POLITICS: African Union Seeks to Shed the Image of Mere ‘Talk Shop’

By James Hall Reprint | | Print |

Analysis - By James Hall

MAPUTO, Jun 16 2003 (IPS) - A year into its mandate to replace the old Organisation of African Unity, the African Union is seeking substantive acts to counter criticism that it is a mere "talk shop" for travel-loving ministers.

Also on the African Union’s "to do" list is reforming its finances, particularly the need to get member states to pay subscription fees that will make programmes, and thus the African Union’s prestige, a reality.

"The forward march towards good governance and democracy is unstoppable and irreversible," South African Deputy President Jacob Zuma told the inaugural session of the African Union (AU) in Durban, South Africa, a year ago, when South African President Thabo Mbeki became the organisation’s first president.

But good governance and democracy are still goals to be achieved among member states, and the African Union is struggling to avoid political pitfalls – like Zimbabwe and war torn nations like the Democratic Republic of Congo – that can undermine the AU’s goal of a united continent of democratic states, at peace with each other and internally.

The immediate focus is on poverty alleviation and health and living improvements, en route to the type of African renaissance envisioned by Mbeki in 1999 when he became his country’s second popularly elected leader, after Nelson Mandela.

The African Union officially came into existence when Nigeria became the 36th African nation to deliver its "instrument of ratification" agreed upon by the Nigerian national congress, on Apr. 23, 2001.

As this year’s AU heads of state summit, the host country, Mozambique, wants to show it is a good AU player. The Mozambique Defence Force has committed 290 soldiers to join the AU’s maiden peacekeeping effort, the African Mission in Burundi (AMIB).

The AMIB force of 2870 soldiers draws its main support from South Africa (1600 troops) and Ethiopia (980 troops). The Mozambique troops will be in place by month’s end, and will stay for one-year, after which a United Nations peacekeeping force is expected to be deployed.

AMIB, as the first peacekeeping operation to be carried out by the African Union, will oversee the implementation of a ceasefire agreement, assist with the disarmament of combatants, facilitate demobilisation of the former hostiles and see that the troops are integrated back into peacetime Burundi society, and pave the way for the U.N. operations take-over.

"The AMIB proves that the AU is not a toothless tiger or a ‘talk shop’. Over 200,000 people were killed in the Burundi conflict, and AU troops are on the ground to ensure an end to violence," Swaziland’s former foreign minister Abednego Ntshangatsi told IPS.

The minister, who oversaw Swaziland’s participation in the birth of the African Union, said that it was important that the African Union commit resources immediately to a trouble spot of concern on the continent to prove the new organisation’s substantiality.

Critics of the new grouping of African states noted that a much-publicised "Peer Review Mechanism" has failed to address the crisis in Zimbabwe. Robert Mugabe’s regime has defied international pressure to halt human rights abuses and re-establish rule of law. When asked in Apr. about AU discussions concerning Zimbabwe, AU chairperson Mbeki said flatly, "The AU has not discussed Zimbabwe".

Mbeki said that it was the 14 member states of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) whose mandate covers Zimbabwe. But SADC’s ineffectiveness in Zimbabwe prompted human rights and legal advocates to hope for more from the African Union.

"The problem with the Peer Review Mechanism is that it is voluntary," South Africa-based rights activist Louis Livingston told IPS. "Nations have to sign a declaration supporting democracy, and throw themselves open to annual inspections by AU monitors. Dictators and unelected governments will not gladly volunteer, and invite criticism of themselves," he said.

When the "O" was dropped from the OAU, and the AU was born, the financial structure remained the same, with the African Union inheriting the financial difficulties of the earlier organisation. Of the 53 African nations that were OAU members at the AU’s inception, only 16 were fully paid up in their membership subscriptions.

The OAU’s operating budget was 31 million U.S. dollars and membership arrears were 42.4 million U.S. dollars. Djibouti, Ghana, Mauritania, Republic of the Congo and Saharawi Democratic Republic were about to face sanctions for being over two years in arrears. They were to lose their right to vote, or speak at meetings on issues not concerning their countries. Nor could nationals from sanctioned countries enjoy lucrative AU postings.

The day was saved for these and several other countries in arrears by Libya. Libyan strongman Muhammar Ghadafi’s generosity was motivated by his desire to have the AU’s headquarters built in Tripoli. Following last year’s Durban summit, Ghadafi went on a whirlwind regional tour to seek support from Mozambique, Swaziland and other nations. Thus far, nothing has come of the idea.

As for tardy subscription payers, this remains a nettlesome problem for the African Union. Madagascar was banned from the roster of AU member states at the organisation’s birth. Continental leaders agreed that civil war on the island state had not produced a single credible government, and to allow such a country in the AU would be to condone a "banana republic" membership critics of the old OAU found objectionable.

In one area, the African Union is living up to a charter commitment that sought to move away from the OAU’s "overly state-centric character of the OAU and its concomitant lack of civil participation."

"NGOs and other civil society organisations have been involved in recommending and implementing AU programmes. It is more than government-run, and the AU should be viewed for its developmental efforts and not just politics," Amanda Nxumalo, a Swazi human rights lawyer, told IPS.