It's official! As of November 24th, 2023, Somalia has joined the East African Community. www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/24/somalia-officially-joins-east-africa-trade-bloc Also I don’t know why I was shouting in this video
Honestly the EAF should just start with the original countries. Join together with them, since that’s the core of the country. Then once that’s stable, expand to the DRC or South Sudan. Those countries aren’t as developed and would be a strain on the union, and while I’m not against them joining, should happen only after it gets off the ground.
Nah, no man left behind. Having unstable neighbors would just deter progress in the region as a whole, just look at the past Congo wars, whereas if the "weaker" nations are also integrated into the common market, they are then also mutually invested in maintaining each others security and stability.
I feel like in the end only the core 5 of the initial proposal will stick. South Sudan and the DRC are potentially too unstable. It would be easy to build an identity around the Swahili history an make Swahili the lingua franca
exactly. trying to bring in Congo, South Sudan, Somalia, or other countries which have active conflicts or are about to is a horrible idea to be honest. stick to the swahili nations east of the rift valley..
I remember first hearing about this a few months ago and being very intrigued. It seems like a bureaucratic nightmare to get established but if it does then it would seemly be very beneficial to each country and the people. I think of those industrialized mega cities in Africa like New Mombasa in Halo which would be a dream
@@chronicallyboredenby Yeah, a Giant multi-sided civil war with foreign powers meddling in it, a debt, hyper-poverty, overpopulation crisis, and a giant famine surely sounds great!
As a congolese. The DRC should have focused on the development of our country. 80% of our country is not at conflict, we getting better in fixing our political problems, with an enormous country. We have the majority of the population. Let’s focus on building our country first. We have come a long way since the Congo wars. Fix before joining.
The problem with several countries merging into one like this is the whole endeavor hinges on several leaders giving up their power to one central authority, and each leader thinks they should be that central authority. For the EAF to be viable, they need a George Washington-esque figure who everyone can agree should be the person in charge. No President, Prime Minister, or what have you wants to voluntarily reduce themselves to a regional governor unless they stand to gain an extraordinary amount in political or economic capital.
Power sharing arrangements ...eg rotating Presidency or Constitutional Seperation of powers eg President from most populous member state, VP For Internal Affairs from second, VP gor External Affairs from next and rotating PM from the other states. Each state could have designated Cabinet Roles assigned to so that Fed Cabinet is proportionalised ...then equal number of Senators from each state like USA and proportional Parliament.
@@kevinwarburton2938 That can work but then again African leaders are notoriously corrupt and they want more power for themselves, with them probably not standing power sharing agreements. There's a power sharing agreement in my home country for the house of the representatives between 2 representatives (both allies of the president but clearly trapos as they are called in the Philippines) but it ended up being politically divisive, imagine that 2 people being 6 and you get what I mean
there's always an EU-type situation where higher, independent governing body is slowly given more power until the federation basically functions as a single country
As a Kenyan, I believe the Federation will be a great idea as most if not all nations involved have mostly similar cultures. And our economies merged will surely propel us further on the world stage, it's only a matter of if the Politicans will agree to surrender power for the greater good which I hope they do
I'm surprised you didn't address the elephant in the room that is the DRC's political status in an East African Federation. The DRC is roughly the size of the rest of the Federation and has (by my unrefined estimate) over 1/3 of its population, so if the Federation were to preserve the integrity of its member states, the DRC would exert an enormous level of gravity on its politics. Federations always hate it when one constituent ends up with more influence than anyone else, but pair that with the DRC being underdeveloped and more peripheral compared to its eastern neighbours for some potential chaos over what the DRC's place in the EAF would or should be.
In the federation,they would break the drc apart.Probably gonna make katanga region,and a region in DRC heartland near the atlantic and another region in the remaining area
Yeah man, totally agree. I think they did it becouse of the natural resources in the west of the DRC wich are very valuable and in fact have been indirectly exploited by Rwanda for a while. Having the DRC in the union would make access to those resources much easier at the cost of complicating even more the full integration between the members
@@mathiaszx1001 True, this shows that the unification seems to be more of a media stunt, while the alliance that comes with it when you want to join is more about economics anyways.
Well I don't think it's impossible Not by a long shot it'll just take a lot more time After all baseless pessimism doesn't get you places my friend I can understand adding the DRC after all because they have all those resources which in addition with their size stretching all the way to the West Coast can potentially make the hypothetical Nation really powerful but still can't understand the inclusion of South Sudan all too well Edit: I should mention your pessimism isn't baseless, I certainly see ur point 😅 But I do think the phrase impossible isn't quite the right word for this
Also you know they could just combine the core five countries first and then once they do that slowly work on establishing enough stability in the other two to start the process of integration
@@thatguynoonelikes4865 That would be an option, although considering the instability of the DRC, this would, at least with the latter, take the form of influencing the eastern part of the "country", and not outright annex it.
I find it interesting that a solution to the problem of borders is to just create bigger borders, since the issue with a lot of these countries is that they have one country when there should be several, with different regions ethnic groups, etc. but in the end I suppose it makes sense in that a large country that was more unified with logical borders could very well become a good thing. Honestly I’m cautiously optimistic about the EAF, I feel it could do a lot for fighting poverty in Africa and democratization. Such a country would actually be able to fight off insurgents.
@@edk487 Well that's a problem that The Philippines has already had since forever, and yet I've never hard anything bout them fragmenting, despite also having lots of "ethnic tensions."
@@edk487 yeah it’s a tough one, I’m not that familiar but maybe a language like English might work? This is assuming the drc has a sizeable English speaking population, because I know the other nations have at least some spoken English.
@@chronicallyboredenby Many DRC citizens can barely speak fluent French, their official language, yet somehow we expect them speak some basic English? Lol. Many of them are poor and uneducated sadly, and trying to force English on them, or French on Uganda/Tanzania/Kenya can result in another Anglophone Crisis in nearby Cameroon where the Cameroonians there hate French being forced upon them. Another example are how people in Québec in Canada are mostly bilingual, and on an official level they're almost purely a French-speaking region of Canada. Yet they hate being forced to speak English within Québec. So yea the English/French language rivalry and status will quite often result in conflicts, and I don't see how there can be an easy lingua franca among the EAF after the joining by the DRC. Imo the DRC should had found ways to forge closer ties to its French-speaking Central African neighbours with a common lingua franca, and also because it's already in the ECCAS (Economic Community of Central African States) with its French & Portuguese speaking neighbours.
The problem when we Africans talk about unity is that we often forget that our individual countries are so fragmented within. It shows clearly in electoral times that the determining factor for allegiance is the ethnic group or the tribe. The state often exist just on paper and doesn't mean much on people psychology. Let's find first ways of having our many tribes within the individual countries loving each other and accepting to live together in harmony before thinking of African or regional unity. We are too emotional and less rational on this subject.
ik but speaking for rwanda as a rwandan, we conquered the disunity after 1994, and we have prospered since, however for this to work we need to stop with our interference in congo for this to work
To be honest this idea could have worked better if it first formed without south sudan and the Congo, both have terrible conditions and trying to fit them all together as quickly as possible might scare off the other players of the project. Bigger is not always better and things that sound great on paper in practice sometimes fall apart. It be great if they can get it to work but I have my doubts.
There are geopolitical moves at play. The way it is seen here is the more developed and stable nations Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania will assist in the stabilization and development of DRC, South Sudan and Somalia. There have already been military interventions. It was mostly Ugandan, Burundian and Kenyan troops that broke Alshabab's control over most of Somalia, they're still there, a Ugandan military intervention prevented genocide in Sudan in 2015 when the vice President carried out a coup, the rebels had captured all the major towns and were outside the state house in Juba when Ugandan special forces dropped in by air, retook the capital then went ahead to recapture the rest of country in a matter of days, stabilized and held it until international pressure forced them to withdraw stating they had no business intervening. Tanzania, Uganda and soon to be Kenyan forces have and continue to carry out operations in DRC to suppress groups like M23, LRA and ADF. On the economic end towns and cities in the DRC, South Sudan and Somalia have been profitable markets for traders and companies in the founding 5 nations. They recognize the opportunity for a lot of growth in these places. Yet they can't be fully exploited if their current governments continue to be solely responsible for their security. So the federation is seen as a path to the stability that will bring economic growth. Not the other way around.
kinda...in my opinion while it possible we see a them become dead weight for the union they do also bring lots of advantages 1.South Sudan and DRC have lots of possible resources that could be exploited 2.The DRC gives this new federation a port to on Atlantic which could come in handy especially if they want to export to stuff to European countries and obviously the cons are SS and DRC are unstable and poor although again it's possible this union increases the stability and decreases the poverty of these regions if the much more stable if this new union invests in them. Well see how it goes but one thing you have to remember is Burindi which is one of OG's is too very poor,underdeveloped and unstable from what l know does that mean they shouldn't be a part of the union...no because it still has lots of potential. Basically all these nations are poor and unstable that's why they are making this union in the first
It would be faster yes. But the union is more about making huge economic and geopolitical gains in the next decade when Huge growth and development will be taking place in Africa. Withe Congolese and Sudanese land and resources the EAF will make us Nigerians consider a West African union
I agree with this, I think it’s important that they aren’t trying to bail out poorer nations right away. I mean, Burundi is pretty poor but I’ve seen some comments on TH-cam from Burundians saying that the cities aren’t very poor so idk.
@@chronicallyboredenby Burundi is also fairly small in terms of both land area and population, so it wouldn't require much effort and and money from the rest of the EAU to help it grow (at least compared to South Sudan which is in chaos and larger in area and the DRC which is massive in all term and it is not stable) In addition, it's infrastructure is close with Rwanda. But most importantly, Rwanda and Burundi has (mainly) the exact same people groups - so socially, it won't be any problem at all.
Hell, even first-first step should be that only Kenya and Tanzania should unite. They're the most stable countries in the community that share the largest border. Prove that works and the rest should all just fall in one by one.
For some reason I genuinely hope this country does work out. The people in Africa had it rough for to long, and it would be great to see an African nation fixing its internal problems and prospering into a great country.
The migration attraction will be great too once they industrialize and root out corruption. If the country remains stable enough for half a century the population will explode
Something that doesn't get discussed is that within the AU, the EAC, ECOWAS, SADC and other now failed institutions were formed with the aim of integrating their respective member states economies and developing them until we're ready for full continental integration. However, this starts to fall apart when some countries become part of multiple development communities. The DRC and Tanzania are part of both SADC and EAC. If SADC decides to make the Rand its official currency, then how does affect the DRC and Tanzania and their East African Shilling. The way I see it, EAC's reckless expansions will lead to its own collapse and perhaps SADC as well.
I think these are simply matters of hedging bets. They want integration and know that it is a necessity in the future. They're placing their chips with multiple entities and will ultimately sign up with whomever gets there first. Tanzania already has a history of merging in its past and was part of the original plans for the EAF. That fell apart and they were then willing to join with whichever project seemed most promising, be it from the south or the east. Since the East African project is now further along than the Southern one this is likely where they will end up which simply means dropping all associations with the Rand and SADC. I see this as a race; Africa needs intra-African social and economic integration for it's own future agency. The region that gets there first will have alot of say over how the future of Africa's borders will be drawn. You already see countries that one might never have thought of as associating culturally as "East African" (Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan) suddenly interested in this union because they see the writing on the wall and it's better to be in on the ground floor than to ask in later on when the EAF could be holding all the chips and can make all sorts of demands on new members as well as un-aligned regions of Africa that aren't as unified.
As a Nigerian that lives in the U.S. I want this to happen so bad ik it will be hard but I only see good things coming for this I truly only want the best for Africa
@@MR.CLEAN777 n from what I can see either Kenya or Rwandan president as those two have had a huge growth but mostly Rwanda since they haven't seen much from the new kenyan president hope this helps
@Doublethink If EAF were to have a alternate name it would be called Banyakitara or simply Kitara because that's the name of the kingdom that controlled the land of each of these former states .
@Doublethink Seems prudent to first start with the countries that speak Swahili, and are therefore easier to unite, then possibly add other countries later.
Yea the DRC in the EAF is already an oddity. Not to mention that the Rwanda is busy backing the rebels in the DRC, in which the violence and refugee crisis then spills over to Uganda & Burundi. And Uganda, Burundi & Rwanda have remained notorious dictatorships over the past few decades. Why would dictators and their elites want to give up more power on a federal level to the EAF whenever possible? I really don't see how the EAF can work, frankly, even without the DRC. Countries must first fix (or at least, greatly reduce) their core problems, before being able to form a union/federation.
True, yes, but the congo has a lot of resources, with the proper money spent into investment they could clean it up. Not an easy task but it is possible.
I’d say the EAF needs to cut Congo loose off they want the project to succeed. The DRC will be a massive weight around the neck of the EAF, that could very likely drag the country down due to having so many more problems, then the other original countries. It needs to stop admitting new members to the project at least temporarily. If they keep saying yes to new partners it will only make actually unifying and settling on a final formula more difficult.
The fact that Somalia was even considered is a big lol to me, it doesn't make sense to accept all those who applies ! DRC is obviously a problem but they probably wanted it because of the resources.
Including the DRC just makes the whole concept dead on arrival tbh. South Sudan joining so soon was imo a major error, the 5 main states should have been merged first and *then* add new states.
I think there are too many conflicts between the countries here, especially the DRC and the Great Lakes countries, but also between Uganda and Rwanda themselves. It makes a lot of sense for Tanzania and Kenya to pursue greater integration/EU-style federalism, but then again Kenya also gains a lot strategically from its current independence and is the richer of the two by a lot. Something like this should probably be done in careful stages.
@@Bigzthegreat but too much corruption and poor management, and violence makes the country not worth it to admit the DRC into the Federation, even though that the DRC has the world's largest mineral deposits
I dont think Museveni of uganda would give up his power.The Tanzanian,Kenyan and Burundi leaders can come to a compromise but for the rest i dont think its quite posible
Europe became the union it is today only after 50 years, starting from an economic union just like the EAF. I know that we’re talking about two different circumstances, but after looking at this video and informing myself on Wikipedia and various articles, I think that considering where their progress is now, something this big can be done in 15-20 years with a good management behind it.
With South Sudan, Congo and Somalia joining the EAC. It looks like deeper political and economic integration is becoming increasingly distant. They should’ve stuck with the original five, then gradually advanced from there.
I think the 5 countries should unite first then South Sudan and DRC. Uniting these countries right away will just spontaneously combust the country. The core nations will be smaller than DRC and Algeria in terms of land and Nigeria in terms of population but an easier area to stabilize (Rwanda and Burundi already had similar histories, and every nation has somewhat of a similar geography, and yeah like he said, religion) and there's very little sign of instability in the core nations. I'm not entirely against DRC joining as that's a lot of resources but A. They should worry of the effects of Dutch Disease, B. Mind the effects of geography (DRC is more than half Jungle only useful because of the Congo River and hidden resources unexploited because it's hell) and C. They need to stabilize the area first especially the relation with the East (which has more in common with the core than the west) and the West of that gigantic nation especially as the West part is too different. For South Sudan, it depends on them but if I'm the ruler of EAF, I'm not against the idea of just scrapping them in the plan as their only benefit would be the added population, but if SS can be stabilized, then no problem with it as it has the same geography with the core.
Assuming the EAF invests a lot into them, the DRC and South Sudan would benefit the most. I have a hard time comprehending why the other 5 even let them join in the first place.
Populists from each nation will find a way to vilify it and will easily bring out xenophobia and racism to make sure that it never happens. Especially since they will realise that populism would be harder to pull once the nation unite, so it would be their last chance to get power. The whole dynamic is scary !
I think the DRC would collapse and then the eastern regions and Katanga would join the EAF, Congo is simply too big and unstable and it would unfortunately drag the rest of the union down despite its vast resources and access to the Atlantic. Even if the eastern regions aren't formally part of the EAF they would effectively be satellite states of the union and economically dependent on it.
DRC by far has the most potential in all of Africa, no, they don't just have resources they are FUCKING FILLED with it. DRC has a big population and an incredible amount of Resources. An EAF union (if it were not just a corrupt failure) would have well over the strength to crush down insurgents within the Congo. Rising stability within the region to the point that EAF can organize its own projects so the new generation in DRC instead of joining insurgent militias instead to have a job to do. Basically Crush current insurgents -> Develop the DRC lands with infrastructure, connecting it to the Indian Sea possibly -> New generation now has a lot of jobs as construction or manufacturer = Passive Region within the DRC The DRC really only failed cuz foreign powers killed it and early independence meant that regionalist gained to much power. It truly can make the EAF 2x as rich
btw. if you ever do a video including Switzerland, as for the choice of animal: foreigners may think a cow would be fitting, but we don't actually regard the cow as national animal (because we don't have one, every canton instead has its own), it's more comparable to how cats are regarded in other countries (or here). Well, cats you could milk. Cats would only really fit Egypt as national animal, by the same token of not being iconic/specific enough anywhere else. I would prefer either two other animals (which non-Swiss are not even aware of as being iconic here): Alpine ibex (where we are the biggest habitat for them) or marmots (frankly I can't tell you why, we just regard them as kind of a cute joke animal here). These are two wild animals, instead of domesticated, so preferable.
Marmots are super cute. He should definitely put marmots for Switzerland. As for ibex, I believe it would be a good animal for Yemen. Not the alpine ibex obviously. I mean arabian/nubian ibex
Also he used eagle for Egypt. He uses cat for Turkey which fits us turks very well. Our national animal is greywolf but we have national dog(Kangal dog) and national cat(Angora cat)
Had no idea D.R. Congo had also joined. The original idea seemed interesting, but as more members get in the more absurd it gets, so I don't expect this to happen unless DRC and South Sudan get out.
@@SuperCrow02 I'm not talking about a union like the EU, I'm talking about unifying as a country. The full EAF would be a mammoth of a state, and I just don't see it happening.
@@rsmapping8539 It's more like India or Pakistan than the EU, I was just making a comparison with the Congo and Germany (a bad comparison in hindsight considering the Congo is much more impoverished than other potential members of the EAF) Still we've seen states like this before. India, Pakistan, the Central American Republic, and Yugoslavia. They haven't all succeeded but it isn't impossible that this one will.
If you ask me the EAF should mainly focus on the original 5 members, and not South Sudan or DR Congo, since they're both having civil wars which would present problems, I think the EAF should focus on consolidating their control first and making sure they have a stable economy in their core nations, before expanding outwards. I think the EAF has massive potential, they just need to play their cards right
The country could potentially work if it stuck with the original core. But adding the DRC, South Sudan, even Somalia would make it a guarantee that it collapses. Those three are far too unstable to ever be more than deadweight and would drag the whole federation down. Why their petitions were even accepted is beyond me.
@@NadegeNadiaKabaseke Why do people say bullshit like this? Do you want me to do research? Point me to the research that backs up the idea that Somalia, the DRC, and South Sudan aren’t basically failed states. They have levels of systemic poverty and corruption that would make anyone’s head spin in shock and confusion. Every other country on this list, especially Rwanda have made incredible strides to becoming stable prosperous nations. Ones that set an example for the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa. Having them be dragged down by deadweight would be a travesty to the progress they’ve made.
@@preoximerianas I think it has to do with resources and trade the DRC is the country with the most recourses in the world which would give them a lot of leverage in the world stage, South Sudan has also quite a few recourses plus it gives them access to the Nile and by extension the Mediterranean and Somalia has the longest coast of any country in Africa giving the federation a huge access to the sea and also the very important trade routes from the Suez Canal to china
@@abdiali871 maybe because Burundi is a small nation with a small population while the DRC is about the same size as the rest of the federation and 1/3 of the population and Somalia and South Sudan are quite big and have a greater population than Burundi
Okay, but will the institutions responsible for governing and administering the East African countries become more democractic and liberal or will we they just have systemic corruption on steroids. I am not saying this in bad faith but a more critical look at the East African nations such as Uganda and Rwanda mostly want the East African Federation to legitimise the violence and brutality of their regimes with economic enrichment to coverup their human rights abuses against their own people. If the EAF is to materalise it will be forced on many of the citizen within it's borders.
It would be beneficial, economically speaking, but tribal conflict is a plague in this region. You'll need someone like the president of Rwanda to start erasing tribal identity and build a national one for the betterment of the people
@@SuperVladamere Kagame is erasing identity ?? Are you dreaming or what? Currently in Rwanda the regime is Tutsi and Hutu are considered as genocidaires just like slave
I thought the EAF was a very good idea until they decided to let the DRC join for some reason. The DRC is barely a functioning country that is already too big to handle. Not sure how bringing them into the fold will help anything.
The East African federation is like these guys are best friends. They all have something in common. They have a horrible past, they are poor and etc. They all live in an average house together, combining their wealth. Their income is average. They share stuff around the house like bedrooms, tv, bathroom, and etc. Sure they do fight one another, but they can solve their issues. Tell me what the East African federation is like in your comparisons. Pls don’t get offended, I did this before with DRC, and etc.
I love your videos. They're fun to watch and very informative. I also really appreciate the fact that you always summarize the key points at the end of the videos... it's very helpful! Keep up the good work!
I'm no expert but including South Sudan and the DRC doesn't make much sense to me. At least not until the originally proposed countries have a chance to stabilize and prosper as a new nation.
I am not surprised at all by the number of times you have mentioned the word "if." That means that there are so many obstacles to overcome on the way to an East African Federation (EAF), that one wonders whether it would be feasible at all. You only have to look at the East African Community (EAC), which was founded in 1967 and collapsed 10 years later only to be revived by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Even though the East African Common Market (EACM) was the driving force behind the EAC, it has never been fully realised after all these years. Moreover, the EAC is now seven countries, including the newest member the DRC. That even makes it harder to come to a satisfactory agreement on the way forward. A common currency of the seven countries planned to take effect by 2023, may be the first move towards the EAF. Still, it remains to be seen whether it will ever materialise at all. Underlying all this will be one key requirement, which may determine the failure or success of the EAC evolving into the EAF. It will be the manner in which the legislative assembly of the EAC conducts its affairs in Arusha as required by the constitution. The Constitution of the EAF would remain only on paper, unless it can be made to work as the law it was meant to be. Given what we have seen in the governance of the seven-member states since independence, I am not optimistic that the constitution would be taken seriously. Failure to set up a democratic legislature in Arusha, the EAC cannot succeed let alone evolve into the much-anticipated EAF. On the other hand, "if" the foundation of the EAC in Arusha is rooted in democracy and not otherwise, then the EAF would stand a very good chance of becoming what it was meant to be.
It was a good idea before South Sudan joined. Now they have Congo and Somalia's on its way... This just sounds like a complete mess now. No way three unstable regions can all be brought into an EAF. Maybe if the EAF becomes a central part of the EAC without those three, like Benelux as a union being part of the European Union.
While this makes sense from a economic and social perspective, one always has to keep in mind the political ramifications. Democracy doesn't just happen, and personally it's hard for me to expect the EAF to be democratic when the countries that make it up aren't so - Kenya and Tanzania are probably the most democratic, and even then they are quite flawed; Uganda and Rwanda are straight up dictatorships (albeit somewhat stable ones), and South Sudan and DR Congo are so chaotic I can't even tell. Are the leaders of these countries willing to give up power for the greater good, or does each individual administration see this as an opportunity to extend their own power? As such, I can't help but imagine that in the unlikely scenario that this plan works the EAF will just end up being ran by a Museveni-like character (or, you know, Museveni himself - I imagine that's how this plays through in his head). Side Note: You might ask yourself "What does it matter if all the countries aren't that great to begin with, that the EAf is democratic?" But, keep in mind that the primary, long-term issue this country will face is battling corruption: it's hard enough for democracies to fight corruption, and _much_ harder for dictatorships/oligarchies - even if the leaders _want_ to end it, offend just a few of the wrong guys and your're out of power, it's just how authoritarian states work. This is why ending corruption is so often associated with democratization.
@@SuperCrow02 that's a very low standard to set. And a very problematic one. To prioritize safety over a functional democracy is to silence the views of the electorate for comfort.
@@Bodabodabroadcast A functional democracy CANNOT exist in an impoverished one. We need to acknowledge that and let these countries develop before inserting all of our views upon them.
@@SuperCrow02 It's not about inserting your views on the east African nations. It's about making sure that the electorates in these countries are able to express their ideas and views without the fear of a military boot. One of the reasons so many African despots admire China is because of this view point: "Let's press pause on democracy while we stabilize" The PRC is very stable and wealthy but any desire or growth for a vote is hyper-suppressed.
In my honest opinion as a Costa Rican (nothing to do with you, I'm a total outsider, and we're not a rich country but hey, we're not that bad), I'd say that, as many other people have suggested, start with the union as a federacy with the founding members, surrounding Lake Victoria. That's the most realistic and 'holdable' country, since South Sudan and the DRC are plagued with problems unfortunately. This is not to say to abandon them, slowly start integrating them in the united market and freedom of passage (goods and people), and slowly start integrating them in the country. It'd be like the federacies which constitute Spain (this would be the EAF) which are also part of the European Union (where the DRC, South Sudan and even Ethiopia could be a part while the process of integration takes place). This may take decades and may have to be passed as a dream to the new generation, but believe me, I understand you guys since I also dream of an united Central America, even though we're also plagued with problems. Still, gotta say I love seeing different people trying to work together to get to a better position as a whole, and even being so helpful to countries in need. Hopefully you'll make it!
I heard that it was possible the Central American countries could federate. But I doubt Costa Rica would want to join. Compared to the rest of the region Costa Rica is well off.
It sounds like a great idea, if it could actually work. But I have serious doubts that it wouldn't just quickly devolve into tribal power struggles like pretty much every country in the region. Just look at Ethiopia's ongoing (?) civil war. I think it could succeed if they take it very, very slowly. Build out free trade agreements, common regulations, etc over time. Beyond tribal conflicts there is also the general high levels of corruption across the entire region that needs to be dealt with.
Not to mention imperial powers profit more from a divided Africa than a unified one. It's not like espionage being used to flame division is out of the realm of possibility, it's one of the most famous things about the U.S.
I think the expansion of the economic union is fine but it could be a mistake to include DRC and to a lesser extend S. Sudan in the political union right off the bat. I think setting up a two tiered system for integration would make the most sense, and also create a framework which can later be extended to Zambia, Ethiopia, Somalia etc.
Can I make a video request: Bangladesh. I feel Bangladesh has a unique story due to how it started off as being a backwards third world country to now having a economy that has overtaken Pakistan. I would like to see it since, many Bengalis like me or those I have talked to seem to vaguely know what Bangladesh’s future could be, and it is interesting to think about.
Я не автор видео ... Но у нас в СНГ( Узбекистан ) с интересом смотрят на Бангладеш. Пакистан почувствовал себя выше чем он есть , и его амбиции погубили его ( хотя отношения между нашими странами хорошие ) воспринимают его как марионетку Китая . А у Бангладеш в связи с его населенностью, и распоряжением , а так же хорошими отношениями с нашим регионом ( АЭС например ) видят интересные перспективы . Вероятно страна не решит свои проблемы и останется бедной - но развитие не прекратится , и если отношения с Китаем останутся нормальными - то есть перспективы стать важной страной в Азиатском регионе ( при всём уважении - сейчас страну такой не считают )
I hope this does well in the long term, unlike most plans like this I see these ones are mostly realistic. It’s like “allow free trade and a consistent currency across this massive country and build roads to facilitate easier trade” and not “guys, let’s build a city in a straight line in the desert” If it all comes together it would probably lead Africa faster into modernity and stability
When you said the union of those SEVEN countries would "squeeze" past Nigeria to be become the most populated African country, it really puts into perspective how big Nigeria's population is 🤯
Am I the only one skeptical about this idea? one integration could take decades if all goes well and it looks like they are more interested in expanding the project than scaling it to realistic levels to further reduce their chances of success in the future, not to mention who will lead the federation?
@@kevinsworldK.w69 they failed to create National Unity within the current borders, so why are they suddenly succeed with more distant peoples and wider borders?
@@kevinsworldK.w69 Many of the multi-ethnic countries in Africa don't function properly (take DRC for example) and also I just think it's stupid to forget your roots and culture for a made-up national identity
@@akolyt That's literally the only way to fix the problems of the region. Africans have to completely erase the tribal identity once in for all, all the countries who succeeded historically went through a process of erasing that bullshit, human development come from the ability to work with people who are different to you, and do not have family ties.
One problem with the EAF is that the Congo is too unstable and has a ton of rebels and warlords in the eastern side of the country. For the union to work, they would have to get rid of them because no borders will allow the rebels to spread into the other members.
The additions of war-torn South Sudan and dirt-poor DRC to the proposal kind of don't make sense to me. Starting with the integration of the original 6 members and achieving relative stability should come before the additions of South Sudan and DRC
I've been interested in a potential EAF since I first heard about it years ago, and it's something I'd like to see happen for a hopefully more stable Africa, but looking at the problems you mentioned, it does feel like South Sudan and DRC would be massive millstones around the neck of the EAF. Even just sharing a sizeable Swahili speaking population I think makes a huge difference, not to mention the instability of those latter countries. I really hope they pull this together, but I'm not super optimistic, at least in the next decade. Also the country has nicer looking borders without South Sudan and the DRC :P
This all comes down to what the EAF wants to be. If it wants to be an East African EU, then although the DRC, South Sudan, and Somalia have problems, it can let them in. However, if the EAF wants to create a nation, having these members would be against the interests of the original 5 and would make successful unification almost impossible. IMO they need both; they should keep the East African Community as an african EU, but they potential for full integration of the original 5 is too great and shouldn't be compromised by adding more members. DRC would increase the population by 50%, which would sideline the other members, and the majority of the country is not even part of the east african zone. And that's before you look at the chaos and corruption. South Sudan is very unstable, so unless they were willing to give the new country almost total control to end their problems I would not let them in. Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda can balance each other in the federation, and are all fairly successful african countries. The benefits of Rwanda and Burundi are good, and they do not pose any big problems to the federation. The EAF could be a major player on the African and world stages, but if they can't actually unite and integrate this will not happen, so they should not try to be too ambitious with their expansion. The British Empire once ruled the world, but what have they got today? China, despite thousands of years, is still one nation. When they create this empire they need to decide if they want to be like China or like Britain.
I really look forward to seeing the EAF. I think a united African federation is just what the region needs hopefully they'll get over the differing cultures bit but if that happens they'll have a bright future. I do think they should just form with the core nations first and then add the more unstable ones on later but all in all, I wish this federation the best. Great Video btw
Rwanda is rapidly developing and I feel like Kigali would fit the capital better as it has a central location and is one of the best cities to live in in africa with low poverty and crime rates and a high standard of living.
I wish them the best of luck. Would love to see a prosperous EAF in the future that finally takes those lands into a safe and secure society where their citizens can live in peace and focus on building a future for themselves and their families.
I would say no to Ethiopia because Ethiopia is the one country to not be a former colony. However, even without being in union, it still makes sense for Ethiopia and a future EAF to pursue a alliance of an economic, military, and social nature.
It was a colony of the Italians for 5 years... May not seem like much but they still had to go through terrible things during the colonization process, with chemical weapons and tanks being used as it was a later point in time.
@@ilikesnakes4695 That wasn't the point. Yes, what Ethiopia suffered was terrible, but what I meant was that Ethiopia wasn't necessarily in a tribal state when Europeans arrived on their doorstep. Yes, their technology wasn't great, but they were by most metrics a nation. A people with their own culture and a state to back it up. The other colonized peoples of Africa definitely had cultures, but ultimately they did not form states to back them up. Pretty much all African countries, and The hypothetical East African Federation definition will be a multicultural society. Ethiopia was an outlier because of the fact it formed a state. Ultimately, it's up the people of Ethiopia, though. I'm just making an assumption on how Ethiopians might feel based off of their history.
@@TommyElijahCabelloReal This comment is historically inaccurate then because half of these countries weren’t “Tribal states” Kenya was mainly comprised of Different Swahili City states, Rwanda was a centralized Kingdom, Burundi is literally a continuous state from the previous Precolonial Kingdom of Burundi, South Sudan was a part of Sudan proper, etc… They most definitely had states to back themselves up all over Africa (Hell Ethiopia was weaker by every metric (Population, Economy, literacy, and technology) then the Sokoto Caliphate in Nigeria (12 Million people) *This “African Tribesmen” view of precolonial Africa stems from Imperialists Propaganda* Since everyone knows of them, The Zulu for all intensive purposes fits the stereotypical “Tribal” caricature and the max population size for them was only 70k How does that stack to The Ashanti Empire (3.4 Million) Kanem-Bournu (5 Million) Benin Kingdom (1.4 Million) Sokoto Caliphate (12 Million) Oyo (Estimated 2 Million) Kongo (500k) Etc… All of which I listed had laws, were centralized/Semi Centralized and had all the markings of being candidates to be called Nations (AND MANY WERE RECOGNIZED AS SUCH like for Example the Dutch, British, and Germans Recognized the Ashanti)
@Tommy Elijah Cabello Ur assessment is pretty accurate, Ethiopians have such along history as a state thats its unthinkable to let go of it and merge with other especially when the proposed country is so different(in terms of culture,language,..) , if Ethiopia is ever to join any larger state it would be limited to the strictest borders of the horn of Africa.
@@TommyElijahCabelloReal and Africans States of the past weren’t One singular ethnic group For example the Mali empire was Primarily Mande but also Sonike, Songhay, Tuareg, And even Akan people during its peak These states just like others all over the world were multi ethnic The issue is that groups with nothing in common (Nigeria for example), People with pre established problems (Rwanda and Zanzibar for example) and people who lived drastically different lifestyles (Chad for example) were grouped together with no say in the matter
Somewhat reminds me of some part I had in my history class in Canada. Our original provinces weren't really all meant to be a united country but we had economical issues. Turned out good.
Sidenote: Africa was in disarray before it's colonization. It's instability is what made it ripe for European powers to exploit during events like the infamous Scramble for Africa in the first place.
I'm a Kenyan, and yes, it's working. It's not about merging the nations in one night. Rather, it's about creating a regional economic block, then a currency. Initially, we had the EAC, I even have a work permit and passport that enable us citizens to cross borders and seek job opportunities in Uganda and Tanzania. I won't lie that it's been well, but I believe everyday is a chance to improve. EAC has great potential that's why nations like Somalia eagerly want to join. But there are so many hurdles we must handle to realize the overall dream.
It would probably be a lot more viable with only Kenya, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, and Tanzania. Mostly because of their more stable governments and economies and mutual use of Swahili and English as lingua franca.
I am doubtful that such a thing would ever occur, given that there is so much ethnic diversity, wars, corruption, and other factors that make it impossible.
okok, cool video and all, but can we just take a moment to acknowledge that Uganda's flag literally has a rooster in it, while the thumbnail shows it represented as a deer/antilope thing WHILE LITERALLY STILL HAVING THE ROOSTER ON IT?!
I'm a lot more optimistic this will actually work after this video. Though I wonder how the government will function. If it is a democracy then the DRC will have the most influence due to its huge population despite not being an original member, but we'll see what happens. There's a lot of opportunity for improvement in the region and it would be nice to see a stable African superpower.
This assumes that the individual EAC members are democractic in any way. Kenya and Tanzania maybe. But definietlery not Uganda or Rwanda as for Burundi heaven knows where they are. The EAF will most likely be a mosaic of banana republics trying to increase their economic power without addressing their underlying political and social indifferences.
Personally I see this potential Union as the greatest hope for a region I Care greatly about since that's where my father is from I just hope the country leaders can manage things well enough to allow this to be a possibility
Hi Hoser. Tbh, I’ve been fantasizing about the unification all of the countries along the Sahel region, from Eritrea and Sudan to Senegal and Mauritania. Would be great to see you do a video on that.
It's official! As of November 24th, 2023, Somalia has joined the East African Community.
www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/24/somalia-officially-joins-east-africa-trade-bloc
Also I don’t know why I was shouting in this video
hello mr hoser
Ah
can you make a video on how thic could effect both somalia and the EAC future
Did they make a constitution yet?
is entering its final stage of development@@kernnysanders1739
Honestly the EAF should just start with the original countries. Join together with them, since that’s the core of the country. Then once that’s stable, expand to the DRC or South Sudan. Those countries aren’t as developed and would be a strain on the union, and while I’m not against them joining, should happen only after it gets off the ground.
Also a lot trickier in infrastructure planning
Exactly
Congo and south Sudan would hold them back with their own problems.
yeah they shouldn't have added South Sudan and DRC
Nah, no man left behind. Having unstable neighbors would just deter progress in the region as a whole, just look at the past Congo wars, whereas if the "weaker" nations are also integrated into the common market, they are then also mutually invested in maintaining each others security and stability.
I feel like in the end only the core 5 of the initial proposal will stick. South Sudan and the DRC are potentially too unstable. It would be easy to build an identity around the Swahili history an make Swahili the lingua franca
exactly. trying to bring in Congo, South Sudan, Somalia, or other countries which have active conflicts or are about to is a horrible idea to be honest. stick to the swahili nations east of the rift valley..
@@cageybee7221 ye, and the borders would also look cleaner without South Sudan and DRC
@@biharek7595 that's less important, but i suppose is also a factor. the borders would atleast align with geography for the most part.
It also won’t work with DRC and Uganda/Rwanda being at major odds currently
Exactly since Rwanda and Congo at war now
I remember first hearing about this a few months ago and being very intrigued. It seems like a bureaucratic nightmare to get established but if it does then it would seemly be very beneficial to each country and the people. I think of those industrialized mega cities in Africa like New Mombasa in Halo which would be a dream
Better than what’s currently going on in these countries that’s for sure.
@@chronicallyboredenby Yeah, a Giant multi-sided civil war with foreign powers meddling in it, a debt, hyper-poverty, overpopulation crisis, and a giant famine surely sounds great!
@@chronicallyboredenby what do you know about Africa?
@@juliusmak3705 you want to quiz him, why? Everyone knows about Africa's enormous problems. Do you think he's lying or something?
been waiting on this country for 3 ish years
As a congolese. The DRC should have focused on the development of our country. 80% of our country is not at conflict, we getting better in fixing our political problems, with an enormous country. We have the majority of the population. Let’s focus on building our country first. We have come a long way since the Congo wars. Fix before joining.
Where do you live? Also, is the president doing better and making the economy better?
Just do what Botswana did and get mining. Could get a couple trillion if you do it right
Do you not think being part of a new African superpower could help fix your internal problems way quicker though?
Not a good idea, with a neighbour like blwanda who has hidden agendas 😂
@@musondakasenge613
How Rwanda troubles Congo is beyond me.
I love how you use little regional animals painted with flags for your nation representers. It's unique and kinda cute
The problem with several countries merging into one like this is the whole endeavor hinges on several leaders giving up their power to one central authority, and each leader thinks they should be that central authority. For the EAF to be viable, they need a George Washington-esque figure who everyone can agree should be the person in charge.
No President, Prime Minister, or what have you wants to voluntarily reduce themselves to a regional governor unless they stand to gain an extraordinary amount in political or economic capital.
Power sharing arrangements ...eg rotating Presidency or Constitutional Seperation of powers eg President from most populous member state, VP For Internal Affairs from second, VP gor External Affairs from next and rotating PM from the other states. Each state could have designated Cabinet Roles assigned to so that Fed Cabinet is proportionalised ...then equal number of Senators from each state like USA and proportional Parliament.
@@kevinwarburton2938 That can work but then again African leaders are notoriously corrupt and they want more power for themselves, with them probably not standing power sharing agreements. There's a power sharing agreement in my home country for the house of the representatives between 2 representatives (both allies of the president but clearly trapos as they are called in the Philippines) but it ended up being politically divisive, imagine that 2 people being 6 and you get what I mean
there's always an EU-type situation where higher, independent governing body is slowly given more power until the federation basically functions as a single country
@@kevinwarburton2938 the first one can function but the second one is just lebanon but bigger.
@@diepie5144 The EU sucks, though.
Germany's wet dream (Mittel Afrika) after WW1 is getting realised now by the Africans. Hope it goes well and bring stability to the region.
Typical kaiserboo
@@im_theodore Not gonna deny that.
Just like the rest of Africa...
@@im_theodore proud kaiserboo
Its more in lines with the old Kitara Kingdom which existed way before germany unification
As a Kenyan, I believe the Federation will be a great idea as most if not all nations involved have mostly similar cultures. And our economies merged will surely propel us further on the world stage, it's only a matter of if the Politicans will agree to surrender power for the greater good which I hope they do
But do you actually think its gonna happen in the near future?
Indeed, but South Sudan or the possibility of Somalia have to go away. They are to unstable, even the EU knows this
@@guilhermefaleiros4892 I've never heard of it
@@guilhermefaleiros4892 yes, I do
@@cosmo_mosy I said mostly have a similar culture, not entirely.
You did us dirty in East Africa with that image of a big head😂😂😂😂
so cool how you get this information about East Africa so spot on. Big up from Kenya
I'm surprised you didn't address the elephant in the room that is the DRC's political status in an East African Federation. The DRC is roughly the size of the rest of the Federation and has (by my unrefined estimate) over 1/3 of its population, so if the Federation were to preserve the integrity of its member states, the DRC would exert an enormous level of gravity on its politics. Federations always hate it when one constituent ends up with more influence than anyone else, but pair that with the DRC being underdeveloped and more peripheral compared to its eastern neighbours for some potential chaos over what the DRC's place in the EAF would or should be.
The solution would be to separate the DRC, for ezample the regions of Katanga or Central Congo
Sounds a lot like Yugoslavia doesn’t it?
In the federation,they would break the drc apart.Probably gonna make katanga region,and a region in DRC heartland near the atlantic and another region in the remaining area
@@bigfennec because it's a good deal.
@@MimOzanTamamogullar I think the DRC would need a lot more convincing than economic incentives for it to allow itself to break apart.
With South Sudan joining the initiative, it already became more difficult, the DRC made it close to impossible.
Yeah man, totally agree. I think they did it becouse of the natural resources in the west of the DRC wich are very valuable and in fact have been indirectly exploited by Rwanda for a while. Having the DRC in the union would make access to those resources much easier at the cost of complicating even more the full integration between the members
@@mathiaszx1001 True, this shows that the unification seems to be more of a media stunt, while the alliance that comes with it when you want to join is more about economics anyways.
Well I don't think it's impossible
Not by a long shot
it'll just take a lot more time
After all baseless pessimism doesn't get you places my friend
I can understand adding the DRC after all because they have all those resources which in addition with their size stretching all the way to the West Coast can potentially make the hypothetical Nation really powerful but still can't understand the inclusion of South Sudan all too well
Edit: I should mention your pessimism isn't baseless, I certainly see ur point 😅
But I do think the phrase impossible isn't quite the right word for this
Also you know they could just combine the core five countries first and then once they do that slowly work on establishing enough stability in the other two to start the process of integration
@@thatguynoonelikes4865 That would be an option, although considering the instability of the DRC, this would, at least with the latter, take the form of influencing the eastern part of the "country", and not outright annex it.
I find it interesting that a solution to the problem of borders is to just create bigger borders, since the issue with a lot of these countries is that they have one country when there should be several, with different regions ethnic groups, etc. but in the end I suppose it makes sense in that a large country that was more unified with logical borders could very well become a good thing. Honestly I’m cautiously optimistic about the EAF, I feel it could do a lot for fighting poverty in Africa and democratization. Such a country would actually be able to fight off insurgents.
What language would they even speak since Swahili isn’t that common in Congo or South Sudan and French isn’t common in east Africa
@@edk487 Well that's a problem that The Philippines has already had since forever, and yet I've never hard anything bout them fragmenting, despite also having lots of "ethnic tensions."
@@edk487 yeah it’s a tough one, I’m not that familiar but maybe a language like English might work? This is assuming the drc has a sizeable English speaking population, because I know the other nations have at least some spoken English.
@@chronicallyboredenby Many DRC citizens can barely speak fluent French, their official language, yet somehow we expect them speak some basic English? Lol.
Many of them are poor and uneducated sadly, and trying to force English on them, or French on Uganda/Tanzania/Kenya can result in another Anglophone Crisis in nearby Cameroon where the Cameroonians there hate French being forced upon them.
Another example are how people in Québec in Canada are mostly bilingual, and on an official level they're almost purely a French-speaking region of Canada. Yet they hate being forced to speak English within Québec.
So yea the English/French language rivalry and status will quite often result in conflicts, and I don't see how there can be an easy lingua franca among the EAF after the joining by the DRC.
Imo the DRC should had found ways to forge closer ties to its French-speaking Central African neighbours with a common lingua franca, and also because it's already in the ECCAS (Economic Community of Central African States) with its French & Portuguese speaking neighbours.
Maybe a larger more powerful state with a shared identity could stop infighting and resource problems.
The problem when we Africans talk about unity is that we often forget that our individual countries are so fragmented within. It shows clearly in electoral times that the determining factor for allegiance is the ethnic group or the tribe. The state often exist just on paper and doesn't mean much on people psychology. Let's find first ways of having our many tribes within the individual countries loving each other and accepting to live together in harmony before thinking of African or regional unity. We are too emotional and less rational on this subject.
I wholeheartedly agree😔
ik but speaking for rwanda as a rwandan, we conquered the disunity after 1994, and we have prospered since, however for this to work we need to stop with our interference in congo for this to work
@@l.hans0692the day tribalism dies in Africa is the day we prosper.
@@forgedwithsteeltribalism and nepotism exists everywhere but it's possible to reduce it and remove it from a position of power
To be honest this idea could have worked better if it first formed without south sudan and the Congo, both have terrible conditions and trying to fit them all together as quickly as possible might scare off the other players of the project.
Bigger is not always better and things that sound great on paper in practice sometimes fall apart.
It be great if they can get it to work but I have my doubts.
Totally right, I think the reason for adding those 2 countries is mainly becouse of natural resources
There are geopolitical moves at play. The way it is seen here is the more developed and stable nations Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Tanzania will assist in the stabilization and development of DRC, South Sudan and Somalia. There have already been military interventions. It was mostly Ugandan, Burundian and Kenyan troops that broke Alshabab's control over most of Somalia, they're still there, a Ugandan military intervention prevented genocide in Sudan in 2015 when the vice President carried out a coup, the rebels had captured all the major towns and were outside the state house in Juba when Ugandan special forces dropped in by air, retook the capital then went ahead to recapture the rest of country in a matter of days, stabilized and held it until international pressure forced them to withdraw stating they had no business intervening. Tanzania, Uganda and soon to be Kenyan forces have and continue to carry out operations in DRC to suppress groups like M23, LRA and ADF.
On the economic end towns and cities in the DRC, South Sudan and Somalia have been profitable markets for traders and companies in the founding 5 nations. They recognize the opportunity for a lot of growth in these places. Yet they can't be fully exploited if their current governments continue to be solely responsible for their security. So the federation is seen as a path to the stability that will bring economic growth. Not the other way around.
agree
kinda...in my opinion while it possible we see a them become dead weight for the union they do also bring lots of advantages
1.South Sudan and DRC have lots of possible resources that could be exploited
2.The DRC gives this new federation a port to on Atlantic which could come in handy especially if they want to export to stuff to European countries
and obviously the cons are SS and DRC are unstable and poor although again it's possible this union increases the stability and decreases the poverty of these regions if the much more stable if this new union invests in them. Well see how it goes but one thing you have to remember is Burindi which is one of OG's is too very poor,underdeveloped and unstable from what l know does that mean they shouldn't be a part of the union...no because it still has lots of potential. Basically all these nations are poor and unstable that's why they are making this union in the first
It would be faster yes. But the union is more about making huge economic and geopolitical gains in the next decade when Huge growth and development will be taking place in Africa. Withe Congolese and Sudanese land and resources the EAF will make us Nigerians consider a West African union
The first step is that only Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Burundi and Rwanda would unite.
Only after that the others could slowly join.
I agree with this, I think it’s important that they aren’t trying to bail out poorer nations right away. I mean, Burundi is pretty poor but I’ve seen some comments on TH-cam from Burundians saying that the cities aren’t very poor so idk.
@@chronicallyboredenby
Burundi is also fairly small in terms of both land area and population, so it wouldn't require much effort and and money from the rest of the EAU to help it grow (at least compared to South Sudan which is in chaos and larger in area and the DRC which is massive in all term and it is not stable)
In addition, it's infrastructure is close with Rwanda.
But most importantly, Rwanda and Burundi has (mainly) the exact same people groups - so socially, it won't be any problem at all.
Agreed, the others are either too unstable or don't really fit
@@shittymcrvids3119
*YET
Hell, even first-first step should be that only Kenya and Tanzania should unite. They're the most stable countries in the community that share the largest border. Prove that works and the rest should all just fall in one by one.
For some reason I genuinely hope this country does work out. The people in Africa had it rough for to long, and it would be great to see an African nation fixing its internal problems and prospering into a great country.
God bless you Nathan 🙏
The migration attraction will be great too once they industrialize and root out corruption. If the country remains stable enough for half a century the population will explode
I thought Africa was a country?
@@tuckersmith8560 Only South Africa is a country.
South Africa is a country in the region of Southern Africa in the continent of Africa. :D
@@tuckersmith8560 American?
Something that doesn't get discussed is that within the AU, the EAC, ECOWAS, SADC and other now failed institutions were formed with the aim of integrating their respective member states economies and developing them until we're ready for full continental integration. However, this starts to fall apart when some countries become part of multiple development communities. The DRC and Tanzania are part of both SADC and EAC. If SADC decides to make the Rand its official currency, then how does affect the DRC and Tanzania and their East African Shilling. The way I see it, EAC's reckless expansions will lead to its own collapse and perhaps SADC as well.
I think these are simply matters of hedging bets. They want integration and know that it is a necessity in the future. They're placing their chips with multiple entities and will ultimately sign up with whomever gets there first. Tanzania already has a history of merging in its past and was part of the original plans for the EAF. That fell apart and they were then willing to join with whichever project seemed most promising, be it from the south or the east. Since the East African project is now further along than the Southern one this is likely where they will end up which simply means dropping all associations with the Rand and SADC. I see this as a race; Africa needs intra-African social and economic integration for it's own future agency. The region that gets there first will have alot of say over how the future of Africa's borders will be drawn. You already see countries that one might never have thought of as associating culturally as "East African" (Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan) suddenly interested in this union because they see the writing on the wall and it's better to be in on the ground floor than to ask in later on when the EAF could be holding all the chips and can make all sorts of demands on new members as well as un-aligned regions of Africa that aren't as unified.
It warms my heart seeing African countries uniting to fight their problems together, I wish all luck to this plan of unification and reforms.
Unity can help bring nation's together
Bless your kind heart internet stranger.
As a Nigerian that lives in the U.S. I want this to happen so bad ik it will be hard but I only see good things coming for this I truly only want the best for Africa
@DemiKhay Africa Tv honestly don't know what do you think?
@DemiKhay Africa Tv lol 😭
@@MR.CLEAN777 in what I can speculate they may choose the president that has led one of the countries to success or atleast still in great developing
@@MR.CLEAN777 n from what I can see either Kenya or Rwandan president as those two have had a huge growth but mostly Rwanda since they haven't seen much from the new kenyan president hope this helps
I literally just wrote this comment, I wanna see Africa take the world stage for something ambitious like this 💪🏾
YES, FINALLY! I remember asking for this months ago on the Congo vid and i’m so glad it’s out now, thank you so much h0ser!
Im from 2024. *it didn’t happen.*
I love how you dont stress people asking for subscriber or like button.
You got a new subscriber buddy 🤙 interesting video. Thanks
The admission of DRC at this point makes the appropriate name for the country as 'Central African Federation'.
@Doublethink If EAF were to have a alternate name it would be called Banyakitara or simply Kitara because that's the name of the kingdom that controlled the land of each of these former states .
@Doublethink why would they adapt a german name
@Doublethink Kaiserboo
@@hessen5498 yeah 99 percent of the German fans are fans of the 1914 era Germany the cringe version I personally like the early days of prussia
The name would be too similar to the Central African Republic to the north
Seems like a good idea if they can make it work, though including Congo seems like it would be a huge problem.
Maybe they could take on parts of the country?
@Doublethink Seems prudent to first start with the countries that speak Swahili, and are therefore easier to unite, then possibly add other countries later.
Yea the DRC in the EAF is already an oddity.
Not to mention that the Rwanda is busy backing the rebels in the DRC, in which the violence and refugee crisis then spills over to Uganda & Burundi.
And Uganda, Burundi & Rwanda have remained notorious dictatorships over the past few decades. Why would dictators and their elites want to give up more power on a federal level to the EAF whenever possible?
I really don't see how the EAF can work, frankly, even without the DRC. Countries must first fix (or at least, greatly reduce) their core problems, before being able to form a union/federation.
True, yes, but the congo has a lot of resources, with the proper money spent into investment they could clean it up. Not an easy task but it is possible.
Similarly, if they made the country safer the congo would have a huge tourist market im sure. I would visit if it wasn’t well, a bit of a hellhole.
I’d say the EAF needs to cut Congo loose off they want the project to succeed. The DRC will be a massive weight around the neck of the EAF, that could very likely drag the country down due to having so many more problems, then the other original countries.
It needs to stop admitting new members to the project at least temporarily. If they keep saying yes to new partners it will only make actually unifying and settling on a final formula more difficult.
I agree. The only way to solve the Congo problem is if they were to split the DRC into regions. Which the DRC may not want.
Ok
You forget that they're not forcing anyone to join, they're receiving applications. That means there's more outside will
The fact that Somalia was even considered is a big lol to me, it doesn't make sense to accept all those who applies ! DRC is obviously a problem but they probably wanted it because of the resources.
@@ledernierutopiste wrong. Controlling the horn of Africa is EXTREMELY valuable.
Including the DRC just makes the whole concept dead on arrival tbh. South Sudan joining so soon was imo a major error, the 5 main states should have been merged first and *then* add new states.
Lol the part where the giraffe asks unanielewa 😂😂. Epic edit my g
Hoser always given us godly content
I think there are too many conflicts between the countries here, especially the DRC and the Great Lakes countries, but also between Uganda and Rwanda themselves. It makes a lot of sense for Tanzania and Kenya to pursue greater integration/EU-style federalism, but then again Kenya also gains a lot strategically from its current independence and is the richer of the two by a lot. Something like this should probably be done in careful stages.
they might need to kick out south sudan and maybe even DRC. DRC has a lot of valuable resources though, so it would be worth it to stabilize them.
@@Bigzthegreat but too much corruption and poor management, and violence makes the country not worth it to admit the DRC into the Federation, even though that the DRC has the world's largest mineral deposits
I dont think Museveni of uganda would give up his power.The Tanzanian,Kenyan and Burundi leaders can come to a compromise but for the rest i dont think its quite posible
I think that Kenya and Tanzania should go first then the rest are next while South Sudan and DRC will be the last in the merger
@@K3rrJu5t1n maybe just the nations around the great lakes will unite then DRC and MAYBE south sudan could be in a kind of EU????
Man i wish them luck. Seeing countries prosper and unite is so satisfying
If they can overcome the ethic tensions and political divisions they could potentially be a regional power. I see a lot of potential for EAF
Division is to strong, and those divisions may not be fixed the EAF is not possible
If. Most non-Africans aren't aware how strong tribal conflicts are. I am Nigerian and can confidently say this isn't going anywhere.
Rwanda needed a dictator to strongarm a national identity. You're going to need a massive cultural shift to even get to the consideration stage.
@@thomas-sinkala The division is why Europeans keep bustling their way in to control.
Europe became the union it is today only after 50 years, starting from an economic union just like the EAF. I know that we’re talking about two different circumstances, but after looking at this video and informing myself on Wikipedia and various articles, I think that considering where their progress is now, something this big can be done in 15-20 years with a good management behind it.
With South Sudan, Congo and Somalia joining the EAC. It looks like deeper political and economic integration is becoming increasingly distant. They should’ve stuck with the original five, then gradually advanced from there.
I think the 5 countries should unite first then South Sudan and DRC. Uniting these countries right away will just spontaneously combust the country. The core nations will be smaller than DRC and Algeria in terms of land and Nigeria in terms of population but an easier area to stabilize (Rwanda and Burundi already had similar histories, and every nation has somewhat of a similar geography, and yeah like he said, religion) and there's very little sign of instability in the core nations. I'm not entirely against DRC joining as that's a lot of resources but A. They should worry of the effects of Dutch Disease, B. Mind the effects of geography (DRC is more than half Jungle only useful because of the Congo River and hidden resources unexploited because it's hell) and C. They need to stabilize the area first especially the relation with the East (which has more in common with the core than the west) and the West of that gigantic nation especially as the West part is too different. For South Sudan, it depends on them but if I'm the ruler of EAF, I'm not against the idea of just scrapping them in the plan as their only benefit would be the added population, but if SS can be stabilized, then no problem with it as it has the same geography with the core.
The acronym of South Sudan is very cursed. But yeah, It's a good plan. I Hope they are able t'o make it work
@@victorabadias9167 I noticed that while writing but I stuck to it
The DRC is 40 rainforest, 50% savannahs and grasslands
@@Congowillprevail243 yeah I realized but still that is a problem
It sounds like a good idea that benefits every nation involved, and fingers crossed that they can make it work.
Assuming the EAF invests a lot into them, the DRC and South Sudan would benefit the most. I have a hard time comprehending why the other 5 even let them join in the first place.
@@FairyCRat Resources. But still a horrible idea this will definitely not work out...
Populists from each nation will find a way to vilify it and will easily bring out xenophobia and racism to make sure that it never happens. Especially since they will realise that populism would be harder to pull once the nation unite, so it would be their last chance to get power. The whole dynamic is scary !
The EAF might be crazy enough to actually work. Regardless I’m hopeful for their future and I hope it all works out
Gosh I Hope This Ends Up Working Out. What A Beautiful Example Of Human Unity It Would Be.
The congo river and the Nile in the same country would be wild
They should ditch the DRC. Yes they have resources but they're like a 2 million square kilometre bad luck charm
I don’t know, I think that the DRC could be worked in. The alternative is having a very chaotic and unstable border.
@@chronicallyboredenby true but id rather have an unstable country on my border than an unstable country within my borders
I think the DRC would collapse and then the eastern regions and Katanga would join the EAF, Congo is simply too big and unstable and it would unfortunately drag the rest of the union down despite its vast resources and access to the Atlantic. Even if the eastern regions aren't formally part of the EAF they would effectively be satellite states of the union and economically dependent on it.
DRC by far has the most potential in all of Africa, no, they don't just have resources they are FUCKING FILLED with it. DRC has a big population and an incredible amount of Resources. An EAF union (if it were not just a corrupt failure) would have well over the strength to crush down insurgents within the Congo. Rising stability within the region to the point that EAF can organize its own projects so the new generation in DRC instead of joining insurgent militias instead to have a job to do.
Basically
Crush current insurgents -> Develop the DRC lands with infrastructure, connecting it to the Indian Sea possibly -> New generation now has a lot of jobs as construction or manufacturer = Passive Region within the DRC
The DRC really only failed cuz foreign powers killed it and early independence meant that regionalist gained to much power. It truly can make the EAF 2x as rich
Somalia is trying to join now so the eac is a joke to me
btw. if you ever do a video including Switzerland, as for the choice of animal: foreigners may think a cow would be fitting, but we don't actually regard the cow as national animal (because we don't have one, every canton instead has its own), it's more comparable to how cats are regarded in other countries (or here). Well, cats you could milk. Cats would only really fit Egypt as national animal, by the same token of not being iconic/specific enough anywhere else.
I would prefer either two other animals (which non-Swiss are not even aware of as being iconic here): Alpine ibex (where we are the biggest habitat for them) or marmots (frankly I can't tell you why, we just regard them as kind of a cute joke animal here). These are two wild animals, instead of domesticated, so preferable.
Marmots are super cute. He should definitely put marmots for Switzerland. As for ibex, I believe it would be a good animal for Yemen. Not the alpine ibex obviously. I mean arabian/nubian ibex
Also he used eagle for Egypt. He uses cat for Turkey which fits us turks very well. Our national animal is greywolf but we have national dog(Kangal dog) and national cat(Angora cat)
Had no idea D.R. Congo had also joined.
The original idea seemed interesting, but as more members get in the more absurd it gets, so I don't expect this to happen unless DRC and South Sudan get out.
Why not? The EU let Germany in. We have no clue how this will go so stop pretending like you have the answers.
@@SuperCrow02 I'm not talking about a union like the EU, I'm talking about unifying as a country.
The full EAF would be a mammoth of a state, and I just don't see it happening.
@@rsmapping8539 It's more like India or Pakistan than the EU, I was just making a comparison with the Congo and Germany (a bad comparison in hindsight considering the Congo is much more impoverished than other potential members of the EAF) Still we've seen states like this before. India, Pakistan, the Central American Republic, and Yugoslavia. They haven't all succeeded but it isn't impossible that this one will.
I honestly think it makes sense South Sudan in the union, but not the Congo.
NO WAY UR HERE
if they take the DRC, then it wouldn't really be the "East African Federation" anymore. since it stretches so far west to the Atlantic at that point.
Drc may swallow EAF in future it's massive land and population makes it parallel to the EAF😂😂
I'm excited for this outside looking in. Let's see how it goes
If, and I say if this works, this has the potential to give Africa the respect it deserves on the global market
I've been hoping for this for so long. I think this is exactly what Africa needs, assuming it goes well.
Loved this one. Absolute fan service, thanks
Uganda, Tanzania, and Kenya are surprisingly similar in almost everything and should definitely consider joining together.
I’m just thinking of how big the national parks can become
If you ask me the EAF should mainly focus on the original 5 members, and not South Sudan or DR Congo, since they're both having civil wars which would present problems, I think the EAF should focus on consolidating their control first and making sure they have a stable economy in their core nations, before expanding outwards. I think the EAF has massive potential, they just need to play their cards right
which civil war is happening in congo?
The country could potentially work if it stuck with the original core. But adding the DRC, South Sudan, even Somalia would make it a guarantee that it collapses. Those three are far too unstable to ever be more than deadweight and would drag the whole federation down.
Why their petitions were even accepted is beyond me.
If you did even an ounce of research you would know why
@@NadegeNadiaKabaseke Why do people say bullshit like this? Do you want me to do research? Point me to the research that backs up the idea that Somalia, the DRC, and South Sudan aren’t basically failed states. They have levels of systemic poverty and corruption that would make anyone’s head spin in shock and confusion.
Every other country on this list, especially Rwanda have made incredible strides to becoming stable prosperous nations. Ones that set an example for the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa. Having them be dragged down by deadweight would be a travesty to the progress they’ve made.
@@preoximerianas I think it has to do with resources and trade the DRC is the country with the most recourses in the world which would give them a lot of leverage in the world stage, South Sudan has also quite a few recourses plus it gives them access to the Nile and by extension the Mediterranean and Somalia has the longest coast of any country in Africa giving the federation a huge access to the sea and also the very important trade routes from the Suez Canal to china
@@preoximerianas Burundi isn't that much of an improvment either, so i'm not sure why you're ruling out South Sudan - DRC - Somalia
@@abdiali871 maybe because Burundi is a small nation with a small population while the DRC is about the same size as the rest of the federation and 1/3 of the population and Somalia and South Sudan are quite big and have a greater population than Burundi
I've got my fingers crossed for this idea. Being connected to both oceans would be a boon to the EAF
Okay, but will the institutions responsible for governing and administering the East African countries become more democractic and liberal or will we they just have systemic corruption on steroids. I am not saying this in bad faith but a more critical look at the East African nations such as Uganda and Rwanda mostly want the East African Federation to legitimise the violence and brutality of their regimes with economic enrichment to coverup their human rights abuses against their own people. If the EAF is to materalise it will be forced on many of the citizen within it's borders.
You’re right.
It would be beneficial, economically speaking, but tribal conflict is a plague in this region. You'll need someone like the president of Rwanda to start erasing tribal identity and build a national one for the betterment of the people
@@SuperVladamere Kagame is erasing identity ?? Are you dreaming or what? Currently in Rwanda the regime is Tutsi and Hutu are considered as genocidaires just like slave
I thought the EAF was a very good idea until they decided to let the DRC join for some reason. The DRC is barely a functioning country that is already too big to handle. Not sure how bringing them into the fold will help anything.
They either formally join or become a puppet to the far larger far wealthier EAF
The idea of the EAF looks interesting to me, greetings from Australia!
The East African federation is like these guys are best friends. They all have something in common. They have a horrible past, they are poor and etc. They all live in an average house together, combining their wealth. Their income is average. They share stuff around the house like bedrooms, tv, bathroom, and etc. Sure they do fight one another, but they can solve their issues. Tell me what the East African federation is like in your comparisons. Pls don’t get offended, I did this before with DRC, and etc.
These countries are not all friends lol, there was a battle against Ugandan and Rwandans forces in the Congo before.
@@edk487 The great Congo war, to be precise.
Don't forget Idi Amin
They aren’t poor. I’d say they are rich.
@@sakhu8945 In a world where "poor" means rich, you would be absolutely correct.
Id live there tbh, it seems so pretty and has lots of potential!
I wonder if Cascadia would be a good country too
I love your videos. They're fun to watch and very informative. I also really appreciate the fact that you always summarize the key points at the end of the videos... it's very helpful! Keep up the good work!
I'm no expert but including South Sudan and the DRC doesn't make much sense to me. At least not until the originally proposed countries have a chance to stabilize and prosper as a new nation.
I am not surprised at all by the number of times you have mentioned the word "if." That means that there are so many obstacles to overcome on the way to an East African Federation (EAF), that one wonders whether it would be feasible at all. You only have to look at the East African Community (EAC), which was founded in 1967 and collapsed 10 years later only to be revived by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Even though the East African Common Market (EACM) was the driving force behind the EAC, it has never been fully realised after all these years. Moreover, the EAC is now seven countries, including the newest member the DRC. That even makes it harder to come to a satisfactory agreement on the way forward. A common currency of the seven countries planned to take effect by 2023, may be the first move towards the EAF. Still, it remains to be seen whether it will ever materialise at all.
Underlying all this will be one key requirement, which may determine the failure or success of the EAC evolving into the EAF. It will be the manner in which the legislative assembly of the EAC conducts its affairs in Arusha as required by the constitution. The Constitution of the EAF would remain only on paper, unless it can be made to work as the law it was meant to be. Given what we have seen in the governance of the seven-member states since independence, I am not optimistic that the constitution would be taken seriously. Failure to set up a democratic legislature in Arusha, the EAC cannot succeed let alone evolve into the much-anticipated EAF. On the other hand, "if" the foundation of the EAC in Arusha is rooted in democracy and not otherwise, then the EAF would stand a very good chance of becoming what it was meant to be.
It was a good idea before South Sudan joined.
Now they have Congo and Somalia's on its way...
This just sounds like a complete mess now. No way three unstable regions can all be brought into an EAF.
Maybe if the EAF becomes a central part of the EAC without those three, like Benelux as a union being part of the European Union.
While this makes sense from a economic and social perspective, one always has to keep in mind the political ramifications. Democracy doesn't just happen, and personally it's hard for me to expect the EAF to be democratic when the countries that make it up aren't so - Kenya and Tanzania are probably the most democratic, and even then they are quite flawed; Uganda and Rwanda are straight up dictatorships (albeit somewhat stable ones), and South Sudan and DR Congo are so chaotic I can't even tell. Are the leaders of these countries willing to give up power for the greater good, or does each individual administration see this as an opportunity to extend their own power? As such, I can't help but imagine that in the unlikely scenario that this plan works the EAF will just end up being ran by a Museveni-like character (or, you know, Museveni himself - I imagine that's how this plays through in his head).
Side Note: You might ask yourself "What does it matter if all the countries aren't that great to begin with, that the EAf is democratic?" But, keep in mind that the primary, long-term issue this country will face is battling corruption: it's hard enough for democracies to fight corruption, and _much_ harder for dictatorships/oligarchies - even if the leaders _want_ to end it, offend just a few of the wrong guys and your're out of power, it's just how authoritarian states work. This is why ending corruption is so often associated with democratization.
This is by far the most realistic response to the idea of the EAF.
Democracy is nice, but safety is nicer. We in the West need to stop expecting everyone else to be Democratic.
@@SuperCrow02 that's a very low standard to set. And a very problematic one. To prioritize safety over a functional democracy is to silence the views of the electorate for comfort.
@@Bodabodabroadcast A functional democracy CANNOT exist in an impoverished one. We need to acknowledge that and let these countries develop before inserting all of our views upon them.
@@SuperCrow02 It's not about inserting your views on the east African nations. It's about making sure that the electorates in these countries are able to express their ideas and views without the fear of a military boot. One of the reasons so many African despots admire China is because of this view point: "Let's press pause on democracy while we stabilize" The PRC is very stable and wealthy but any desire or growth for a vote is hyper-suppressed.
As a Tanzanian, this would be a good idea bit i dont think it will happen in the near future due to current political affairs
In my honest opinion as a Costa Rican (nothing to do with you, I'm a total outsider, and we're not a rich country but hey, we're not that bad), I'd say that, as many other people have suggested, start with the union as a federacy with the founding members, surrounding Lake Victoria. That's the most realistic and 'holdable' country, since South Sudan and the DRC are plagued with problems unfortunately. This is not to say to abandon them, slowly start integrating them in the united market and freedom of passage (goods and people), and slowly start integrating them in the country. It'd be like the federacies which constitute Spain (this would be the EAF) which are also part of the European Union (where the DRC, South Sudan and even Ethiopia could be a part while the process of integration takes place). This may take decades and may have to be passed as a dream to the new generation, but believe me, I understand you guys since I also dream of an united Central America, even though we're also plagued with problems.
Still, gotta say I love seeing different people trying to work together to get to a better position as a whole, and even being so helpful to countries in need.
Hopefully you'll make it!
I heard that it was possible the Central American countries could federate. But I doubt Costa Rica would want to join. Compared to the rest of the region Costa Rica is well off.
It sounds like a great idea, if it could actually work. But I have serious doubts that it wouldn't just quickly devolve into tribal power struggles like pretty much every country in the region. Just look at Ethiopia's ongoing (?) civil war. I think it could succeed if they take it very, very slowly. Build out free trade agreements, common regulations, etc over time. Beyond tribal conflicts there is also the general high levels of corruption across the entire region that needs to be dealt with.
Not to mention imperial powers profit more from a divided Africa than a unified one. It's not like espionage being used to flame division is out of the realm of possibility, it's one of the most famous things about the U.S.
I think the expansion of the economic union is fine but it could be a mistake to include DRC and to a lesser extend S. Sudan in the political union right off the bat. I think setting up a two tiered system for integration would make the most sense, and also create a framework which can later be extended to Zambia, Ethiopia, Somalia etc.
Can I make a video request: Bangladesh. I feel Bangladesh has a unique story due to how it started off as being a backwards third world country to now having a economy that has overtaken Pakistan. I would like to see it since, many Bengalis like me or those I have talked to seem to vaguely know what Bangladesh’s future could be, and it is interesting to think about.
Я не автор видео ... Но у нас в СНГ( Узбекистан ) с интересом смотрят на Бангладеш. Пакистан почувствовал себя выше чем он есть , и его амбиции погубили его ( хотя отношения между нашими странами хорошие ) воспринимают его как марионетку Китая . А у Бангладеш в связи с его населенностью, и распоряжением , а так же хорошими отношениями с нашим регионом ( АЭС например ) видят интересные перспективы . Вероятно страна не решит свои проблемы и останется бедной - но развитие не прекратится , и если отношения с Китаем останутся нормальными - то есть перспективы стать важной страной в Азиатском регионе ( при всём уважении - сейчас страну такой не считают )
When he showed that tropical image I was just like "wait a minute" and then he said it was a joke :-)
I hope this does well in the long term, unlike most plans like this I see these ones are mostly realistic. It’s like “allow free trade and a consistent currency across this massive country and build roads to facilitate easier trade” and not “guys, let’s build a city in a straight line in the desert”
If it all comes together it would probably lead Africa faster into modernity and stability
When you said the union of those SEVEN countries would "squeeze" past Nigeria to be become the most populated African country, it really puts into perspective how big Nigeria's population is 🤯
if the drc and somalia was removed, it'd have a very similar pop to nigeria
Am I the only one skeptical about this idea? one integration could take decades if all goes well and it looks like they are more interested in expanding the project than scaling it to realistic levels to further reduce their chances of success in the future, not to mention who will lead the federation?
Nope you're not the only one I think ditching their ethnic and tribal identity is a stupid idea
@@akolyt No, its an amazing idea. National Unity can make the EAF be alot more stable
@@kevinsworldK.w69 they failed to create National Unity within the current borders, so why are they suddenly succeed with more distant peoples and wider borders?
@@kevinsworldK.w69 Many of the multi-ethnic countries in Africa don't function properly (take DRC for example) and also I just think it's stupid to forget your roots and culture for a made-up national identity
@@akolyt That's literally the only way to fix the problems of the region. Africans have to completely erase the tribal identity once in for all, all the countries who succeeded historically went through a process of erasing that bullshit, human development come from the ability to work with people who are different to you, and do not have family ties.
One problem with the EAF is that the Congo is too unstable and has a ton of rebels and warlords in the eastern side of the country. For the union to work, they would have to get rid of them because no borders will allow the rebels to spread into the other members.
The additions of war-torn South Sudan and dirt-poor DRC to the proposal kind of don't make sense to me. Starting with the integration of the original 6 members and achieving relative stability should come before the additions of South Sudan and DRC
I am an East African citizen and I'm learning about this for the first time now lol. We do have East African Passports though
I've been interested in a potential EAF since I first heard about it years ago, and it's something I'd like to see happen for a hopefully more stable Africa, but looking at the problems you mentioned, it does feel like South Sudan and DRC would be massive millstones around the neck of the EAF. Even just sharing a sizeable Swahili speaking population I think makes a huge difference, not to mention the instability of those latter countries. I really hope they pull this together, but I'm not super optimistic, at least in the next decade.
Also the country has nicer looking borders without South Sudan and the DRC :P
This all comes down to what the EAF wants to be. If it wants to be an East African EU, then although the DRC, South Sudan, and Somalia have problems, it can let them in. However, if the EAF wants to create a nation, having these members would be against the interests of the original 5 and would make successful unification almost impossible. IMO they need both; they should keep the East African Community as an african EU, but they potential for full integration of the original 5 is too great and shouldn't be compromised by adding more members. DRC would increase the population by 50%, which would sideline the other members, and the majority of the country is not even part of the east african zone. And that's before you look at the chaos and corruption. South Sudan is very unstable, so unless they were willing to give the new country almost total control to end their problems I would not let them in. Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda can balance each other in the federation, and are all fairly successful african countries. The benefits of Rwanda and Burundi are good, and they do not pose any big problems to the federation. The EAF could be a major player on the African and world stages, but if they can't actually unite and integrate this will not happen, so they should not try to be too ambitious with their expansion. The British Empire once ruled the world, but what have they got today? China, despite thousands of years, is still one nation. When they create this empire they need to decide if they want to be like China or like Britain.
Somalia has the best strategic location that can dominate the world trade, red sea and longest coast.
I really look forward to seeing the EAF. I think a united African federation is just what the region needs hopefully they'll get over the differing cultures bit but if that happens they'll have a bright future. I do think they should just form with the core nations first and then add the more unstable ones on later but all in all, I wish this federation the best. Great Video btw
Rwanda is rapidly developing and I feel like Kigali would fit the capital better as it has a central location and is one of the best cities to live in in africa with low poverty and crime rates and a high standard of living.
I think they should start with just Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania and Kenya. Once they have developed, then they should expand to DRC and South Sudan.
EAC made a mistake in allowing new members before becoming a state.
Thats what I'm saying
@@Sceptonic It had so cool borders and now they fucked it up. Just because "bigur is betah"
@@10hawell Cool borders? Seriously?
@@10hawell this isn't about borders looking cool
@@whoisjoe5610 that's the only thing i care about there, they are black
I wish them the best of luck. Would love to see a prosperous EAF in the future that finally takes those lands into a safe and secure society where their citizens can live in peace and focus on building a future for themselves and their families.
me too. i want prosperity for africa. they suffered too much.
I would say no to Ethiopia because Ethiopia is the one country to not be a former colony. However, even without being in union, it still makes sense for Ethiopia and a future EAF to pursue a alliance of an economic, military, and social nature.
It was a colony of the Italians for 5 years...
May not seem like much but they still had to go through terrible things during the colonization process, with chemical weapons and tanks being used as it was a later point in time.
@@ilikesnakes4695 That wasn't the point. Yes, what Ethiopia suffered was terrible, but what I meant was that Ethiopia wasn't necessarily in a tribal state when Europeans arrived on their doorstep. Yes, their technology wasn't great, but they were by most metrics a nation. A people with their own culture and a state to back it up. The other colonized peoples of Africa definitely had cultures, but ultimately they did not form states to back them up. Pretty much all African countries, and The hypothetical East African Federation definition will be a multicultural society. Ethiopia was an outlier because of the fact it formed a state. Ultimately, it's up the people of Ethiopia, though. I'm just making an assumption on how Ethiopians might feel based off of their history.
@@TommyElijahCabelloReal This comment is historically inaccurate then because half of these countries weren’t “Tribal states”
Kenya was mainly comprised of Different Swahili City states, Rwanda was a centralized Kingdom, Burundi is literally a continuous state from the previous Precolonial Kingdom of Burundi, South Sudan was a part of Sudan proper, etc…
They most definitely had states to back themselves up all over Africa
(Hell Ethiopia was weaker by every metric (Population, Economy, literacy, and technology) then the Sokoto Caliphate in Nigeria (12 Million people)
*This “African Tribesmen” view of precolonial Africa stems from Imperialists Propaganda*
Since everyone knows of them, The Zulu for all intensive purposes fits the stereotypical “Tribal” caricature and the max population size for them was only 70k
How does that stack to
The Ashanti Empire (3.4 Million)
Kanem-Bournu (5 Million)
Benin Kingdom (1.4 Million)
Sokoto Caliphate (12 Million)
Oyo (Estimated 2 Million)
Kongo (500k)
Etc…
All of which I listed had laws, were centralized/Semi Centralized and had all the markings of being candidates to be called Nations (AND MANY WERE RECOGNIZED AS SUCH like for Example the Dutch, British, and Germans Recognized the Ashanti)
@Tommy Elijah Cabello
Ur assessment is pretty accurate, Ethiopians have such along history as a state thats its unthinkable to let go of it and merge with other especially when the proposed country is so different(in terms of culture,language,..) , if Ethiopia is ever to join any larger state it would be limited to the strictest borders of the horn of Africa.
@@TommyElijahCabelloReal and Africans States of the past weren’t One singular ethnic group
For example the Mali empire was Primarily Mande but also Sonike, Songhay, Tuareg, And even Akan people during its peak
These states just like others all over the world were multi ethnic
The issue is that groups with nothing in common (Nigeria for example), People with pre established problems (Rwanda and Zanzibar for example) and people who lived drastically different lifestyles (Chad for example) were grouped together with no say in the matter
Somewhat reminds me of some part I had in my history class in Canada. Our original provinces weren't really all meant to be a united country but we had economical issues. Turned out good.
Unity is alway power..
Stability is always the trick
Hard work is the hint..we can be great for once
What’s the Burundi animal it’s so cute
Sidenote: Africa was in disarray before it's colonization. It's instability is what made it ripe for European powers to exploit during events like the infamous Scramble for Africa in the first place.
Short answer : no
Long answer : Also no
@@JcoleMc how so?
@@JcoleMc What are you even trying to say here?
@@Saltasaur Take a guess .
@@JcoleMc your wrong
I remember when the DRC joined the EAC and I was like “Why is no one talking about this?”
This is indeed a good idea. I support this. United they stand, divided they fall.
Yep
Great move towards the formation of Africa as a large, ang huge Single Country❤❤!!
I'm a Kenyan, and yes, it's working. It's not about merging the nations in one night. Rather, it's about creating a regional economic block, then a currency. Initially, we had the EAC, I even have a work permit and passport that enable us citizens to cross borders and seek job opportunities in Uganda and Tanzania. I won't lie that it's been well, but I believe everyday is a chance to improve.
EAC has great potential that's why nations like Somalia eagerly want to join. But there are so many hurdles we must handle to realize the overall dream.
It would probably be a lot more viable with only Kenya, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, and Tanzania. Mostly because of their more stable governments and economies and mutual use of Swahili and English as lingua franca.
Eastern part of drc speak Swahili
Now that the DRC has joined, the EAF is doomed to fail.
I am so excited for the possibility of having such a wonderfull country very soon
I am doubtful that such a thing would ever occur, given that there is so much ethnic diversity, wars, corruption, and other factors that make it impossible.
maybe without drc or south sudan it could be possible, since the core countries are stable
okok, cool video and all, but can we just take a moment to acknowledge that Uganda's flag literally has a rooster in it, while the thumbnail shows it represented as a deer/antilope thing WHILE LITERALLY STILL HAVING THE ROOSTER ON IT?!
I hope that they succeed and that the people in the EAF can live a peaceful and prosperous life :)
I'm a lot more optimistic this will actually work after this video. Though I wonder how the government will function. If it is a democracy then the DRC will have the most influence due to its huge population despite not being an original member, but we'll see what happens. There's a lot of opportunity for improvement in the region and it would be nice to see a stable African superpower.
This assumes that the individual EAC members are democractic in any way. Kenya and Tanzania maybe. But definietlery not Uganda or Rwanda as for Burundi heaven knows where they are. The EAF will most likely be a mosaic of banana republics trying to increase their economic power without addressing their underlying political and social indifferences.
Personally I see this potential Union as the greatest hope for a region I Care greatly about since that's where my father is from
I just hope the country leaders can manage things well enough to allow this to be a possibility
Hi Hoser. Tbh, I’ve been fantasizing about the unification all of the countries along the Sahel region, from Eritrea and Sudan to Senegal and Mauritania. Would be great to see you do a video on that.
Museveni and Kagame dynasty has to fall for this dream Empire to come true.
Whenever I first heard of the EAF I hoped it would happen and I still hope one day it will be a thing