Foreign policy review: A reset button?-I

 

President Samia Suluhu Hassan (right) with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and East African Cooperation, Dr. Stergomena Tax. PHOTO | COURTESY

By Erick Mwakibete

Summary

·         A successful foreign policy must be reflective of the country’s domestic priorities.

President Samia Suluhu Hassan announced last November that the country’s foreign policy is under review to make it more reflective of current realities.

The focus is still very much on economic diplomacy, but with a sustainable view of attaining economic prosperity.

Over the last two decades since the country adopted an economic-oriented foreign policy, critics have argued that it has become obstructionist, withdrawn, and overly cautious in venturing into regional affairs.

In light of escalating tensions between superpowers, the president recommended caution in order to keep the nation out of any future confrontations.

Will a review help change this perception?

According to experts, foreign policy is a projection of domestic policies on specific issues outside of the country's political boundaries.

In other words, for a foreign policy to succeed, it must be reflective of the country’s priorities on the domestic front.

Tanzania’s ‘traditional’ foreign policy under Mwalimu Nyerere was underpinned by a domestic policy of Ujamaa na Kujitegemea, which was anchored on the principles of equality for all people, unity, and a pan-Africanist view of regional and global politics.

For all the challenges Ujamaa na Kujitegemea had as a governing policy on the domestic front, like attempting to move beyond history’s pace, it seamlessly integrated with the interpretation of the country’s foreign policy at a time of momentous regional and global changes.

The liberation wars waged across the continent and the Cold War between the then-global superpowers were auspicious for the country.

Political stability at home gave room for political leaders to pursue regional and global ambitions.

By the time Mwalimu retired in 1985, Uganda had been through four presidents with none of them relinquishing power voluntarily, and to make matters worse, its future president and his rebel group were on their way to capture power in a year's time.

Kenya was down to its second president; a man who paid more attention to domestic threats and his own political survival after a failed coup attempt that changed him for the worse.

There was no appetite for lofty ideals such as Pan-Africanism.

Burundi was down to its second president and headed for another coup in two years’ time. With continued instability at home, there was no time for any marked footprint of its foreign policy on the regional or global stage.

Rwanda, too, was down to its second president, who had come to power in a military coup. The country was too consumed by its own crises to have energy and time to spare for regional and global politics, barring security issues, which consumed the entire Great Lakes region.

D.R. Congo (then Zaire) was under the reactionary regime of Mobutu Sese Seko, whose priorities in foreign policy were intended to guarantee the survival of his very corrupt regime.

He, too, had civil wars to contend with and secession attempts. His regime was a pariah to Pan-Africanists.

South Sudan was still 26 years away from becoming the newest nation in the world. Its future leaders were waging a bloody war to either secede or gain more autonomy from the rest of Sudan.

As such, through this mixture of successful foreign policy and political stability at home, Tanzanians came to pride themselves on being 'different' from their neighbours. This led to a sense of 'exceptionalism', with a high moral ground compared to their neighbours.

Mwalimu Nyerere’s magic was tying the many struggles of the era and the country’s involvement in them beyond any economic benefits; there was no tangible price tag. The country was giddy with its own achievements on the regional and global stage.

All the causes were noble, from hosting all sorts of liberation movements to providing moral and material support to them and hosting many refugees from the different conflicts in the Great Lakes region.

This is what made it possible for people to wholeheartedly support the country's foreign engagements. It was all too grand, too noble, and too precious to them.

All that changed with the 'new' foreign policy and its focus on economic gains.

The heirs of that great political shaman who captivated his country, the region, and the global powers with his spells have struggled ever since in their delicate dances of balancing between the domestic and the foreign.