Peace is not absence of scrutiny — it’s presence of accountability

Over the past week, Kenya has found itself at the centre of a deepening regional controversy. Investigations by several actors, including Nation Media Group, have linked the country to the Sudan conflict, alleging that arms have been funnelled through Nairobi to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF)—one of the belligerents responsible for grave human rights violations in Sudan’s ongoing civil war.

These revelations starkly contradict Kenya’s posture as a peace mediator in the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (Igad)-led peace process and cast a long shadow over its credibility in peace and security diplomacy.

These allegations place Kenya in the untenable position of profiting from the very conflict it claims to mediate.

This moment of contradiction comes at a time when Africa’s peacebuilding and integration efforts are in flux. On the peace front, frameworks such as the African Union’s Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development (PCRD) policy, the AU Peace and Security Architecture (Apsa), and the African Governance Architecture (AGA) aim to foster locally anchored, long-term peacebuilding initiatives.

There are also emerging shifts in global peacebuilding, including debates about the reform of the UN Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) and growing calls to decolonise financing and centre local actors.

Yet, despite these promising shifts, three persistent structural challenges continue to undermine meaningful progress across the continent.

The first challenge is sustainable, locally anchored financing. While the global conversation is increasingly turning toward decolonised financing, Africa’s peacebuilding processes continue to rely heavily on external donors.

Domestic resource mobilisation remains weak, and mechanisms like the PBF, in their current design, often sideline national actors and civil society by routing funds solely through UN country offices.

Achieving truly decolonised peacebuilding demands a shift towards innovative and predictable financing that centres African ownership. This should include regional peace funds, private sector engagement and direct support for national and community-led initiatives.

The second challenge relates to the true inclusion of civil society, youth and traditional actors. Despite decades of resolutions, community-based peacebuilders remain marginal to decision-making.

There are growing calls for the development of national peacebuilding strategies integrated into national development plans and backed by meaningful consultation with those living the realities of conflict. These actors don’t just need a seat at the table—they need to co-chair it.

The third challenge involves re-linking peacebuilding and governance. The artificial separation between security and governance has long weakened Africa’s ability to prevent and resolve conflict.

Read: Nairobi tells off Sudan over claims of Kenya fuelling conflictStronger coordination among APSA, AGA, the African Peer Review Mechanism, and the African Union Development Agency-New Partnership for Africa's Development (AUDA-NEPAD) have been proposed to address the structural roots of conflict.

Democratic governance must be treated not as an outcome of peace but as a prerequisite.

These systemic exclusions are not just policy shortcomings—they carry serious political consequences. They manifest in real-world fractures such as the weakening of the Economic Community of West African States (Ecowas) solidarity and the contradictions in Kenya’s diplomatic conduct, revealing a growing gap between peacebuilding ideals and actual political behaviour.

If left unaddressed, they risk eroding the legitimacy of African-led peace processes at a time when continental coherence is most needed.

These urgent calls for structural transformation come at a time of deepening political volatility and regional fractures.

Regional disunity is perhaps the clearest expression of the current fragility. Nothing illustrates this fragmentation more vividly than the recent withdrawals of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger from Ecowas.

These countries, which have experienced military takeovers in recent years, exited West Africa’s most significant regional bloc, expressing dissatisfaction with what they perceive as its overreach and Western influence. Their coordinated exit marks an unprecedented blow to regional solidarity.

These states are not just withdrawing—they are realigning, seeking security partnerships with countries like Russia and building alternative regional configurations such as the Alliance of Sahel States.

The implications are profound: they signal a growing disillusionment with traditional multilateralism and question whether the African Union still retains the moral and political authority to lead continental peace and security efforts.

Meanwhile, data from the 2024 Ibrahim Index of African Governance Regional Integration Report by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, paints a complex picture. Africa’s overall regional integration indicator improved by +4.4 points between 2014 and 2023, with Ethiopia, Benin and Ghana registering the highest gains.

This index does not only track trade—it measures multiple dimensions: free movement of people, infrastructure and financial integration, and political and institutional cohesion.

While some states are deepening cooperation across these domains, others are actively withdrawing, especially from political commitments. This growing divergence underscores how fragile the project of African integration remains.

The comparison between Ecowas and the East African Community (EAC) underscores this divergence. Ecowas, even amid political upheavals, has demonstrated overall improvement in regional integration, rising by +11.0 points over the last decade (excluding suspended or withdrawn members).

In contrast, the EAC has faced deterioration—driven largely by sharp declines in Uganda and Kenya (-17.8 and -16.6 respectively). This contrast highlights not just uneven integration but differing political will and institutional capacity to uphold regional commitments. It also reflects how internal governance issues can directly erode integration efforts, as seen in the EAC's setbacks.

In 2023, four Regional Economic Communities (RECs) performed above the African average of 43.4 (Ecowas, EAC, Southern African Development Communty and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa), while four RECs registered scores below this average (Igad, Community of Sahel-Saharan States, Economic Community of Central African States and Arab Maghreb Union).

These scores reflect regional disparities in policy implementation, political cohesion, infrastructure development, and economic integration. RECs performing below average often struggle with internal conflicts, overlapping mandates, and limited institutional capacity—factors that significantly hinder their ability to deliver on integration goals.

Kenya has long positioned itself as a key stabiliser in East Africa. Its leadership of the UN-mandated mission in Haiti and its pivotal role in regional diplomacy underscore this reputation. But if it emerges that Nairobi facilitated arms flows into Sudan, even inadvertently, it places Kenya in the untenable position of profiting from the very conflict it claims to mediate.

Read: Burhan accuses Kenya of hostility for hosting rivalsAt a time when the future of African peace operations hinges on trust, coordination, and principled leadership, such contradictions do more than harm reputations; they undermine continental coherence. This is especially critical as Africa steps into a new era of peacebuilding—one that aspires to centre dignity, justice, and decolonised approaches to security.

This moment demands more than concern—it demands action. As African states seek to chart their own peace and security futures, the following steps are urgent:A full, transparent, and independent investigation into the alleged transfer of weapons from Kenya to Sudan.

A clear reaffirmation of AU normative leadership, including consequences for breaches that violate the AU's peace and security architecture.

Support for rebuilding Ecowas credibility, while also reassessing how RECs can remain responsive to political shifts without compromising democratic values.

A redefinition of integration—beyond infrastructure and trade—to include shared political ethics, mutual accountability, and restorative justice.

A radical commitment to local actors—especially women, youth, and civil society—who hold essential knowledge but are persistently sidelined.

The real question facing Africa is not whether it can shape the future of peacekeeping. It is whether it can do so on its own terms, with integrity, and in ways that honour the aspirations of its people—not the interests of the most powerful players in the room.

As a gender, peace, and security practitioner, I believe that decolonising peacebuilding starts with naming contradictions, refusing complicity, and choosing the harder path of truth over quiet diplomacy. Africa deserves more than optics. It deserves authentic leadership that speaks from—and for—the ground up.

Nyambura Mundia is a Gender, Peace, and Development expert and co-founder of Usawa Inc. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. ( Syndigate.info ).