Somalia had UN envoys representing the UN Secretary General since the collapse of the State in 1991 and they are still around after some 36 years with James Swan, the last one. It was in the news lately that he will be leaving for another troubled country, the DR Congo sometime this year. Envoys do not solve problems but perhaps could be accused of being fuel for the fires, for which they are sent to put out. It is why it is a surprise that the African Union Commission, which is now under a younger African generation, has fallen into the same trap of appointing envoys for the region. It is already saturated with them.

There is Guang Cong of China as the new UN Special Envoy for the region replacing Hanna Serwaa Tetteh and representing the UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. There is also Mike Hammer of the United States in the region, and Dr. Annette Weber, the EU’s Special Envoy, Xue Bing, China’s Special envoy to the region and Switzerland’s Special Envoy, Sylvain Astier, and many more. Special envoys are generally deployed when governments and international organizations find themselves facing complex situations beyond the capacity of a normal embassy.

Envoys often report directly to a president, a prime Minister, or the head of an international organization such as the UN. This gives a special envoy the political weight needed to get into the room with heads of state and rebel leaders without the normal bureaucracy of a normal embassy. They are only sent when situations are sensitive and, of course, the Horn of Africa, being located in the junction of the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean is such a sensitive geographical space, which handles some 12% of global trade.

 It is the main artery for oil and liquified natural gas (LNG) moving from the Arabian/Persian Gulf to Europe and North America and currently it is under a great strain because of the ongoing Middle East war. Because of this strategic location, the region has become a theater for geopolitical competition among global and regional powers including  major and middle powers and even regional powers including the United States, the European Union, China, Türkiye, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and others, often exporting their own rivalries into the region, through backing different local factions, to secure ports and influence.

The  irony is that there is already a large array of envoys in the region all serving their countries and institutions, only prolonging the suffering of the people without solving the region’s acute problems, be it economic or political. The new African envoy appears to have been called to serve as diplomatic shield for external powers. An African envoy, such as the new one for the region, President Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, former president of the United Republic of Tanzania, as High Representative for the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea, although we wish him well, appears to have been appointed to champion for the principle of African solutions to African problems. Most envoys from beyond the continent are generally accused of being imperialistic or neo-colonial in nature. This new branding of African envoys allows global actors, such as the U.S., the EU, China or regional powers like the UAE to advance their strategic interests in maritime security and resource extraction without the political friction of a direct foreign mandate. The African envoy then inadvertently becomes a decoy, offering the symbolic face of continental sovereignty while the actual leverage, in the form of financial aid or military backing, remains firmly in the hands of non-African stakeholders.

Adding another envoy to the string of other envoys remains an indicative of the failure of the region’s leadership to make peace among themselves or peace with their own people. The high density of envoys effectively functions as a diplomatic life-support system. It confirms that the local political architecture (the presidents, parliaments, and regional bodies like IGAD) is no longer capable of resolving disputes through normal channels. When a Tanzanian or American envoy has to be flown in to get two neighboring leaders to speak, it is a public admission that regional trust has completely evaporated.

With so many different envoys (US, EU, UN, AU, China), regional leaders are able to shop for the mediator who is most sympathetic to their side. If they do not like the AU’s terms, they pivot to the Chinese or the Gulf envoys, effectively playing the international community against itself to avoid making real concessions.

The continuing mediation has become a permanent state of being. Instead of fixing the root causes like ethnic exclusion or resource mismanagement, leaders appear to have learnt to manage the process of mediation. The presence of high-profile envoys gives failed leadership a temporary status and a seat at the global table they might not otherwise deserve. 

Ultimately, the appointment of the new envoy Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete to the Horn of Africa will not add one iota to the situation of the region. It is only another new bandage on a wound that the regional leadership refuses to let heal.

© Eurasia Review