The AU on a quest for post-national identity

Introduction

One does not need to explicate the symbolic meanings of the African village tree located at the very centre of the village or in small and remote communities. In the main, it is not only the site for manifold economic transactions and other valuable exchanges and social communication but also a place of assembly to discuss matters of public interest in a face-to-face, honest interaction and mutual social learning. For strangers, sojourners, and the stranded it is the place for topographic orientation, a warm-nest and hospitality. It is a place where no one is left behind when dusk begins to fall and active day’s life fades into obscurity just to wait for the dawn of another brighter day of interwoven human interaction. Is it long overdue for the African Union to forge a post-national identity by making its novel institutions and policies accessible and meaningful at the grassroots? In other words, isn’t the time ripe for the AU to create the space for true Africanisation of its institutions and ownership of its processes by the people at home and in the diaspora?

The political character of the individual member states of the AU reflects how the union engages with its citizens as well as how it safeguards national coherence as a pedestal of genuine continental unity. In 1975, to the chagrin of many Ugandans and the wider Pan-African community Idi Amin was elected the Chairman of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), forerunner of the AU. There is no continental unity to be protected or to be promoted when our heads of state and governments continue to divide and rule their populations. Until the demise of the Cold War, many of us were witnesses to how a ruthless club of military leaders trespassed, tampered, and trampled upon the basic rights and aspirations of millions of Africans. More than two decades of re-democratisation seem not to have transformed our political elites. Given the "unique" challenges we face in our continent, we must adopt a holistic perspective in analysing the AU as a true representative of the African peoples. At the level of organisation, it is also high time that as true Pan-African citizens we intensify our collaboration and appropriate some of the new institutions of the AU we deem will make our voices and actions come to bear on our leaders. We also cannot delink the realities in our villages, communities, and constituencies from the functions of the AU bearing in mind the duties of states and our civic responsibilities. These are also the natural sites of the AU’s legitimacy, and the founding fathers wanted first and foremost to create Pan-African citizens who are conscious of their rights, capable of shaping their development path as well as resolving their internal conflicts in peace and prosperity. Thus, political and economic independence are directly intertwined and therefore the basis of inclusive citizenship. As stated by one of the architects of the OAU:

"We shall measure our progress by the improvement in the health of our people; by the number of children in school, and by the quality of their education; by the availability of water and electricity in our towns and villages, and by the happiness which our people take in being able to manage their own affairs. The welfare of our people is our chief pride, and it is by this that my Government will ask to be judged". (Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, First President of Ghana - a Broadcast to the Nation, 24 December 1957.)

The formation of the OAU on 25 May 1963 and transformation of the regional body to the AU in 2002 corroborate the fact that institutions are created in response to existing challenges while we make room for emergent and unanticipated developments. As the problems of the world ease past existing political orders and institutional arrangements at an unprecedented speed, policymakers without proactive response strategies are overwhelmed on a daily basis by unpredictable events. In this connection, since the early 1960s intergovernmental cooperation has been identified as a conduit for collaborative interaction, communication, and information sharing to enhance the problem-solving capacity of the collective African leadership. Without any doubt, many Africans were hopeful that the OAU could solve some of the problems of the time. The to-do list included cementing African unity and solidarity in a divided world marked and marred by Cold War animosity and belligerence between the superpowers; speeding up decolonisation and liquidation of Apartheid; and shaping a development path that would lead many of the beleaguered post-colonial states to peace and prosperity. While the OAU tilled the soil in a hostile international political environment, the emergence of the AU in the immediate aftermath of the new millennium was greeted as an historical opportunity to sow the seeds to regenerate the continent and its peoples, their aspirations and dreams in a moment of relative international peace and stability.  

Moreover, while one also cannot deny the diligence behind the institutionalisation of the AU, such as its renewed identification with the diaspora, commitment to resolve conflicts, and a new orientation towards its people, the balance sheet is that the benefits of these efforts are yet to trickle down to ordinary Africans. The battles for freedom and basic rights in the 1990s are yet to be fully won as some leaders continue to be glued to political power in contradiction of existing constitutional arrangements thus reversing some of the gains of re-democratisation in the recent past (Plattner & Diamond, 2010) [1]. Decision-making processes in many states have become short-circuited as political elites abuse existing peace dividend in a democratic context to shield themselves and their ill-gotten wealth from the masses. Many politicians collude with foreign extractive companies to plunder the continent’s natural resources and use their share of the booty to consolidate their personal wealth and that of their political parties, and serve their clientele networks while mining communities are dragged into wanton destitution and a looming environmental catastrophe (Olympio, 2013). [2]

Concurrently, many leaders have embraced democracy just to appease their external partners while they close their ears to the African peoples. The state of affairs of politicking at the triadic levels of polity, policy and politics leaves much to be desired as lack of 'political listening' has increasingly become a 'new democratic deficit' (Dobson, 2012) [3]. These developments are contradistinctive to the dreams of the founding fathers of the OAU whose fundamental goal was to achieve a people-centred union (-unifying process). This is an anomaly - in an era where many governments have already expressed their commitments to the Constitutive Act of the African Union (CAAU). It is a slippage in the continent’s re-democratisation process since 'the most effective and insidious way to silence others in politics is a refusal to listen' to them (Dryzek, 2000: 149) [4].

Our strength as a people lies in our complex and diverse social configurations, strong kinship ties, and social networks, which we can deploy not to weaken the state and vice versa but to collaborate across spaces to revamp state-society relations for the common good. It is in our firm beliefs as Pan-African citizens and consciousness about our civic responsibilities, which will catapult us to a true post-national identity in an uncertain and a rapidly changing world.  Of course, this is a long process, and may the wisdom and virtues we have accrued from our Ubuntu village life guide us navigate the tortuous path towards true Pan-African citizenship.

At the dawn of a new era and beyond

When the architects of the OAU conceived of African unity, they were convinced that no single state could withstand the international forces operating in the scorched-earth ideological tug-of-war that was termed the Cold War (1947-1989). Their position was, without doubt, the crystallisation of events and lessons of the past four hundred and sixty-three years prior to the formation of the OAU (1500-1963). It was a past marked by a long history of slavery, imperialist scramble for and balkanisation of the continent (1884/85), and subsequent colonisation of the whole of Africa by 1912 except Ethiopia and Liberia. As the crossroad of foreign powers, the history of the continent thus became an entangled global history. Aware of this, Nkrumah and his peers foresaw a future of a continent that could be held hostage by its rich natural resources via neo-colonialism, inter-imperialist competition and rivalry, and predatory capitalism wheeled by transnational corporate greed and overt exploitation. Hence, building on the achievements of the diasporic unification movements by intellectuals such as Henry Sylvester-Williams, Marcus Garvey, Dr. W.E.B. Dubois, Edward Blyden, George Padmore, e.t.c, Nkrumah invested much time in rallying Africans at home and in the diaspora to unite and reclaim Africa’s place in the new world order that had emerged in the post-World War II period. The wind of decolonisation and the founding of the UN-system after the Second World War opened new political spaces to promote Africa’s interests in international fora, and offered the inspiration for forging inter-state cooperation and development, solidarity, and unity. The formation of the OAU and its transformation to the AU has strengthened the regional body’s position as the unequivocal representative of Africans at home and abroad. In a rapidly changing world, many regions have responded to global challenges by deepening international and regional cooperation and solidarity in order to achieve a common platform to represent their regions in global affairs, as well as to find solutions to their peculiar regional problems, and the AU is no exception.

Nurturing a new hope

Even though the OAU remained a club of Heads of State and Government throughout its existence, in the past fourteen years the new AU has strengthened its regional institutions, affirmed the inviolability of the role of sub-regional groupings in a 'New Regionalism' (Shaw, et. al., 2003) [5] that is "democratic" - accommodates non-state actors, human-centred, and development oriented. The CAAU, The African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance, The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NePAD) and the adjunct African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), The Economic Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC) are feats of institutionalisation in a little over a decade of existence of the AU. Never before in the brief history of regional cooperation and integration in Africa is the commitment to tackle security and governance challenges been taken so serious. This is symbolised in the African Peace and Security Council (PSC) and a number of sub-regional security architectures.

 Notwithstanding, many people are yet to feel the palpable benefits of the regional body. In the past fourteen years, the AU has launched a process of self-renewal the impact of which is largely observable at the highest levels of interaction. The outcomes demonstrate an AU that has increasingly and successfully made its global presence felt in the UN-system, the G7, the G20 and other regional organisations such as the EU in a framework of shared international norms. At the interstate level, the AU has deepened partnerships with established and emerging powers, sub-regional anchors, and countries that have already captured a niche in the "global bazaar" of finance, trade, markets, and new technologies in a multipolar world. However, the AU’s global presence is yet to be matched by assertiveness, as the continent remains marginalised in the decision-making processes of global institutions. While the institutionalisation that has taken place in a short period of transformation is laudable, it is now time for the AU to see to it that these institutions work in the interests of the people irrespective of ethnicity, gender, and religion.

The creation of ECOSOCC and the attendant diaspora outreach initiatives is unprecedented in the annals of the OAU/AU. At the continental level, however, since lack of harmonious state-society relations has been one of the main obstacles to deepening democracy and promoting the rule of law, we would like to see a new kind of partnership between ECOSOCC and the AU that is different from what we experience at the national level.  There should be a partnership framework backed by statutory guidelines in order to account for breaches of codes of conduct and shirking of responsibilities. The ultimate challenge remains how such a civil society organ is financed and sustainably resourced. Perhaps, it is time for AU citizens to design plans to take up this responsibility if we truly want to own ECOSSOC. There should be enough resources and incentives to lure the youth to participate in it through special forums in our villages, communities, constituencies, campuses, and the work place. We should not expect an AU that is dependent on external paymasters to take care of its civil society organs. A self-financing ECOSSOC will grow from strength to strength to become an independent community of social networks from within and without. It is also only in our capacity as independent, collaborative actors and networks that we can successfully bring pressure to bear on our leaders. The penetration of ECOSSOC by some civil society organs and the impact they have made so far bespeaks the untapped potential of the regional organ for the true advancement of the interests of the African peoples. The potential benefits of other people-centred organs of the Union such as the Pan-African Parliament are yet to be fully tapped.

Towards a people-centred AU

Hence, it is now time to make the AU’s new institutions work at the grassroots: A process that entails overhauling some regional and sub-regional institutions while member states rejuvenate policymaking machinery to reflect the real needs of the people. The decision of the Assembly to endorse the integration of the NePAD framework into the AU structures and processes should be welcomed. [6] It remains making the AU a real human institution that is capable of creating the institutional space for its member states and citizens to be responsive and responsible in mutual social learning. Member states should deepen democratisation, strengthen state-society relations for the diverse religions, cultures, and nationalities so that people could organise their life in peace and security in order to realise their creativity and strengthen their adaptive capacity in an increasingly uncertain world. The evidence in many countries such as Ghana is not just pathological but pathetic. Even though Ghana’s re-democratisation project has made positive headlines in regional and international media, a closer look at events suggest that democracy is underperforming in the country – a lopsided scramble for substantive gains by constituencies and chieftains at the cost of normative demands. This does not augur well for democratic development and the Ghanaian people deserves better. A large section of the Ghanaian polity has been engineered to cultivate a false consciousness - that the provision of infrastructure and other community projects by government is an equivalent of the latter’s commitment to the social contract underlying the country’s young democracy. The provision of infrastructure is, however, an obligation of every legitimate government as far as it continues to perform its extractive functions - taxation. The practice has diverted the attention of a large section of the Ghanaian polity away from the real problems facing the country’s democratic development. Many Ghanaians would be satisfied with the provision of infrastructure by the government and at the same time would be ready to pay a bribe for public utility services such as water (Afrobarometer, 2015) [7], pay their way through to secure a national passport, or collude in other acts of malfeasance without remorse. Like elsewhere, the system is marked by inequality, myriad exclusions, violation of constitutional rights and social injustice. Some political elites and civil servants are abusing the prevailing democratic peace dividend to exploit and make fortune overnight via illicit procurement practices, misappropriation of user fees, bloated budgets, among a long list of corrupt practices driven by sheer greed. We see here how "collective prosperity" for the present and future generations is systematically squandered by a few.

The efforts towards achieving a people-centred AU is therefore a dual responsibility of state and society to enthrone the rule of law at the national level. In Ghana, because of the above-mentioned pathologies, society has become exceptionally dependent on government for everything thus overshadowing the power of civil society activism and creativity in finding smart solutions to immediate social problems. Abban, the Akan [8] people of Southern Ghana’s word for 'government', is a distant force majeure and an experiential-totality at the same time. It has its roots in colonial administration and their strict policies such as taxation, which people did not see as benefiting them directly. Today, that element of distantness/foreignness be it for the governed or the governing has come to mean apathy vis à vis whatever belongs to the government. Those who are interested in this argument should compare how we mismanage state owned enterprises until they collapse, and how the privately owned small and medium-scale cocoa farms remains the largest foreign exchange earner for the country. What is our state-led industrialisation drive up to? Corruption in the cocoa industry begins with the distribution of logistics and other incentives to farmers, purchasing of cocoa beans, the allocation of scholarships to the children of cocoa farmers, and export of the so-called 'golden pod' by government agencies - all dominated by the so-called elites. Overcoming the state-society conundrum is thus a matter of changing mindsets (some will call it decolonisation of the mind) in order to unleash social creativity as well as embrace politics and leadership as a vocation for the common good. This will form the basis of a genuine Pan-African social project, and thereby cultivate a true post-national identity and an honest Africanisation of the AU.

This people-to-people project should bring Africans together, especially by making the AU institutions and organs accessible and meaningful for continental and diaspora communities in order to contribute their expertise. At the inter-state level, countries should intensify cooperation with diaspora countries of good will and fraternity, which have comparative advantage in the extractive sectors and other small and medium-scale enterprises to invest and share knowledge in natural resource exploitation and other start-up ventures. This will form the basis of promoting a new sense of wealth and knowledge circulation between Africans and people of African descent. It is time to deepen existing cooperation agreements between African states and the diaspora communities. After all, one of the underpinning concerns of the founding fathers and mothers of the OAU was imperialists’ open gestures for cooperation while they maintained a gaze on the continent’s natural resources, which they could arbitrarily grab at the lowest economic cost.

That apart, in an increasingly networked society and communities of shared ideas and experiences, Africans seems to be permanently torn apart by anachronistic national borders through which billions of dollars worth of economic transactions and other value exchanges dissipate on a daily basis. Instead of wealth creation through cross-border economic transactions we see along many of the entry points at our national borders how immigration officers and security agencies amass illicit wealth via intimidation and extortion, and involvement in other illegal cross-border activities. The decisions by Ghana and Mozambique to introduce visa-free travelling requirements for Africans irrespective of country of origin though a good beginning is, however, a drop of water on a hot-baked stone – a lacklustre snapshot of more than fifty years of intergovernmental cooperation and regional integration.

The problems of the new millennium cannot be solved through charters, conventions and protocols alone. These are not ends in themselves but should be designed to create the social, cultural, political, and economic spaces for people to realise their aspirations, creativity, and adaptive capacity in an uncertain world of globalisation and interdependence. Having successfully 'retooled' and 'reordered' itself on the international stage through bilateral and multilateral arrangements it is now time for the AU to 'reposition' its peoples at the helm of affairs - create the space for citizens to participate in intra-African knowledge production in order to strengthen the continent’s competitive edge in the global bazaar of ideas and creativity (Olympio, 2013).

In search of a new social contract

After more than a decade of institutionalisation, the impulses required for a genuine, people-centred AU must come from the people themselves via multiscale, iterative social learning in common fora such as the ECOSOCC where ideas are freely exchanged and developed, and honest conversations are held in peaceful political environments. In this way, in an increasingly networked society, we will be building on the legacy of Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem’s unique style of engagement by consolidating the sites for negotiating and contesting some of the decisions and policies adopted by our leaders. Free movement of people, goods and services, reduced travel time, harmonisation of commercial laws, and educational reforms are sine qua non for any serious regional integration project. We stand aloof while our educational systems barely reflect our socio-economic realities. As a tool for emancipation and transformation, educational reforms should be re-designed bearing in mind the challenges of global competitiveness as well as the needs of the large informal sectors across the continent where many of the youth are employed, semi-employed, or are self-employed (ILO, 1998-99).[9] Governments should be bold and move away from the many decades of disengagement to engagement with the informal sector, and create requisite incentives to empower the youth to develop their skills, creativity, and enhance their meaning-making portfolios at their specific 'symbolic sites' (Zaoual, 1997). [10]

Current research has revealed that the informal sector in Ghana, for example, is the leading generator of jobs providing about 86.1 percent of all employment including absorption of some certificate holders from the junior and senior secondary schools (Ghana Statistical Service, 2013: 79). [11] If compared with the 14 percent employment generation capacity of the formal sector this makes the informal sector 'the single most important player in the economy' (Haug, 2014: 12). [12] The main obstacle is lack of collaboration between public-private/informal sectors.  Instead of disengagement, governments should adapt by removing bureaucratic-technocratic red tape; retool the education system to reflect the needs of the informal sector in order to unlock their growth, creativity, and regenerative potential. This will in turn lay down the foundation for achieving inclusive and shared growth across multiple sectors. Inclusiveness facilitates empowerment, fosters legitimacy, and therefore self-confident and responsible youth who may look at their supra-national institutions with pride. In the above-cited quotation by Dr. Nkrumah on his broadcast to the Nation on 24 December 1957, the iconic Pan-Africanist was convinced that economic emancipation and prosperity is the direct follow-up to political freedom and thus the material basis for a true Pan-African citizenship.

Conclusion

Never before in the short post-colonial history of Africa has unity among Africans and between African states become so crucial. The contradictions of globalisation and neoliberal capitalism in an increasingly uncertain world, increasing global inequality and insecurity, ravaging environmental onslaughts, overt dispossession and exploitation are beyond the capacities of governments as communities, groups, and social networks self-organises in uncertain times where disruptive events have also become almost a routine. It will take collective efforts wheeled by the undergirding values and virtues that shape the myriad social interactions and other creative flows under the Ubuntu village tree in order to overcome many of these challenges. Social coherence, unity, solidarity, fraternity and goodwill, are all crucial values for our way forward and cannot be left to wallow in political rhetoric. It is with this social strength that we can join the struggle against social injustice, corruption, poverty, inequality, racism, xenophobia, disenfranchisement e.t.c. from within our continent and beyond with the utmost self-confidence.

Our identity as Pan-African citizens is not given; it must be worked for now and again in total reflection of our fundamental and emergent convictions. Today, as dictated by the challenges we face in our continent our firm beliefs must be foregrounded in a true post-national identity bearing in mind our entangled global history and therefore responsibilities. In the past, the OAU took upon itself this struggle in a hostile international environment in solidarity with other oppressed regions and nations of the world, and we cannot afford to be bystanders, even when the issues are different today. The flame ignited on the torch of freedom by our pioneers, and sustained by great Pan-Africanists such as Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem and others must continue to glow. The problems facing our continent and humanity at large demand even more collective efforts as Taju demonstrated to us via his down-to-earth organisational skills and wisdom, and in his capacity as the Secretary-General of the Pan-African Movement, Director of Justice Africa, and Deputy Director of the United Nations Millennium Campaign for Africa.[13]

The responses to these challenges also chime with the "new regionalism" concept, which is marked by increasing complexity and interconnectedness of issues and actors beyond the capacities of states. A new conceptual thinking that helps create the requisite political spaces for interaction among hybrid actors and networks that are actively engaged in existing processes in regional and sub-regional organisations (Shaw, et. al. 2003). The inherent uncertainties of the global-local nexus (glocalisation) apart, there are also opportunities at new sites of interaction where people are empowered in order to realise their sense of purpose and creative (re-)purposing in a dynamic, relational, global context while we remain conscious of our regional, sub-regional, national, and local responsibilities. Our leaders must be true facilitators of these multilevel processes rather than being an obstacle.

* Francisco Kofi Nyaxo Olympio, DPhil, teaches at the Chair of Cultural Anthropology, University of Trier, Germany.

End notes

[1] Plattner, Marc & Diamond Larry. 2010. Democratisation in Africa: Progress and Retreat. Book Whole. Baltimore, Md: John Hopkins University Press.

[2] Olympio, F.K.N. 2013. Neopanafricanism Foreign Powers and Non-State Actors: Retooling, Reordering, Repositioning. Munster: Lit, Germany.

[3] Dobson, Andrew. 2012. Listening: The New Democratic Deficit: Political Studies, 60: 843-859.

[4] Dryzek, J. 2000. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[5] Timothy M. Shaw/Fredrik Söderbaum/Julius E. Nyang’oro/J. Andrew Grant. 2003. The Future of New Regionalism in Africa: governance, human security/development and beyond. In:  F. Söderbaum / T. Shaw (Eds.). Theories of New Regionalism. Palgrave: Basingstoke: 180-192.

[6] AU Decision: Assembly /AU/Dec.283 (XIV)

[7] Corah Walker. Lack of safe water, sanitation spurs growing dissatisfaction with government performance. Afrobarometer Round 6, Dispatch no. 76 / 22 March 2016.

[8] The largest ethnic group in Ghana.

[9] International Labour Organisation. World Employment Report 1998-99. Employability in the global economy: How training matters. Geneva.

[10] Zaoual, Hassan. 1997. The economy and symbolic sites of Africa. In: Majid Rahnema with Victoria Bawtree (eds.) The Post-Development Reader. Zed Books: London and New Jersey: 30-39.

[11] Ghana Statistical Service. Provisional Gross Domestic Product. 2013: 79

[12] Haug, J. 2014. Critical Overviews of the Urban Informal Economy in Ghana. The Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. Ghana Office.

[13] The author was further encouraged during his three-week close interaction with Taju when he gave a series of lectures at the Centre for European Studies at the University of Trier, Germany from 05.06. – 26.06.1996 under the theme: Europe in a Changing World: An African Perspective. When we met again in 2007 during a conference in Bonn, Taju had not changed - beaming with a smile, engaging, and had always something new to tell. The only thing I could tell the African participants who did not know him was that the second day of the conference was going to be very interesting.

* THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM

* BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Please do not take Pambazuka for granted! Become a Friend of Pambazuka and make a donation NOW to help keep Pambazuka FREE and INDEPENDENT!

* Please send comments to [email=[email protected]]editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org[/email] or comment online at Pambazuka News.