Abstract
This paper examines the role of historical hegemons in International Relations, analysing the basic tenets of hegemonic stability theory, investigating its area of strength, weakness and their contributions to global stability. Hegemonic Stability Theory posits that the stability of the international system is closely tied to the dominance of a single, powerful state, or hegemon, which provides global public goods such as security and open markets. This research explores the origins and key arguments of Hegemonic Stability theory; primarily rooted in the works of Charles Kindleberger and Robert Gilpin, who suggest that hegemonic power is crucial for maintaining international order and preventing systemic chaos. The study adopts secondary source of data collection and uses content analysis as the method of analysis. The study critiques Hegemonic Stability theory by addressing challenges such as the rise of multipolarity, global interdependence, and regionalism, which question the necessity of a single hegemon for stability. The study observes that although the earlier major proponents of hegemonic stability theory lay emphasis on a single hegemon as a stabiliser, two or more coalition of willing statescan undertake the task of providing for the system in the interest of all. To this end, it concludes that Africa needs a hegemon, single or coalition, willing to provide leadership and undertake the expenses of providing order within the region to ensure stability that would pave the way for the much-needed development.