Kenya's AUC performance proof of its rising diplomatic influence

Beyond intra-African fractures, Western powers continue to manipulate these divisions to serve their geopolitical interests. The AU remains an arena where the US, the Gulf states, the European Union, China, and former colonial powers exert influence through financial incentives and diplomatic maneuvering. France, for instance, still maintains substantial sway over Francophone Africa, often ensuring that candidates from its sphere of influence secure key AU positions. Meanwhile, Gulf states such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia have deepened their involvement in African politics, subtly backing candidates who align with their broader strategic aims.

Kenya, with its robust diplomatic credentials, must develop a long-term strategy to counterbalance these external forces. However, the progress seen in the latest bid compared to Amina’s attempt suggests that we are gradually learning how to navigate these complex power plays more effectively. In a landscape where Western and Gulf actors continue to exert influence, Kenya’s increasing ability to marshal African support signals an important shift in its diplomatic positioning.

It is essential to recognise that Mudavadi and Haji were navigating two distinct but interconnected roles in this process. Mudavadi, as Prime Cabinet Secretary and Foreign Affairs CS, had the job of anchoring Kenya’s foreign relations in a diplomatic framework that emphasised trade partnerships and historical alliances. Haji, as the National Intelligence Service (NIS) Director General, was focused on national security interests, ensuring that any continental engagements aligned with sovereignty imperatives, particularly in the face of rising threats from extremist movements and geopolitical shifts in the Horn of Africa.

Their efforts, while unable to secure an outright victory for Raila, ensured that Kenya remains a formidable contender in continental politics. The goodwill, alliances, and regional influence accumulated through this bid position us favourably for future engagements, an outcome that Amina’s campaign did not achieve at the same scale. Unlike in the past when Kenya’s efforts faded into diplomatic oblivion, Mudavadi and Haji’s work has won the country better returns and heightened its credibility on the continental stage.

We must also recognise that the controversy surrounding Kenya’s AUC bid reflects a deeper dysfunction within the AU itself. The organisation remains hamstrung by regionalism, religious factionalism, and foreign manipulation. Instead of scapegoating envoys, African nations must confront uncomfortable truths – one, the AU’s electoral process remains opaque, prioritising regional rotation over meritocracy. Two, external actors continue to exploit Africa’s divisions, undermining genuine continental unity. And three, religious and linguistic alliances still dictate major decisions, to the detriment of merit-based leadership selection.

For Kenya to improve its standing in continental politics, it must invest in sustained, year-round coalition-building rather than reactive episodic diplomatic missions of prior years. Furthermore, Africa as a whole must address the rising sectarian and ideological divides that continue to undermine collective progress. Until these fractures are addressed, no amount of diplomatic maneuvering will be enough to “deliver” continental unity.