|
|
|
|
|
|
The
African Union 20th July 2002 THE launch
of the African Union this week marks a departure of sorts. It reflects the
determination by a handful of African leaders to abandon Africa's troubled past
- particularly its sterile rhetoric - and make the most of the trade and
investment possibilities opened up by globalisation and measures such as the US
African Growth and Opportunity Act. There is
an unambiguous commitment to improved governance by leaders signing up to Nepad,
which the AU has adopted as its lodestar, and an array of bodies designed to
make closer union a reality. But will
it work? Will the understandable cynicism, not least in Africa itself, about the
prospects for a new beginning, prove justified? After all, grand schemes for
African union have proved unattainable before. Comparisons
are being made with the European Union. This is a good template because it
illustrates just how far the AU has to go in making things happen on the ground.
The EU had its genesis in the European Coal and Steel Community of 1951 which
was designed to harness German post-war recovery to French, Belgian and Dutch
security concerns. That in turn grew into the Common Market set up under the
1957 Rome Treaty and the subsequent European Economic Community and European
Union. But all
these structures with their councils, commissions and parliaments were built
brick by brick over 50 years with endless horsetrading and inevitable
concessions of sovereignty. There were also significant mutualities such as
German industry and French agriculture as well as far-sighted statesmen working
to stabilise the new European order on both sides of the Rhine. The threat posed
by the Communist bloc to their east concentrated minds. Above all, closer union
was built on the strong foundations of stable national institutions. African
states have few mutualities. They all export unprocessed raw materials and
prefer external trade partners to each other. They are reluctant to concede
sovereignty and have weak national institutions. Nor is there any commitment to
civil society structures or democratic consensus which underpin the EU. There is
another daunting reality here. While South Africa's Thabo Mbeki has warned
against the politics of blaming the West for Africa's shortcomings, he is
surrounded by fellow rulers who have no intention of departing from their old
habits. Col Muammar Gaddafi's crude demagoguery at Durban's Absa stadium on
Tuesday was a reminder of the obstacles ahead. So was the presence of President
Mugabe, the ghost at the feast. Understandably
the AU leaders agreed not to let Zimbabwe's crisis rain on their parade. That
will be postponed for subsequent peer review. But while ignoring flawed
elections in Zambia and Zimbabwe where ruling parties ensconced themselves in
power, they insisted that Madagascar's Marc Ravalomanana, whose election was
endorsed by his country's courts, be subject to a re-run because he had the
temerity to defeat an incumbent. It is the
concern that the AU will persist as a mutual survival club where unstable
mavericks like Gaddafi and Mugabe can strut upon the continental stage that
poses the greatest danger to the infant AU. If they succeed it will not be taken
seriously. With regional building blocs like Ecowas and Sadc still struggling to
promote intra-group trade, an economic union seems remote. Mbeki,
Nigeria's Olusegun Obasanjo, Senegal's Abdoulaye Wade, and Algeria's Abdulaziz
Bouteflika have a mountain to climb if they want the new-look Africa to succeed.
They at least have on their side international leaders who are committed to
giving them a chance and domestic democratic imperatives which the continent's
rulers can no longer ignore. There will
be plenty of tests for the much-vaunted peer review mechanism ahead. The AU and
Nepad will be judged by how leaders handle their first big test which they have
been studiously ignoring for the past four months on the grounds that
institutional structures are not yet in place. Regional heads have already told
Mbeki they are not prepared to appear before any review body to account for
their performance. And the Nepad implementation committee has been extended from
15 to 20 members to include its likely saboteurs. That's a predictable start. It remains to be seen just how serious Africa's leaders are about projecting a new profile. Until then the jury is out. |
