By Cheriff M. Sy
Former Ghanaian President, Kwame Nkrumah said this on 22 May 1963 referring to the Organisation of African Unity: "This union, we must achieve. Without necessarily sacrificing our various sovereignties, large or small, we can now and right here forge a political union based on a common defense, a common nationality, an African currency, an African monetary zone and an African Central Bank. We must unite in order to achieve full liberation of our continent. We need to create a system of common defense, led by an African High Command, to ensure stability and security in Africa. We have been entrusted with this sacred task from our peoples; we cannot miss them and betray their trust. We would turn a mockery of the hopes of our people if we show the slightest hesitation or if we make any delay to objectively address the issue of African Unity."
From Bandung in 1955 to Addis Ababa in 1963 through Accra which formalised the Pan-African movement, the founding fathers of the unitary dynamics had dreamt of a free, independent and prosperous Africa.
Fifty (50) years after her creation, the African Union seriously suffers from lack of unity. The so-called Malian crisis perfectly describes the state of the union and its “Pan-Africanism” character. A whole union of 54 countries was unable to rescue Mali from the hands of schizophrenic bearded guerrillas. It then took the “helping hand” of imperial France supported by Chad, to allow Mali to rise and find its feet again.
On the other hand, the AU will not spare a chance to extend a begging bowl everywhere and any time. 70% of her budget comes from partners and other donors: her glittering headquarters a “gift” from China. Her imposing yet-to-be-completed Peace and Security Commission’s building is a gift from Germany. No single brick has come from any of the 54 African countries.
At the same time, it can certainly not be said that in fifty years the African Union has not advanced the causes of African development. Charters and important Treaties have been adopted even if their implementations are extraordinarily hackneyed or otherwise shunned and ignored by many States.
Thanks to the work of the AU, significant efforts are being made on the management of crises with the Peace and Security Commission. Significant economic growth is recorded through the programmes and projects linked to the New Partnership for Development (NEPAD). Despite the commitment to changing the AU from a Union of Heads of State and Government to one which is a union of the peoples of the member countries of Africa it remains in the main still very much the gathering of the Big Men and their Big cars and their uniformed shadows.
The recent celebrations of 50 years saw a slight change where civil society speakers addressed the plenary and were given enough time to make their points while the leaders were limited to three minutes each. Used to making long speeches, many of them were cut mid sentence. It was a small thing, but indicative maybe of the new mood in Addis.
It must be stated that the two strong conditions that undermine the AU and negatively impact on what should be her original mission, are the States and their Leaders on the one hand, and the internal bureaucracy.
Apart from the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, who despite his inarticulate approaches and hegemonic pretensions, pushed hard for progress towards unity and causing major institutional reforms, most states have not shown any interest in strengthening these efforts through abandoning a tiny portion of their national prerogatives in the interest of the continental.
Alpha Konare, then Chairman of the African Union Commission, had wanted to object to the young Faure Gnassingbe succeeding his father Eyadema of Togo. The union headed by the President of Gabon at the time, Omar Bongo, roundly concluded that Konare’s responsibility was to implement their decisions and not to initiate decisions. At the time Bongo exclaimed: "Alpha, he does not know what he is talking about, he comes out and speaks wo wo wo wo ...".
In so far as the Pan-Africanism concept is concerned, very few heads of state believe in it or seriously think of it really. Only a few countries that have gained their political independence through armed struggle will place some emphasis on pan africanism. Had that not been so, the question of Free Movement of Goods and People would no longer be an issue because it is obvious to everyone that this is one of the key issues to make unity real.
The second condition that hamstrings the AU is within the AU itself. First there is the question of commitment to Africa, which is to believe in Africa and work hard for its development. However, the least we can say is that in this great institution, many of the people who work there do not reason as Africans but as citizens of the individual countries that they come from.
Some of them have fashioned themselves into “indispensable" people who, though retired, remain in their offices through consultancy contracts. Add to this the fact that there are people who find a way to travel from 100 to 180 days in a year, so they can collect the much anticipated financial benefits, and you realise that there is hardly any time to do any real work for Africa.
Then there is the cacophony of leadership. In effect, the Commissioners who serve like a cabinet of the continent are elected in the same way as the President and the Vice President of the AUC and have the same mandates. They tend not to accept that the President or vice President of the AUC is their leader. Such a situation is messy and calls for a necessary reform whereby Commissioners are elected, but it is the president that assigns them to specific positions according to their competence. This would ensure they know they report to the President and not the Council of Ministers.
The AU truly still lacks unity. The new president of the commission, Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma is trying to give a new impetus to the organization. But she will find it very difficult to achieve anything if heads of state, civil society organisations and various internal forces do not commit more for the realization of the pan-African ideal.
Cheriff M. Sy, Burkina Faso, is Director of Bendré, an analyst and a columnist
