ON June 23, 2016, the world witnessed a referendum on the unbelievable Brexit phenomenon. Britain voted for or against remaining in the European Union (EU). Friday, June 24, 2016, was the final surprise seeing the historically giant nation of Britain, the Great Britain, finally deciding to quit the EU.

Those who wanted Britain to leave the European Union narrowly outnumbered those who wanted to remain. Britain has been a member of the EU for about 42 years. It voted on joining the then European Economic Community (EEC) in 1975, and at that time one of the main reasons for joining the EEC was to be part of a common market.

At that time, the Community had nine member states, but now the Union has 28 member states. This is to say that the Community has expanded so much, its goals have also been modified, and the situations have changed so much.

Besides the initial economic motive, now the EU also makes important political decisions about its member states. There are, for example, the burning issues of immigrants, and handling terrorism, among others.

There are also issues of some member countries whose economic statuses are shaky which have in many instances needed rescue. These are some of the issues which some people in Britain find unacceptable. If you talk to the common people in other European countries, they also complain that they are made to pay more taxes in order to finance the EU.

I am certain that if other people in the EU were asked for their opinions some shocking results would be witnessed as well. I am aware of countries like the Netherlands, Greece and Italy also thinking about a referenda as well.

I am not going to argue that the referendum and that the British people have carried out is a bad decision, or even that it is a good one, even though some ominous signals have already started to show up, it does communicate some serious messages to not only the EU, but to other regional integrations. I am aware of the fact that Britain has been providing a big boost to EU development aid, some of which came to Africa.

Its withdrawal will definitely have a lot of impact on how much aid the developing world will receive from the European Union (EU). Besides, Africa has been benefiting from Britain’s presence in the EU, particularly because of its criticism of the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which favours subsidising farmers in the European Union.

Through the CAP arrangement, agricultural products from the EU have been sold at lower prices, thus lowering prices of Africans’ agricultural products. Now that Britain is leaving the EU, Africa’s economies are likely to worsen as the EU’s CAP enterprise will go unopposed.

Coming now back to the East African Community (EAC), while it is not very clear what the future of the East African Community is likely to be, it has to so closely learn from this referendum. It also needs to remember how the former EAC collapsed only after ten years of its existence, that is, from 1967 to 1977.

The current EAC started with only three member states, but now the number is almost six, when South Sudan will have joined it in full. It is even though that the EAC will finally turn into an East African Federation, with only one sovereign state.

While it is generally held that in many cases that unity is power, the fact is, cherishing unity has never been easy. We all witnessed Tanzania threatening to pull out of the EAC in 2013, when it felt sidelined by Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda.

The three countries, under the leadership of President Uhuru Kenyatta, made an arrangement, which they termed ‘the Coalition of the Willing’, which considered Tanzania and Burundi unwilling. Rumours had it that Tanzania and Burundi were also considering forming their own alternative arrangement.

Among the issues agreed through the coalition of the willing included the construction of a crude oil pipeline from Uganda to Kenya, as well as a standard gauge railway.

However, it does not seem likely that the coalition of the willing arrangement will work well in favour of the allies. Soon in April 2016, Uganda announced that it was going to construct a crude oil pipeline from Kabaale in Uganda to Tanga, Tanzania.

Among the reasons given were that the Tanga route was much cheaper, but also that Tanzania was safer than Kenya. The Lamu option was seen as being closer to Somalia where the Al-Shabaab would target it.

Similarly, Rwanda pulled out from the standard gauge railway deal, leaving the friends perplexed.There have also been a number of deals involving the Presidents of Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and South Sudan, discussed and signed outside the EAC headquarters in Arusha. All these signify a union within a union, which is not very healthy for integration.

However, with the coming of President Magufuli, who wants Tanzania’s economy to boom as quickly as possible, these differences seem to be underplayed. My take is that Dr Magufuli is more interested in the economy, not useless politics. For example, President Magufuli’s visit to Rwanda was an important signal that politics of conflict will not have room during his time in power.

The construction of the Arusha-Holili-Taveta-Voi Road agreed and signed by President Magufuli and President Kenyatta also point to that direction. All the same, there are many issues which must be sorted out carefully before East Africans can relax that their Community is a lasting marriage.

Dr Gastor Mapunda is Senior Lecturer in the College of Humanities (CoHU), University of Dar es Salaam
http://www.dailynews.co.tz/index.php...ican-community

South Sudan was actually admitted into the EAC today, and presumably into the potential East African Federation by extension.