The 12th Tana High-Level Forum on Security in Africa is under way in Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, bringing the relationship between economic sovereignty and durable peace to the centre of its three-day discussions. The forum runs from 23 to 25 October under the theme “Pathways to Peace in Africa: Economic Sovereignty and Geopolitical Transformation”. It brings together political leaders, policymakers, scholars and representatives of continental, regional and international bodies for an annual exchange on peace and security.
The central argument set before participants is that lasting peace cannot be separated from the ability of African countries to transform their resources, finance their priorities and influence decisions that affect their future. Economic sovereignty was presented not as an isolated economic goal, but as one foundation for security, public trust and more durable political settlements.
That framing places resource governance alongside diplomacy and conflict prevention. The discussion has highlighted the importance of retaining more value from minerals, agriculture and energy within African economies through processing, infrastructure, skills and regional value chains. It also points to transparent contracts and accountable management of public revenue as safeguards where resource wealth can otherwise intensify grievances or sustain armed networks.
Participants are also considering the financial capacity needed for African institutions to act. Domestic resource mobilisation, efforts against illicit financial flows and access to development finance form part of the agenda. These are policy priorities rather than measures agreed at the opening. The forum has not announced a new regional financing package or a binding peace agreement.
Regional integration is the other major thread. The case advanced at the meeting is that countries can increase their collective reach by coordinating national, regional and continental institutions more closely. In practical terms, that includes sharing early warning, making mediation efforts more coherent and following through on commitments already made. It also means giving institutions dedicated to conflict prevention and peacebuilding sufficiently predictable support.
The emphasis is on making existing commitments work in practice rather than creating a new structure at this meeting. It connects national capacity with regional and continental mechanisms because threats can move across borders. The discussion does not establish that early-warning systems, mediation arrangements or institutional funding have already been expanded; those remain matters for governments and institutions to pursue after the forum.
Trade and movement across borders feature in this approach. Better transport corridors, modernised border posts and simpler procedures could support implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area, while cooperation between neighbouring states can make cross-border travel and commerce easier. The discussion also distinguishes legitimate small-scale cross-border trade from criminal activity, warning against policies that treat local livelihoods as security threats without distinction.
The forum’s agenda extends to digital transformation. Skills, infrastructure and regulatory capacity are presented as necessary if countries are to govern data, strengthen institutions and respond to cyber threats and disinformation. In this account, digital policy belongs alongside more familiar peace and security concerns because dependency, exclusion and weak public confidence can shape wider stability.
The Tana Forum is convened annually by the Institute for Peace and Security Studies at Addis Ababa University as an informal space for dialogue on the continent’s security challenges. Its 12th edition comes amid conflict pressures, changing geopolitical relationships and demands for African-led approaches. The opening sessions have set out a broad agenda rather than a completed programme of action. Any practical outcomes will depend on the deliberations over the remaining days and on whether participating institutions translate the priorities into follow-through after the meeting ends.
