Africa’s digital diplomacy in the AI era: Building a common voice for global digital governance

Africa’s place in an evolving digital governance landscape

As AI, cybersecurity, and digital technologies become increasingly central to international policymaking, African countries are seeking to strengthen their role in shaping global digital governance. Questions of representation, digital sovereignty, capacity development, and regional coordination are becoming more prominent as governments prepare for negotiations on AI governance, cybersecurity, telecommunications, and internet governance.

These issues formed the focus of a recent Diplo webinar on Cyber Diplomacy in Africa: Regional, National and Continental Initiatives, moderated by Mwende Njiraini, African Initiative Coordinator at Diplo and Chair of the ITU-T Study Group 17 Regional Group for Africa on security. The discussion brought together policymakers, diplomats, academics, and regional organisations to examine how African interests can be more effectively represented in international digital governance processes.

Speakers included Jovan Kurbalija, Executive Director of Diplo and Head of the Geneva Internet Platform, Dr Katherine Getao, consultant on cyber diplomacy and former CEO of Kenya’s ICT Authority, Ambassador Prof. Bitange Ndemo, Professor of Entrepreneurship at the University of Nairobi and former Kenyan Ambassador to the European Union, Meriem Slimani, Development Director at the African Telecommunications Union (ATU), and Tapera Henry Chinemhute of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) Secretariat.

Although the discussion focused on Africa, many of the issues raised, including AI governance, digital sovereignty, capacity development, and multistakeholder cooperation, reflect broader challenges facing digital governance worldwide.

From cyber diplomacy to diplomacy in the AI era

Opening the discussion, Kurbalija suggested that the distinction between cyber diplomacy, digital diplomacy, and technology diplomacy is becoming less significant as digital technologies permeate virtually every area of international relations. Rather than focusing on terminology, he argued that the central question is how countries, communities, and citizens represent their interests in an increasingly digital world.

‘Cyber diplomacy, digital diplomacy, or AI diplomacy is ultimately diplomacy. It is about representing interests, negotiating, and finding common solutions.’, he said.

According to Kurbalija, technological developments are no longer confined to specialised policy discussions. AI, cybersecurity, digital infrastructure, and data governance increasingly influence trade, security, education, healthcare, humanitarian action, and economic development, making digital issues part of mainstream diplomacy.

This evolution also raises questions about whether Africa is sufficiently represented in international discussions shaping the future of digital technologies.

Kurbalija noted that African diplomats are becoming more active in negotiations related to AI, cybersecurity, and internet governance, but argued that stronger participation will be necessary to ensure that the continent’s priorities are reflected in emerging international frameworks.

He pointed to several forthcoming international meetings, including the AI for Good Global Summit, the AI Governance Dialogue, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)+20 process in Geneva, and the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2026 in Nairobi, as important opportunities for African governments, civil society organisations, academia, and the technical community to contribute to global discussions.

Rather than approaching these meetings individually, Kurbalija encouraged participants to prepare coordinated positions that reflect African priorities across different policy areas.

Regional coordination remains a work in progress

A recurring theme throughout the discussion was the gap between continental ambitions and national implementation.

Introducing the session, Dr Katherine Getao observed that African countries have participated in international digital governance processes for several decades through the UN, the African Union (AU), and regional organisations including the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), COMESA, the Southern African Development Community (SADC), and the East African Community (EAC).

However, she questioned whether these processes consistently translate into practical outcomes across the continent.

To illustrate this point, Getao presented the results of a live audience poll measuring familiarity with African digital governance initiatives. While approximately half of the participants recognised the AU Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection (the Malabo Convention), significantly fewer were familiar with other continental initiatives, including the AU Digital Transformation Strategy and the African Union’s position on international law in cyberspace.

The findings suggested that awareness of Africa’s existing digital governance architecture remains uneven, even among participants engaged in digital policy discussions.

Ambassador Bitange Ndemo argued that implementation presents an even greater challenge than awareness. He observed that agreements adopted at the African Union level often take considerable time to influence national policymaking, with countries frequently developing their own legal and regulatory approaches rather than building on common continental frameworks.

Using the Malabo Convention as an example, Ndemo suggested that many governments introduced separate data protection legislation without fully integrating broader continental approaches. According to him, one contributing factor is reliance on external funding for many regional digital initiatives.

‘If we continue depending on external partners to finance our priorities, ownership becomes more difficult’, Ndemo added.

Ndemo argued that stronger African investment in digital governance initiatives would improve both implementation and long-term sustainability.

Getao echoed this concern, noting that important achievements at the continental level do not always ‘percolate’ effectively to national implementation.

Building common African positions

Despite these challenges, speakers highlighted several examples of growing regional coordination.

Meriem Slimani described how the African Telecommunications Union (ATU) has worked to strengthen cooperation among member states in preparing common African positions for international telecommunications negotiations.

When she joined the organisation in 2015, Slimani recalled, many countries submitted proposals independently at international meetings, often without consulting neighbouring states.

ATU responded by creating a coordination platform through which member countries discuss priorities, identify common interests, exchange experiences, and gradually develop shared positions before major international conferences.

‘Our objective has been to ensure that Africa speaks with one voice where common interests exist.’

According to Slimani, this collaborative approach has become particularly important in preparation for major meetings of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), where coordinated regional positions can strengthen Africa’s influence during negotiations.

Tapera Henry Chinemhute offered a complementary perspective from COMESA.

While acknowledging that implementation challenges remain, he argued that progress has been more visible in some sectors than others.

In particular, COMESA has advanced several practical digital trade initiatives, including electronic trade documentation, digital logistics systems, electronic certificates of origin, and simplified digital trade procedures designed to facilitate cross-border commerce.

Governance issues such as cybersecurity and cybercrime, however, have generally progressed more slowly because they often involve more politically sensitive discussions and require broader legal coordination among participating states.

Chinemhute suggested that smaller regional organisations can sometimes move more quickly than continental institutions because they involve fewer actors and more focused policy priorities.

Looking ahead

While speakers approached Africa’s digital future from different institutional and regional perspectives, several common priorities emerged throughout the discussion. These included strengthening Africa’s participation in global digital governance processes, improving coordination among national, regional, and continental initiatives, investing in capacity development, and ensuring that digital policies reflect local realities and priorities.

The discussion also highlighted that digital governance extends beyond technology. Questions of AI, cybersecurity, connectivity, language, education, and financing were presented as interconnected challenges that require cooperation among governments, regional organisations, academia, the private sector, and civil society.

As international discussions on AI and digital governance continue through forums such as the AI for Good Global Summit, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)+20 process, and the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), speakers stressed that African participation will be most effective when supported by coordinated regional positions and sustained investment in local expertise and digital capabilities.

Ultimately, the webinar underscored that Africa’s role in shaping the future of digital governance will depend not only on engagement in international negotiations but also on translating continental ambitions into practical national implementation and ensuring that African perspectives contribute to global debates on AI, cybersecurity, and digital development.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!