Visibility or impact? International efforts to defend LGBTQI+ rights in Sub-Saharan Africa

This paper analyzes the question of international efforts to defend LGBTQI+ rights in countries the Global South, with a particular focus on Sub-Saharan Africa. It asks how and when international actors should and should not intervene. It recognizes that motives for intervening can be problematic and the means often counterproductive, especially when exhibiting neo-imperialist tendencies and constituting ad hoc reactions to events in the media. Countering essentialist arguments about “authentic” African culture and values, influenced by religious beliefs, is also a significant challenge. I argue that more fruitful efforts should instead be centred on local rights defenders’ perspectives and supporting their priorities and initiatives, based on concerted, long-term, principled strategies. International actors, however, will be reluctant to adopt them because of a desire for short-term visible action, even if less effective or not effective at all. This conundrum is a fundamental problem in the area of foreign aid writ large, as greater impact often requires less visibility on the part of international actors, but donor countries want domestic and international recognition of their efforts. The first section of the paper assesses the two main challenges to intervention in the domestic politics of Sub-Saharan African countries: 1) the argument, whether deployed sincerely or instrumentally, that LGBTQI+ identities are Western constructs and un-African, thus contrary to authentic African culture, history and religious beliefs; and 2) that any form of intervention is thus a form of neo-imperialism, seeking to circumvent national sovereignty and impose external values, practices and laws. I parse out the validity of some of the critiques, while refuting elements of casuistry, concluding that some forms of intervention are legitimate, even if many actions remain problematic. The second section of the paper explores what makes intervention effective or not, what a more productive approach would encompass and the obstacles to putting the principles into action. It begins by exploring Western countries’ problematic motives and perspectives. Next, I examine the generally poor effectiveness of previous efforts to defend LGBTQI+ rights, focusing on the cases of Malawi, Uganda and Tanzania, where Western countries provoked a backlash that actually worsened the situation for sexual and gender minorities. Finally, drawing mainly on lessons derived from those relatively recent examples and the “grey” literature, the paper proposes a potentially more fruitful approach, considering the impediments to such action.