Afrocentrism as Diplomatic Practice

This chapter opens by situating the Abuja-Pretoria relationship within its historical context, drawing attention to the strained era under apartheid and the subsequent normalisation of ties following South Africa’s transition to majority rule in 1994 and Nigeria’s return to civilian governance in 1999 after prolonged military rule. It then explores both the material and ideational foundations of Nigeria and South Africa’s claims to regional leadership, as well as their comparative influence relative to other African powers. In this context, their dominance stands out. Whereas North Africa sees a contest for influence among Egypt, Morocco, and Algeria; East Africa among Kenya, Ethiopia, and Tanzania; and Central Africa between Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)—Nigeria and South Africa maintain uncontested leadership in West and Southern Africa, respectively. As such, they are seen as bearing the mantle of continental responsibility. The chapter also underscores the relevance of Afrocentrism—an African-centred framework for interpreting international relations—as a key lens for analysis. This perspective is reflected in both countries’ foreign policies towards each other and the broader continent, particularly in areas such as peacemaking, democracy promotion, regional integration, and Africa’s broader development agenda.

Nigeria-South Africa relations are arguably the most critical bilateral ties in Africa. Yet the relationship has experienced considerable fluctuations over time, significantly influencing the trajectory of peace, sustainable development, and regional integration on the continent. The prominent roles both states occupy in Africa—and their remarkable influence—stem not only from tangible assets such as economic and military capabilities (hard power), but also from intangible assets like cultural influence, guiding principles, and diplomatic approaches (soft power). Tracing these ties from the apartheid era to the post-apartheid period in South Africa, and since Nigeria’s independence, this chapter underscores the lost decades of relations (1960–1999), marked by confrontation and tension during apartheid and under military regimes in both countries. It then highlights the golden era of relations, as well as the more recent downturn in ties. This chapter therefore adopts Afrocentrism as an analytical lens to assess the dynamics of their bilateral relations and considers how these interactions shape their regional influence and contribute to broader efforts towards integration across Africa.

Given Nigeria and South Africa’s material and ideational capacities, their multilateral engagements are pivotal to the continent’s overall success. In other words, the numerous challenges confronting Africa—ranging from conflicts and authoritarian governance to the adverse effects of globalisation, such as climate change and terrorism—demand collective action rather than isolated state efforts. These issues can only be effectively addressed when both regional powers provide consistent and effective leadership. It is within this context that this chapter explores Nigeria and South Africa’s roles in ECOWAS and SADC, respectively, as well as their engagements within the AU and UN, through the lens of Afrocentrism. The chapter highlights the successes achieved in areas such as peacekeeping, democracy promotion, and economic development when the two states have collaborated, as well as the setbacks that arise when their positions diverge.

This chapter engages state-diaspora relations in Nigeria and South Africa, underlining the contributions of the Nigerian and South African diasporas to their respective countries’ national development. While there has been remarkable engagement between Nigeria’s government and its diaspora in the country’s democratic era, in South Africa, in contrast, the advent of democracy (majority rule) has been accompanied by the disengagement of the South African diaspora (the majority of whom are white) from the black-dominated government and, by extension, the home country. The implication of this is that while the Nigerian diaspora has contributed to national development—particularly through remittances and investment in the home country—the South African diaspora has contributed in a very limited way in this regard, owing to their discontentment with successive post-apartheid governments. While the Nigerian diaspora often demonstrates Afrocentrism and Afro-optimism, their South African counterparts tend to exhibit a degree of de-Afrocentrism and Afro-pessimism.

While there is increasing reference in extant literature to Nigeria and South Africa’s domestic responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, there is limited analysis on the states’ responses in both the domestic and international contexts as regional powers in Africa. This chapter seeks to fill this gap by exploring Nigeria and South Africa’s initial responses domestically and the regional powers’ roles in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Southern African Development Community (SADC), African Union (AU), and their engagements with external actors such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and European Union (EU) towards combatting the pandemic. It submits that Abuja and Pretoria leveraged their status as regional powers to provide leadership in African multilateral institutions, especially ECOWAS, SADC, and the AU, and to engage external powers towards ameliorating the socioeconomic impact of the pandemic in their respective countries and Africa, more broadly.

This chapter examines the space exploration efforts of Africa’s two leading regional powers—Nigeria and South Africa—within the context of persistent global Afro-pessimism, which continues to portray the continent as scientifically and technologically backward. Challenging this perception, both countries have emerged as key players in Africa’s growing space sector. Alongside Egypt, Morocco, and Algeria, they were among the first to establish space agencies and policies. Nigeria and South Africa account for a significant share of Africa’s satellite launches, with Nigeria having the most institutionalised space programme and South Africa leading in industrialised satellite production. The chapter examines their space policies, legal and institutional frameworks, satellite composition and capabilities, and how their space initiatives contribute to Africa’s development. It highlights their different approaches: South Africa’s focus on local satellite manufacturing, though with shorter orbital lifespans, and Nigeria’s reliance on international partners, resulting in longer-lasting satellites. Despite these differences and ongoing challenges, both countries have shown resilience and innovation, solidifying their status as regional powers. Their progress in space technology not only redefines Africa’s scientific capabilities but also offers lessons in collaboration and strategic development.

This chapter highlights the salient features, issues, and nuances that characterise Nigeria–South Africa engagement. By illustrating how Afrocentrism operates in practice, it underscores the significance and complexity of the Abuja–Pretoria axis, as well as the states’ multilateral efforts to advance Africa’s socio-economic and political development through key institutions such as ECOWAS, SADC, the AU, and the UN. The chapter also explores Afrocentrism in the realms of health emergency response, diaspora diplomacy, and space diplomacy. While acknowledging that there are instances where these regional powers pursue narrow national interests, the chapter emphasises that Afrocentrism remains at the core of their foreign policy behavior.