African leaders have again squandered yet another opportunity, an historic one, to lead decisively. Instead they have gone for the least common denominator, the line of least resistance, by deciding not to decide. The all-important issue of a Government of the Union that was billed as The Grand Debate at the recently concluded AU summit, has been referred to yet another committee that will report at the next summit in January in Addis Ababa.

We are all familiar with the saying that the best way to kill an idea is to form a committee about it. How many more committees do we need to make this decision?

The so-called debate itself was the result of a study presented to the heads of state that has taken almost two years to complete. All the arguments for and against were contained in the report and the three options were clear. One, immediate formation of a Union government. Two, a gradual process leading to Union Government by consolidation of regional economic communities and economic convergence. And last, the formation of a Union Government that gives political authority to the AU in specified areas, aligns national policies to continental policies, and rationalises the RECS to become affective building blocs for the Union Government.

Wherever one stands on this debate, deciding on these issues is vital to move forward. Too many decisions, agreements, protocols have been made, agreed or signed at the continental level without any implementation at the national level. The suggestion of a Union Government was meant to give an effective legal and political framework to these agreements and a mandatory enforcement mechanism.

Unfortunately, the huge ego, razzmatazz and showmanship of the brother-leader, Muammar Gaddafi, the champion of the accelerated Union-track, has beclouded the real issues feeding the prejudice of all Gadaffi-phobic and Arab phobic and sub-Saharan obscurantists. President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa who is leading the anti-Gaddafi and anti-Union Government charge, liberally exploited these sentiments to actually subvert the debate due to the interests of South African capital and its expansion across this continent without any obligation towards our social commune.

The South African manoeuvre also tapped into the deep-seated alienation of many Africans about our governments, their distrust of political leaders, and cynicism that our leaders don't mean what they say or say what they mean.

Unfortunately, Mbeki's neoliberal agenda was unwittingly aided and abetted by the ambiguity displayed by Nigeria's new President, Umar Musa Yar' Adua. Yar' Adua was obviously not properly briefed by his benefactor and the Nigerian foreign policy elite about a third position championed by former President Obasanjo, and supported by Uganda, Senegal and other leaders in the Heads of State committee set up to look into the issue. They were supposed to report to the Summit but with clear timelines and concrete steps about what will be Union issues, further reforms of the charter, strengthening of representational institutions like the Pan-African Parliament and also taking a decision on the RECS.

But when Yar Adua spoke in his maiden Summit address, he sounded like all he was interested in were the RECs, thereby strengthening the Mbeki supporters.

Obasanjo was too busy trying to get Yar' Adua to Aso Rock to update him on Nigeria's position on African and global matters. The enemies of the Union Government are not just neoliberal governments but also must be some of the bureaucrats in the Union and NEPAD. The old OAU bureaucrats were afraid of the Union and fought its restructuring before and after the extraordinary summit in Shirte in 1999. Now they are fighting to defend the Union they opposed because we now want to reform it further to create a viable institution with political authority.

Many of them are incompetent and got their positions due to political barter and horse-trading and want to maintain them at all costs. But all is not lost yet. At least no one dares to argue against the Union and the Union Government in principle any more. What they are arguing about is when and how.

Therefore, the debate in the next six months in all our countries should shift to the streets, seminar halls, parliaments, county halls and at all levels to challenge our leaders and democratise the discussion so that by the January Summit there is a clear and unambiguous message that we are ready for a Union Government with a clear timetable. South Africa is happy for its businesses to be free to exploit the rest of the continent. Their attitude is like that of Britain towards Europe. However, British reluctance did not stop the Germans and the French and other Europeans to move forward.

Those countries that are willing and ready should begin to take the necessary steps that will make unity concrete for our peoples and not wait until everybody agrees.

* Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is the Deputy Director for the UN Millennium Campaign in Africa, based in Nairobi, Kenya. He writes this article in his personal capacity as a concerned Pan-Africanist.

* Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

We are all familiar with the saying that the best way to kill an idea is to form a committee about it. How many more committees do we need to make this decision?

The so-called debate itself was the result of a study presented to the Heads of State that has taken almost two years to complete. All the arguments for and against were contained in the report and the three options were clear. One, immediate formation of a Union government. Two, a gradual process leading to Union Government by consolidation of regional economic communities and economic convergence. And last, the formation of a Union Government that gives political authority to the AU in specified areas, aligns national policies to continental policies, and rationalises the RECS to become affective building blocs for the Union Government.

Wherever one stands on this debate, deciding on these issues is vital to move forward. Too many decisions, agreements, protocols have been made, agreed or signed at the continental level without any implementation at the national level. The suggestion of a Union Government was meant to give an effective legal and political framework to these agreements and a mandatory enforcement mechanism.

Unfortunately, the huge ego, razzmatazz and showmanship of the brother-leader, Muammar Gaddafi, the champion of the accelerated Union-track, has beclouded the real issues feeding the prejudice of all Gadaffi-phobic and Arab phobic and sub-Saharan obscurantists. President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa who is leading the anti-Gaddafi and anti-Union Government charge, liberally exploited these sentiments to actually subvert the debate due to the interests of South African capital and its expansion across this continent without any obligation towards our social commune.

The South African manoeuvre also tapped into the deep-seated alienation of many Africans about our governments, their distrust of political leaders, and cynicism that our leaders don't mean what they say or say what they mean.

Unfortunately, Mbeki's neo- liberal agenda was unwittingly aided and abetted by the ambiguity displayed by Nigeria's new President, Umar Musa Yar' Adua. Yar' Adua was obviously not properly briefed by his benefactor and the Nigerian foreign policy elite about a third position championed by former President Obasanjo, and supported by Uganda, Senegal and other leaders in the Heads of State committee set up to look into the issue. They were supposed to report to the Summit but with clear timelines and concrete steps about what will be Union issues, further reforms of the charter, strengthening of representational institutions like the Pan-African Parliament and also taking a decision on the RECS.

But when Yar Adua spoke in his maiden Summit address, he sounded like all he was interested in were the RECs, thereby strengthening the Mbeki supporters.

Obasanjo was too busy trying to get Yar' Adua to Aso Rock to update him on Nigeria's position on African and global matters. The enemies of the Union Government are not just neo-liberal governments but also must be some of the bureaucrats in the Union and NEPAD. The old OAU bureaucrats were afraid of the Union and fought its restructuring before and after the extraordinary summit in Shirte in 1999. Now they are fighting to defend the Union they opposed because we now want to reform it further to create a viable institution with political authority.

Many of them are incompetent and got their positions due to political barter and horse-trading and want to maintain them at all costs. But all is not lost yet. At least no one dares to argue against the Union and the Union Government in principle any more. What they are arguing about is when and how.

Therefore, the debate in the next six months in all our countries should shift to the streets, seminar halls, parliaments, county halls and at all levels to challenge our leaders and democratise the discussion so that by the January Summit there is a clear and unambiguous message that we are ready for a Union Government with a clear timetable. South Africa is happy for its businesses to be free to exploit the rest of the continent. Their attitude is like that of Britain towards Europe. However, British reluctance did not stop the Germans and the French and other Europeans to move forward.

Those countries that are willing and ready should begin to take the necessary steps that will make unity concrete for our peoples and not wait until everybody agrees.

* Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is the Deputy Director for the UN Millennium Campaign in Africa, based in Nairobi, Kenya. He writes this article in his personal capacity as a concerned Pan-Africanist.

* Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/