POLITICS-AFRICA: Caught Between A Rock And Hard Place

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Analysis by Na-iem Dollie

JOHANNESBURG, Jul 8 2003 (IPS) - South African President Thabo Mbeki hands over the reins of his year-long chairmanship of the African Union (AU) in Maputo this week to President Joaquim Chissano of Mozambique.

Referred to as a "regular" assembly, delegates are expected to inaugurate the AU’s peace and security council, its pan-African parliament, and to discuss ways of ending the bloody civil wars that continue to disfigure the push towards Africa’s renaissance.

The first year has come and gone, and after a brief spat with Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi over the location of its head office, the 53 African heads of state, who signed the AU’s declaration of intent in Togo last year to form the political and economic union, have decided to place it in the non-controversial Ethiopian capital of Addis Ababa.

Now that President Charles Taylor of Liberia – who, according to news reports, has been given sanctuary by Nigerian President Olesogun Obasanjo – has effectively stepped down and openly appealed to the US and the international community for assistance, the gruelling reconstruction of Angola, and the unresolved low-intensity war in Mozambique between the ruling MPLA and the rebel movement, Renamo, could well top the agenda of southern African delegates to the meeting. Alfonso Dhlakama, the leader of Renamo, has come out against the summit, arguing that the US$23m needed to host the gathering could be more effectively used elsewhere.

This meeting coincides with US President George Bush’s African safari, which began on Tuesday in Senegal and Wednesday with a welcoming ceremony in South Africa’s administrative capital, Pretoria.

The South African president faces stiff opposition within his own African National Congress (ANC) government, civil society groups, the South African Communist Party – which is in alliance with the ANC in South Africa – and other anti-war protesters.

Mbeki faces a tough choice: he has to be seen at the AU as a strong African leader who is ready to take the flak for South Africa’s unambiguous stance on Bush’s unmandated war against the people of Iraq, and the country’s refusal to be bullied into submission over the vexing question of Zimbabwe.

On Robert Mugabe’s Harare regime, Mbeki has been consistent and has followed the international letter of the law and the statutes of the AU: he will not "interfere" in the internal political arrangements of a sovereign state.

At the same time, South Africa continues to benefit from the Africa Growth and Opportunities Act, which the US has put in place up until 2008 and which allows preferential treatment of African exports to the US market.

While South Africa will fall off the beneficiary list of US military support for refusing to sign an immunity agreement with the US that says it will protect US citizens from prosecution by the International Court of Justice in the Hague for "crimes against humanity", Bush is expected to use the big carrot of trade to cajole Mbeki into accepting his US-dominated growth plan for Africa.

The continent is not united about Bush and his agenda for Africa. Botswana, for example, has signed the immunity agreement with Bush, and, at the AU meeting in Maputo, it will presumably argue for increased co-operation with the US, while South Africa will be expected to lead the resistance to continued Northern domination of the people of the South.

The AU is between a rock and hard place. On the one hand, it seeks to link common African interests, but like its European counterparts, the European Union and the European Parliament, it comprises a juxtaposition of antagonistic nationalisms, driven by different classes and ruling groups that are often about their own national reproduction.

The greater good is a good idea but the immediate imperative is the national drive. On the other hand, continental co-operation and unity will be vital solidarity blocs in negotiating advantageous positions for Third World development in the World Trade Organisation. And it is this "bigger picture" that seems to be more compelling than national interests.

Bush has tried to use Zimbabwe and support for his war against the Iraqi people to divide Africa. Mbeki refuses to buy into this, and quite rightly so. But the issues of Zimbabwe, Mugabe’s distortion of governance and his dogged refusal to retire, will continue to influence the African Union’s efforts to resolve conflicts in Africa.

The South Africa-Nigeria axis of power will dominate the affairs of the continent for some time. The relationship between these two countries, and Gaddafi’s seemingly unlimited access to cash, are the critical pointers for the attempts at African unity. Gaddafi has already burnt his fingers with Mugabe. Who will be the next beneficiary of his considerable largesse is anybody’s guess." (ENDS/IPS/AF/IP/ND/SM/03)