-coloniality.
Politics in Central Africa 11 
By emphasising the concrete life of states, the endeavour is not the consecration 
of extreme cultural relativity but the operationalisation of conceptual categories of 
political science. Contrary to the essentialist and substantialist use and critique of 
concepts such as civil society (Mamdani, 1996: 13-16; Mamdani, 1995:602-616; 
Chabal and Daloz, 1999), it is not interesting to lay down "Africa" on the 
Procrustean bed of "Western" experience. In that regard, the critique of Eurocentrism 
becomes paramount. From the perspective of an African political thinker, identifying 
useful theoretical and practical tools to make sense of, and analyse African 
politics is of paramount concern. 
My intention in the preceding sections was not to review the literature, which 
dominates the ways of analysing politics in (Central) Africa. This has already been 
done elsewhere (Hyden, 1999: 9-27). I want to focus on a few theories and 
paradigms that can be related to the current trends of politics in Central Africa. 
First, the theory of state collapse is now as prominent as the "failure of state" theory 
(Hyden, 1999: 14-16). The collapse of the states in Africa as analysed by Zartman 
(1995); also Reno, 1998) refers to the disintegration of authority, to the loss and 
shrinking of state authority. "Collapsed states" in Central Africa is an expression, 
which characterises DRC, Angola and so on. Many of the states in central Africa 
are contested by private or substate groups which are competing for the control of 
the territory and the monopoly of violence (see the contribution of Patrick Quantin 
in this volume). Collapsed states are "conflictualised" states. The intense conflict 
over the state is generally perceived and analysed as a sign of state "pathology" 
(Joseph, 1998). I think that paradoxically, conflicts in Central Africa reveal the 
consolidation of the state. I want here to mention the following points. 
- Conflicts are made intelligible through the conquest or the safeguard of 
power; state power is seen by actors in conflict as providing access to 
subjective and objective resources, as a fundamental instrument for the 
determination of a collective destiny which mobilises conflictual energies; 
- Mapping the itinerary of conflicts shows the importance of cities or towns in 
which state functions are located; in this regard the occupation of the 
presidential palace, the state's symbol of power par excellence, marks the 
ultimate triumph (see the contribution of Sundberg in this volume about the 
Congo); 
- Conflicts do not necessarily imply the end of the nation-state in a Weberian 
perspective. There is the possibility of envisaging the community of conflicts 
as referring to interaction based on mutual recognition of actors as revealed 
by confrontation, negotiation, etc. 
Conflicts develop around the state. In some cases, it divides and in other cases 
it unifies actors and the state. Conflicts are only possible in a system with at least 
minimal interaction among the parts.
12 Luc Sindjoun 
The critique of the theory of slate collapse made by Mamdani through the 
Congolese (DRC) example needs to be reinforced (Mamdani, 1998a: 8; 1998b). In 
Mamdani's view, the state persists in DRC because the state in the DRC refers to 
"the constellation of Native Authorities, through which order has been maintained 
in the Congolese countryside since the colonial period began" (Mamdani, 1998.a: 
8)". The role of Native Authorities is important. But it is not historically pertinent 
to analyse them in isolation from the state. Native Authorities were invented or 
reinvented in order to be part of the central state's penetration and domination of 
local societies. It doesn't make sense to proceed as Mamdani does by assigning 
Native Authorities to "ethnic power" and the "central state" to "civic power". 
These categories of reference are not separate from each other. In real life, they arc 
in constant interaction. Part of "civic power" is embodied in "ethnic power" when 
the state invents or canalizes ethnicity. Part of "ethnic power" is in "civic power". 
In other words, the illusion of dichotomy must be transcended. 
State persistence in (Central) Africa can also be analysed by taking seriously 
the state as a cultural form. The symbolic life of the state, expressed through 
rituals of state power, political socialisation and nationalism, can be an explanatory 
variable. The material failure of the state in terms of effective power over 
its territory and people can be compensated for by a relative symbolic success, 
which is that the political elite have successfully constructed a mental domain of 
reference. In that regard, one of the weaknesses of Jackson's analysis of the 
"negative sovereignty" of African States is the minimisation of institutions and 
norms that constitute the state in Africa. (Jackson, 1990) The institutionalisation 
of the system of slates should to be taken seriously. There is no sufficient 
argument from which the effective or material life of the state is to be prioritized 
over the symbolic and cultural life or vice-versa. Jackson focussed well on the 
international community as a resource for the existence of African states; but it 
was done more from the perspective of the pathology of African states than from 
the objective analysis of the dynamics of the state. Ultimately, the nostalgia for 
state formation in Western Europe prevailed over scientific analysis. To cite 
another example, it is clear that, for instance, in Angola and DRC the central 
authorities had lost control ol important parts of their territory. Meanwhile, there 
arc international expectations and pressures for them to act on behalf of those 
over whom they do not exercise any authority (sec the contribution of Patrick 
Quantin in this volume). 
The preceding analyses illustrate the importance of the idea of the state and also 
its mythology. The idea of the state can sometimes emancipate itself from its 
appaling material conditions. It is at the same time a fiction which can produce 
effects of reality. Finally, I submit that the "failure of state theory" (Hydcn, 1999: 
14-16) is the failure of some visions of the state. State theory can be rehabilitated 
through an operational and reflexive approach.
Politics in Central Africa 13 
Note
Luc Sindjoun is Professor of Political Science at University of Yaounde II, 
Cameroon, and Vice-President for Central Africa, African Association of 
Political Science. 
References 
Africa Today, Vol. 45, No. 1 "Crisis in Central Africa", January - March 1998. 
Appiah, K. A., In My Father's House. Africa in the Philosophy of Culture, New 
York, Oxford University Press, 1992. 
Bach, D. et Sindjuon, L., "Ordre et desordre en Afrique ", Polis, August 1997. 
Bayart, J. F., "La guerre en Afrique: deperissement ou formation de l'Etat" Esprit, 
No. 247, Novembrc 1998, pp. 55-73. 
Ellis S. et Hibou B., La Criminalisation de L'Etat en Afrique, Bruxelles, 
Complexe, 1997. 
, "L'embrasement de l'Afrique Sub-Saharienne" Politique Internationale, 
No. 77, 1997, pp. 185-202. 
L'Etat en Afrique, Paris, Fayard, 1989. 
Mbembe, A. and Toulabor, C, Le Politique Par le Bas en Afrique Noire, Paris, 
Kathala, 1992. 
Bourdieo, P. and Wacquant, L., Reponses, Paris, Seuil, 1992. 
Chabal, P. and Daloz, P. J., Africa Works. Disorder as Political Instrument, 
London, James Currey, 1999. 
Chelabi, H.E. and Linz, J. J. (eds.), Sultanistic Regimes, Baltimore and London, 
The Johnns Hopkins University Press, 1998. 
Conrad, J., Au Coeurdes Tenebres, Paris, Editions Mille et une nuit, 1999. 
Deng, F. and al., Sovereignty as Responsibility, Washington, Brookings 
Institution, 1996. 
DuBois de Gaudusson, J. et Gaud, M. (eds.), "L'Afrique Face Aux Conflits" in 
Afrique Contemporaine , No. 180, October - December 1996. 
Elias, N., Sport et Civilisation, Paris, Fayard, 1994. 
Fawcett, L. and Hurrell, A. (eds.), Regionalism in World Politics, Oxford, Oxford 
University Press, 1995. 
Goodin, R. E., "Institutions and their Design" The Theory of Institutional Design, 
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp. 1-53. 
Hyden, G., "Rethinking the study of African Politics" Governance and 
Democralisation in West Africa, Dakar, CODESRIA, 1999, pp. 9-27. 
Joseph, R., (ed.), State, Conflict and Democracy in Africa, Boulder, London, 
Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1998. 
Kontchou Kouomegni, A., Le Systeme Diplomatique Africain. Paris, Pcdone, 
1977. 
Laidi, Z. (ed.), Geopoittique du Sens, Paris. Desclee de Brouwer, 1998.
14 Luc Sindjoun 
Lake, D. A. and Morgan, P. M. (eds.), Regional Orders, Pennsylvania, The 
Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997. 
Luckham, R., "The Military, Militarisation and Democratization in Africa: a 
Survey of Literature and Issues" The Military and Militarism in Africa, 
Dakar, CODESRIA, 1998, pp. 1-45. 
Lyons, G. M. and Mastanduno, M. (eds.), Beyond Westphalia? State Sovereignty 
and International Intervention, Baltimore and London, The Johns Hopkins 
university Press, 1995. 
Mamdani, M., Citizen and Subject, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 
1996. 
"A Critique of the State and Civil Society Paradigm in African Studies" African 
Studies in Social Movements, Dakar, CODESRIA, 1995, pp. 602-616. 
Preliminary Notes on Political Science in Equatorial Africa, paper presented 
at "International symposium on Globalisation and Social Sciences in 
Africa", Johannesburg, CODESRIA/HSRC, 14-18 September 1998(a), 14 
pages. 
, The Democratic Republic of Congo, paper presented at the 9"1 General 
Assembly of CODESRIA, 14-18 December 1998(b), 51 pages. 
Mansfield, E. D. and Milner, M. V., "The Political Economy of Regionalism: An 
Overview" The Political Regionalism, New York, Columbia University 
Press, 1997, pp. 1-19. 
Martin, W. G. and West, M. O. (eds.). Out of One, Many Africas, Urbana and 
Chicago, University of Illinois Press, 1999. 
Mbembe, A., Du Gouvernement Prive Indirect, Dakar, CODESRIA, 1999. 
NnoYi,O., Globalisation and the Focus ofAnalysis Problem of Political Research 
on Africa, Paper presented at the joint IPSA - AAPS seminar on 
"Globalisation and the future of nations and states in Africa", Durban, 
January 26-29, 1999. 
Nye, J. S., Understanding International Conflicts, New-York, Harper Collins, 
1993. 
Olowu Dele, et at., (eds.). Governance and Democratization in West Africa, 
Dakar, CODESRIA, 1999. 
Pinto, L., Pierre Bourdieu et la Theorie du Monde Social, Paris, Albin Michel, 
1998. 
Reno, W., Warlord Politics and African States, Boulder and London, Lynne 
Rienner Publishers, 1998. 
Retaille, D., Le Monde du Geographe, Paris, Presses de Sciences Po, 1997. 
Said, E. W., Covering Islam, London, Vintage, 1997. 
Shaw, T. M., "African Renaissance/African Alliance: Towards Regionalism and 
New realism in the Great Lakes at the Start of the Twenty-first Century" 
Politeia, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1998, pp. 60-73.
Politics in Central Africa 15 
Zartman, I. W., Collapsed States, Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999. 
Zartman, I. W., International Relations in the New Africa, New Jersey, Englewood 
Cliffs, 1966. 
Zeleza, P. T., Manufacturing African Studies and Crises, Dakar, CODESRIA, 
1997.