On November 12, 2014, the Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences hosted a round table "Problems and Prospects of Federalism in Africa". Speakers (all from the Africa Institute) focused mainly on theoretical and practical aspects of federalism in the African countries of Ethiopia, Tanzania, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Madagascar.

O. Igho Natufe (Canada) opened the round table with the message "Why Nations are Federalized: Towards Understanding Federalism", in which he touched upon the fundamental theoretical issues of federalism. Currently, there is no unified theory of federalism. The practical implementation of the federal principle in different States differs significantly from each other. For example, in the United States, federal subjects have much more extensive powers than the states of Nigeria, although both states are considered federal. The principle of federalism serves to create an integrative form of government that unites communities without violating their identity.

V. R. Filippov in the report "Federalism: the 'Ethnization' of Statehood or the depoliticization of 'ethnicity'?" reviewed the challenges that the construction of federal systems, particularly in Africa, might face. In the USSR, a large number of works were published justifying the advantages of federalism based on the ethnic principle. It is impossible to talk about the advantages and disadvantages of "ethnic federations" without clearly defining the concept of "ethnos", which has not been done so far. If we try to define the concept of "ethnofederation", we can say that it appears where political elites pursuing their own interests divide the country along confessional, linguistic, cultural lines, etc. True federalism is possible where the level of development of the political culture of citizens is high, where a civil nation has been formed. Otherwise, the experience of building a federation in the country is likely to be unsuccessful.

For African countries, the path of federalization can be disastrous. The political culture and diversity of languages, religions and cultures there are such that when federalized, the countries will look like patchwork quilts. The existence of a civil nation presupposes a certain community of interests between different parts of the country's population. In Africa, federalism will always cause regional rivalry with each other and with the federal government, and there is no question of any unity of the country. Such a situation is fraught with bloodshed, and federal subjects will constantly struggle for power, natural resources, and revenues from their extraction.

Yu. N. Vinokurov in his report "Unitarianism and federalism: historical experience of the Democratic Republic of the Congo" clarified some aspects of its history and its present. There has been a debate among the DRC's political elite about which form of government is more appropriate for the country, unitary or federal, since the 1940s, when the country was not yet independent. The number of provinces in the DRC has varied throughout history. So, under the Belgian rule, there were 6 of them, at present-25. Unlike other colonial powers, which somehow attracted the local elite to rule, the Belgians did not consider it necessary, and the Congolese - capable of governing the state.

Patrice Lumumba advocated a unitary form of state for the DRC, saying that unitarianism can ensure the integrity and normal development of the country. In 1959, supporters of federalism in the Congo also expressed support for the country's integrity and condemned tribalism and separatism. However, the ideas of federalism and separatism in the history of the Congo have been closely linked. Lumumba and his supporters wanted Congo to be a multi-ethnic, unitary country with a high level of development.

Today, it is most likely that the DRC will remain within its current borders, but there is some threat of a split. Neighboring countries claim to conduct economic activities in the mineral-rich eastern regions of the country. Katanga, which at one time declared independence from the Congo, still stands somewhat apart from the rest of the country, since it is the richest and most developed region in terms of human resources, although there is no strong separatist sentiment there now.

R.N. Ismagilova in her report "Ethiopia: Traditional institutions and federalism" spoke about the ethnic situation in the country and the peculiarities of federalism in Ethiopia. According to the current Constitution of Ethiopia, which came into force in 1995, the country is a federation organized along ethnic lines. The decision to create a federation of 9 ethnic states was made in the context of complex interethnic relations. 11 peoples of Ethiopia make up 88% of the country's population. The largest ethnic groups are the Oromo, Amhara, Tigrai, and Somali. In addition, 78 ethnic minorities live in the country. According to the Ethiopian Constitution, ethnic groups have the right to self-determination up to secession (the only case in Africa). Ethnic groups in each state share-

Both indigenous and non-indigenous people have political power in the state. All the peoples of Ethiopia were granted equal rights, the opportunity to participate in political life both at the federal and regional levels, and to protect and preserve their culture.

However, not everyone is satisfied with the current federal structure in Ethiopia. Amhara, dissatisfied with the loss of a leading position in the country, would like to return to the unitary structure of the state. The Oromo, although they have a large state, are in favor of creating their own independent state of Oromia. Those living in the Ogaden region of Somalia speak of a desire to reunite with their fellow Somalis. The Tigrayas, who make up 6% of the Ethiopian population and play a dominant role in the country, are in favor of joining the Eritrean Tigers to their state.

A part of the Ethiopian population is dissatisfied with the excessive centralization of power and the dominance of the ruling party, the Revolutionary Democratic Front of the Ethiopian Peoples. There are many reasons for the complication of the ethnic situation in Ethiopia. This includes competition for resources and the desire to create new administrative divisions. Even representatives of large groups such as the Amhara and Oromo may be discriminated against in a State where they are not considered indigenous.

In general, the role of ethnicity in the context of ethnic federalism has increased. Traditional patterns of interethnic relations that have developed in Ethiopia also play a negative role here. These relationships mostly remain hierarchical. So, some peoples have long been considered suppliers of slaves, their names are synonymous with the word "slave", and still the attitude towards them is appropriate. In addition, the hierarchy based on the type of occupation is largely preserved. For example, among the Gurage people, the most revered are farmers, the most despised are artisans, in particular woodworkers. The low social status of artisans and poor treatment of them are also observed in other parts of Ethiopia.

The current ethnic federalism in Ethiopia, on the one hand, allows the ethnic groups inhabiting the country to preserve and develop their culture, economy, and institutions of power; on the other hand, it has caused a surge of ethnocentrism, which has also had negative consequences. In addition, much of what the current Constitution could have done for Ethiopia has not yet been implemented.

A. V. Timofeev in the message " Confab 2014. Discussion on the Federal future of Nigeria" spoke about the discussions that emerged during the national dialogue regarding the federal structure of the country. On October 1, 2013, the President of Nigeria, Goodluck Jonathan, announced the convening of the National Conference of the National Nigerian Dialogue, which was expected to involve a large number of social groups in Nigerian society. The number of delegates was 492, of which 71 were directly appointed by the President. Confab did not become a dialogue of nationalities in Nigeria, which caused serious dissatisfaction with certain social groups. Many in the country were in favor of dialogue between representatives of the ethnic groups inhabiting Nigeria. The conference was composed of delegates from various levels of groups - religious communities, political parties, trade unions, etc. Traditional leaders and elected representatives of some ethnic groups were also present.

The course of the conference and its results showed that there are significant differences in Nigerian society, which exist largely on ethno-regional grounds. Representatives of each of the three macro - regions of the country (and the borders of these regions roughly coincide with the borders of the predominant settlement of the three largest ethnic groups in Nigeria-Hausa, Yoruba and Igbo) agreed on a common position on key issues before the meeting. Many of the issues caused a fierce confrontation between representatives of the North and South of the country. So, the problem of increasing or decreasing the existing share of oil revenue return to producing states has caused controversy. It was decided to recommend increasing the percentage from 13 to 18. It is proposed to create 18 new states so that their number is the same in all regions of the country. The opinion was expressed about the need to develop new deposits.

In her report "Quasi-federalism in Africa: The United Republic of Tanzania", Kh.M. Turinskaya considered two topics. The first was devoted to the complexities of terminology related to the specifics of the political structure of Tanzania. Both federalism and quasi-federalism as

the terms used in science do not have and probably will never have a generally accepted definition, and their content will remain the subject of discussion. Researchers can simultaneously characterize the same state as unitary, federal, or quasi-federal. Thus, South Africa, according to the Constitution, is not a federal state and is not officially recognized as such. However, many researchers, including South African ones, call South Africa a federation, since the powers of the regions here are quite large. South Africa is also sometimes referred to as a quasi-federal or regional state.

As for Tanzania, opinions about its structure also differ. Under the Constitution, Tanzania is a United Republic. Tanzania came into being in 1964 after the merger of independent Tanganyika and Zanzibar. Tanzania is assessed by various experts as a federation, as a unitary state, and as a quasi-federation (regional state). Zanzibar's status within the state is often referred to as"anomalous". This is reflected in the administrative asymmetry between Tanganyika and Zanzibar. Zanzibar has autonomy, while mainland Tanzania does not. J. Nyerere, the founder of the country, did not consider Tanzania a federation and called it a union. Zanzibar was granted broad autonomy, and a separate government for Tanganyika was not established largely due to financial considerations. In fact, the Federal Government is also the Government of Tanganyika.

The political elite of Zanzibar initially assumed that Tanzania would become a federal state, and later on, some Zanzibaris were periodically dissatisfied with the fact that the union appeared on unequal, in their opinion, principles.

Many experts believe that the integration of Zanzibar into the Tanzanian system did not happen. The abolition of the one-party system in Tanzania played a negative role in strengthening the union, as the party was an important link between Tanganyika and Zanzibar. Among the politicians of Zanzibar, there are both supporters of preserving the union and advocates of secession of the island. The latter make an economic argument, claiming that as part of Tanzania, the economic life of Zanzibar has declined. Some Zanzibarans question the legitimacy of the union's formation. Tanzania is often referred to as a quasi-federal state, since the country's development dynamics are clearly moving towards federalism, and a draft constitution for a federal state has been developed.

S. M. Shlenskaya in the report "Peculiarities of the genesis of federalism in the Republic of Madagascar" touched upon the history of coexistence of ethnic groups in Madagascar. The political structure of the country is currently not federal. However, from 1998 to 2004 in Madagascar, according to the Constitution, the provinces were granted some autonomy. Throughout the history of the island, there was a unitary model of the state, in which the common language (Malagasy) and the similarity of culture played an important role. Madagascar is home to 18 ethnic groups.

At the end of the 18th century, a strong state of Imerina emerged in Madagascar, subjugating many of the island's state formations. The rulers of Imerina divided the territory into 6 provinces, where certain ethnic groups lived. However, there were significant differences between the central and peripheral provinces. So, the center of the island was inhabited by the Merina ethnic group, which formed the state of Imerina and secured political power in it, the population of the coast was called kotye. The confrontation between the coast and the center of the island at different times was used to their advantage by various political forces. The French, during their ownership of the island after the anti-colonial uprising of 1947, began to give the coastal areas an advantage in funding, allocating them larger quotas for education than the center.

The confrontation between Merin and Cottier is seen in the example of the struggle for the presidential post in the country. The 2002 presidential election was won by M. Ravalumanana (merina), who, unlike his predecessor D. Ratsirak, made a bet on the centralization of the country. Prior to the election of Ravalomanana, Madagascar had an unofficial practice that if merina was elected President, Cottier became Prime Minister, and vice versa. Ravalumanana discontinued this practice, and subsequent presidents have been gelding. Ratsiraka was a supporter of the federalization of Madagascar. After his first appearance in power in 1975, Ratsiraka introduced amendments to the constitution aimed at decentralizing the country. A certain degree of decentralization was also prescribed by the Constitution, which was also created by the President-Cothier (F. Tsiranana). In 1998, Ratsiraka increased up to the financial autonomy of the regions, making

Madagascar is actually a federal state. Ravalumanana, when he came to power, reversed the changes made by his predecessor, and in 2004 abolished the division of the country into 6 provinces, creating 22 regions.

So, Cottier presidents, as a rule, are in favor of greater decentralization of power in the country, for significant rights of provinces, while merina presidents are supporters of a unitary system. The ideas of federalism in Madagascar are periodically used as a tool for achieving goals by provincial political elites.

The Round table showed that federalism is a complex and ambiguous phenomenon. When discussing this topic, many controversial issues arose. This is, for example, the problem of terminology associated with the lack of a generally accepted definition of federalism. If we talk about Africa, then questions arise: is federalism possible on the continent, why it is needed, in what form it should be applied, etc. These issues are very relevant for the political life of the continent.

Permanent link to this publication: