Other than the now seemingly permanent task of fire fighting
and peacekeeping, the African Union (AU) is currently engaging in a historic
task: Developing Africa’s Agenda 2063, along the vision of a united and strong Africa, through a
process that seeks to involve the ordinary African Mwananchi.( Check http://agenda2063.au.int/ )
Having a fifty year Agenda for Africa is indeed very
important, especially now that the AU’s agenda is mostly shaped by both long
running and spontaneous/organised conflicts. What sets this process apart from
past AU processes is that this one particularly seeks to involve the People
directly, by opening up avenues through which they can contribute their views. It
is only through the involvement of the African people in the AU processes that
we can begin to move the organisation closer to the African masses.
However, this noble idea is not being promoted as vigorously
as is expected, which means that the eventual aim of involving the masses
directly will not be achieved. At the current pace, it is the same bureaucrats,
NGOs etc that will get involved the most.....(at least ordinary Panafricanist Wananchis like me who independently follow the
AU will have a chance to contribute!)
One would expect that the ‘Agenda 2063’ would receive enough
publicity in every African country through the State owned media, at zero cost to
the African Union, but this has not been the case.
Dlamini Zuma.
The
leadership of Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma is what the AU has been lacking since its makeover
from the OAU.
It will be remembered that in the run up to the elections
for the AU chair two years ago, she earned a lot of respect and support from
Progressive Panafricanists and Africans in general, with her statements about taking the AU to the
people of Africa, about the paramount importance of African Unity and
integration.....she spoke like a Nkurmah-Gaddafi reincarnate.
She cemented her support when she ended the “Anglophone-Francophone”
debate by stating that she “was not Anglophone. She is Zulu.”
This Anglophone-Francophone” childish debate was the only
argument that Jean Ping and his supporters had been left with, >>after
overseeing the imperialist bombings and ouster of President Laurent Gbagbo and
our Brother Leader, Muammar Gaddafi!<<
 |
| Dr Dlamini Zuma-African Union Commission Chair |
Since her election into office, she has proven that she is
not some opinion-less bureaucrat, or some poster girl for the African Union,
but a decisive leader by her own right, who understand her tasks as the AUC
chair.
Her analysis of conflict situations in Africa have been unconcealed
and on point, and all her reports on these situations are made public through
the AU website. This is something that never used to happen before...and when
it accidentally happened, the reports would be too diplomatic to serve any
helpful purpose.
Her understanding of external interference has seen her not
shying away from expressing solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe, Kenya,
Egypt and other places. She did not falter when a decision was made to exclude
the NGOs (mostly western based) and partners from the AU summit main sittings.
(These Partners felt that since they fund the AU programs,
then they had a right to attend the closed sessions! Pure insanity! It is like
a man paying the house rent for a couple, and then he insists that he will
participate in the “bedroom action” by this couple, since in any case, he is
the one who pays the rent!)
(The claim by the NGOs that they represent the African people
is also absurd, since they are non-membership organisations. If it were Trade
Unions, political Parties, Churches and other membership organisations then it
would have been a different matter.)
Her creative letter from the future [Agenda 2063: an e-mail from the future Presentation by Dr. Nkosazana
Dlamini Zuma, Chairperson of the AU Commission... http://bit.ly/1b715cM ] captured the
imagination of uncountable African Youth in a great way, as was seen by the way
it went viral on social networking sites. Through such, she is consciously
combating the notion that Panafricanism is some old idea that belongs to
History books.
The role of the African Union today
Many commentators
have over the years described the AU as a club for the Heads of States (and now
a trade union for the heads of states) and others have even called for its
disbandment. It is true, that the AU has not achieved much in the last 30 years
(especially on the question of African Unity and anti-imperialism), but it
would be unfair to blame the AU for the numerous wars that have been erupting
on the continent.
This is because the AU is not a government in itself, but is
rather an organisation of states. The AUC Chair also lacks executing powers in internal
matters affecting the member states, in spite of him/her being nominated and elected
by those who are (mostly) elected by the African masses. (Though this does not justify the
inefficiency of people like Jean Ping)
The relevance of the AU today has not been in bringing
progression, but in preventing deterioration. This is manifested through
AMISOM, MISCA or UNAMID, MINUSMA and other peacekeeping missions whose origins were the AU.
The AU is always resolving conflicts (both diplomatically
and militarily) yet there is no space for it to prevent these conflicts.
If we take the Situation in South Sudan for instance,
Dlamini Zuma gave a very good report on what led to the conflict [AUC Chairperson Report on South Sudan http://bit.ly/1mh7P0U ].
So at what point was
the AU supposed to intervene?
The report indicates that in July and August,
President Salva Kiir dissolved, restructured and reconstituted his government
where he sacked Dr Riek Machar as the Vice President, and suspended Pagan Amum,
the Secretary General of SPLM, dismissed two state governors and sacked anyone
who contested within the SPLM structures.
Should the
AU have intervened at this point?
In September,
Salva Kiir severally postponed a National Liberation Council meeting that could
have dealt with matters that had not been approved by the Party’s political
Bureau.
Should the
AU have intervened at that point?
In November,
Salva Kiir unconstitutionally dissolved all the structures of SPLM, save for
the position of the Chair (his position), a matter that was highly contested.
Should the
AU have intervened at this point?
In December,
fighting broke out between the Dinka and the Nuer soldiers in the Presidential
guard, leading to a nightlong fight. The following day, Salva Kiir stated that
there was an attempted coup, and went ahead to arrest and detain several SPLM
leaders.
Should the
AU have intervened at this point?
Both IGAD, the AU and all the people involved could not even
force Salva Kiir to release the detained SPLM leaders, a move that could have
greatly weakened Riek Machar’s weight at the talks, and make it easier to find
a solution that would actually have favoured Salva Kiir! Salva Kiir only agreed
to the demand after thousands of civilians were killed. It is as if that was
his intention!
Today, Rwanda looks quiet, but remains a potential hotspot
for war. This is because the country is ruled over by a fascist dictator with a
tribal regime. We all know that in Africa, most dictators don’t last forever,
and where nature refuses to solve the problem, the people will rise up in arms,
just like Mr. Paul Kagame himself and the Rwanda Patriotic Front did in the
past.
So the questions come up again. Should the AU intervene in
Rwanda during this period of repression? Should the AU intervene at the break
out stage? Should it intervene, as usual, after an all out war break out?
And when it intervenes, does it just intervene to bring
peace, or also to bring justice? ... Who decides when and how to intervene? Shouldn't
the AU take sides in clear cut conflicts?
Western Sahara
Unlike in most
situations where the lines are blurred, the African Union has not only been a
big failure but also a big embarrassment when it comes to the case of Morocco’s
colonisation of Western Sahara.
Even though the OAU admitted Western Sahara as a member in
1981; and even though Western Sahara Republic was a founding member of the AU
in 2002, the people of Western Sahara are still living under the terror of the Moroccan
colonialism, or are living in refugee camps outside their country. A referendum
that was supposed to be held over 20 years ago is still being delayed thanks to
Morocco’s campaigns at the UNSC.
The AU has been reduced to writing resolutions and reports (just
like some small organisation) in a matter where diplomacy and waiting has
failed, while repression and exploitation prevails.
Can’t the AU
give a timed ultimatum for the referendum?
Can’t the AU
send a ‘referendum enforcing’ Intervention Brigade Forces to Western Sahara?
Is the AU
saying that it cannot contain one African country?
Tasks for Dr. Dlamini Zuma
Other than
the immediate and most important task of pushing for the end of colonisation
and occupation in Western Sahara by all necessary means (especially by use of force),
the AU chair
should intensify her calls for the Unity of the African people, and the
integration of Africa.
She should
speak directly to the Workers, Peasants and African masses on the need for them
to unite, and reject imperialism. She should intensify the planting of
Panafricanism in the hearts of the Youth and children of Africa.
What she lacks in mandate, she should recover with direct
propaganda to the African masses.
She must refuse to be a bureaucrat and be the politician and
progressive that she is.
Benedict Wachira
19th March 2014
6:32pm
