The African Union’s Dangerous Dance with Despots
The African Union Commission has congratulated President Yoweri Museveni on his re-election in Uganda’s January 15, 2026 elections, praising the electoral process despite overwhelming evidence of systematic repression, violence, and democratic backsliding. This troubling response exposes a fundamental hypocrisy at the heart of the African Union: while the organization speaks eloquently about democracy and good governance on the world stage, it consistently enables and legitimizes the very authoritarians who strangle these principles at home.
Uganda’s elections were marred by widespread repression, internet shutdowns, and intimidation of opposition candidates, with the United Nations describing an environment of pervasive intimidation. Museveni secured 71.65% of the vote in what observers universally acknowledged as a deeply flawed process.
Security forces used violence against opposition rallies throughout the campaign, with international media witnessing beatings and tear gas attacks on supporters of challenger Bobi Wine. The government shut down internet services on January 13, citing misinformation and electoral fraud. Yet despite these glaring deficiencies, the AU’s election observation mission concluded that the elections were delivered in a calm environment compared to 2021. This represents a catastrophic lowering of standards; celebrating an election as acceptable merely because you crowned it as less violent than the previous one normalizes democratic decay.
The case of Dr. Kizza Besigye exemplifies the Museveni regime’s brutal treatment of dissent, yet the AU has remained conspicuously silent. Besigye was abducted in Nairobi, Kenya in November 2024 and forcibly transported to Uganda, where he was charged with treason. A Ugandan court denied him bail in August 2025 despite nearly nine months in detention without trial. UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk condemned the abduction and noted that Besigye was arraigned before a military court despite being a civilian, in contravention of Uganda’s international human rights obligations.
Even after Uganda’s Supreme Court ruled in January 2025 that trying civilians in military courts is unconstitutional, authorities continued to detain Besigye and his associates. Here was a clear case of a government defying its own Supreme Court to keep a political opponent imprisoned during an election cycle, yet the AU congratulated this very government on conducting credible elections.
Uganda is far from an isolated case. The African Union’s approach to flawed elections across the continent reveals a disturbing pattern of prioritizing stability over democracy, and solidarity with sitting governments over accountability to citizens. When the AU speaks at international forums about African agency and self-determination, it often does so with moral authority.
Yet this authority evaporates when the organization refuses to hold its own members to the democratic standards it champions globally. Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan, who led the AU observation mission, acknowledged that reports of intimidation, arrests, and abductions targeting the opposition instilled fear and eroded public trust in the electoral process. Despite these damning observations, the AU Commission issued its congratulatory statement. This amounts to active complicity in democratic erosion.
The AU’s tolerance for electoral authoritarianism has created a profound disconnect with Africa’s youth. Uganda has one of the youngest populations in the world, with an overwhelming majority of its 50 million people under age 40 who have only ever known one president. Youth unemployment in Uganda is staggering, with only 90,000 out of 700,000 graduates each year finding employment in the formal sector. These young Africans are watching their democratic institutions fail them repeatedly. They see elections rigged, opponents jailed, and continental bodies applauding the perpetrators. When democratic processes consistently fail to deliver change or accountability, is it any wonder that some begin to look elsewhere for solutions?
The growing acceptance of military coups across the Sahel and West Africa reflects, in part, a generational disillusionment with democratic institutions that have been hollowed out by the very leaders the AU protects. Military coups in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and Guinea have been met with surprising popular support, particularly among young people who see military rulers as disrupting a corrupt status quo. This is a perilous development. Yet the AU bears significant responsibility for creating the conditions where such interventions gain legitimacy. By tolerating and celebrating civilian autocrats who manipulate elections, jail opponents, and ignore constitutional constraints, the organization has undermined the very democratic institutions that could provide peaceful pathways to change.
The African Union must undertake urgent and fundamental reforms to its approach to elections and governance. First, the organization needs to develop and enforce meaningful consequences for member states that conduct fraudulent elections. Congratulatory statements following flawed polls should be replaced with honest assessments and targeted sanctions against officials responsible for electoral manipulation.
Also, the AU’s election observation methodology requires complete overhaul. Missions that acknowledge widespread irregularities but still validate results serve no purpose beyond providing democratic cover for authoritarian outcomes. In addition, the organization must prioritize the protection of opposition leaders and civil society activists facing persecution. And finally, the AU needs to engage directly and meaningfully with Africa’s youth, whose demands for accountability and participation must shape the organization’s evolution.
The African Union stands at a crossroads. It can continue on its current path, offering diplomatic pleasantries to despots while democracy crumbles across the continent. Or it can reclaim its stated commitment to democratic governance by holding member states to meaningful standards and supporting the citizens who struggle for genuine representation.
The cost of continued complicity will be measured in disillusioned populations and the proliferation of military governments that fill the void left by failed democratic systems. Museveni has been in power since 1986, making him one of Africa’s longest-serving leaders. His seventh term will extend that reign further, enabled in part by a continental organization that has prioritized his comfort over his citizens’ rights. This pattern must end.
The young generation watching today’s charades will be tomorrow’s leaders. They will remember who stood for their rights and who enabled their oppression. The African Union’s legacy depends on the choices it makes now; to either become a genuine force for democratic accountability or to remain a club of sitting governments protecting their own.
Related to this topic:
