Great expectations: AU remains hopeful and hesitant

Africa’s 53 Heads of State ended their first summit of the year in Addis Ababa with a strong pledge to foster democratic culture and respect for fundamental rights. But these commitments were made beneath an avalanche of concern over an apparent reluctance to reign in errant members complicit in the violation of fundamental rights and freedoms.

In recent times, this concern has revolved mostly around the deteriorating situation in Darfur. The tenuous discussion on Sudan’s suitability to chair the AU and adoption of the charter on democracy at this last summit indicated a renewed but cautious sense of affirmation by the African Union to break new ground. But it also showed the lack of clear determination to reign in members not playing by the rules and violating organizational principles clearly evident in the failure to exert clear demands on Sudan.

The decision to devote the forthcoming summit in Accra to a consideration of the proposal on Pan Africa federalism has reinforced a sense of optimism and steer that the AU is intent on breaking new ground towards consolidating continental unity. Even then, there are serious questions on the viability of some of this and other proposals. The democracy charter has for instance faced reservations from several countries while southern Africa countries have expressed strong sentiment on the union government proposal. In the circumstances, a lot of backroom negotiations will need to take place before harnessing consensus on contested issues.

The recent AU summit took place at a significant moment when the African Union Commission prepares for the homestretch on its current mandate, which expires at the end of the year. A new commission will be constituted in 2008 following the election of new commissioners with a clear mandate to steer the AU into its next phase. The summit was also the penultimate session for the current chairperson, Professor Alpha Konare, whose term expires this September. Professor Konare, a former president of Mali, is not expected to bid for a second term setting the ground for a new set of eyes to steer the organisation’s overall strategic vision and mandate.

AU needs to reflect on its performance as it seizes itself for new demands and expectations and the hankering over Sudan best exemplified the dilemma facing the AU at this critical moment rather than the new thresholds of ambition being set for the organisation. The concern to stave off a diplomatic standoff with Sudan obscured the imperative to reign in Sudan and wrench out clear commitments from Khartoum on Darfur following months of negotiations with the AU.

Hence, even though the new UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon described Darfur as “the world’s worst humanitarian disaster” and promised to make it a key priority of his leadership, the AU failed to deal tough with Sudan. Once Sudan’s bid to lead the AU was dispensed with, the Darfur crisis slowly tapered off. Here, the AU was squarely in focus over the limited capacity of its peace monitors to stem the killing and suffering of thousands of civilians in the hands of the government-backed janjaweed militia. Even though the AU has expended much energy in seeking resolution to the Darfur conflict, Africa’s leaders gathered in Addis Ababa could not extricate themselves from their collective failure to exert sufficient political pressure on Sudan. What was clearly worrying though is that as the curtains came down on the summit, no substantive ground was broken to ensure that the ill-equipped AU peace monitors were equal to the task. Neither was the contested question over the deployment of a hybrid protection force involving the African Union and UN within an agreed timetable thrashed out.

The summit also failed to win an unequivocal commitment from Khartoum to halt its military scale-up in Sudan and disarm the janjaweed even as questions abound over whether the membership of a complicit Sudan is not anathema to the AU’s determination to raise the threshold against which its members must be judged by.

Nobel peace laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu was spot on warning that “the African Union [had] before it a stark choice on Darfur. Be bold and stand by the people of Darfur or be weak and stand by the politicians who are making that corner of Africa a graveyard”.

The decision on Sudan’s bid was clearly a bold statement. A Sudanese presidency would have compromised the neutrality and independence of the AU’s operations in Darfur. Alioune Tine, a member of the Darfur civil society Consortium spoke for many when he warned that “African opinion will never accept a choice of Mr Bashir as president of the African Union. Such a move will discredit the institution and diminish the image of the African Union as an independent arbitrator in the eyes of the world”.

In the aftermath of the summit, and in the wake of a multiplicity of new and resurgent conflicts, it is feared that the AU could be fatigued and steer its energy and focus away from its priorities and visioning. In many ways, the new theatres of conflict – Chad, Comoros, Ivory Coast, Guinea and Somalia – have excised the AU’s undertaking to respect territorial sovereignty without being indifferent to systematic violation of fundamental freedoms and rights. This is in sharp contrast to its predecessor, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) which turned a blind eye to conflicts under the guise of respecting the sanctity of territorial sovereignty and non-interference in the affairs of sovereign states. But a lot more is expected of the AU. The period leading up to the summit showed that the AU is increasingly being called upon to provide leadership in reaching a pedestal where governments respect the organisation’s principles in the best interest of their people.

But now the AU must audit itself to determine whether its structures fit the task before it. The organisation clearly faces a raft of internal institutional challenges which impact on its efficiency and effectiveness. The caveat is that the AU may not live up to the billing due to existing institutional constraints, which potentially impede on its capacity to deliver at this critical moment.

A substantive assessment of the AU contained in a newly published report titled Towards a People-Driven African Union: Current Obstacles and New Opportunities cites some of the internal challenges facing the AU as ” the sheer number of AU ministerial meetings, ordinary and extraordinary summits each year, commission budget shortfalls and multiplicity of national legal frameworks, incoherent institutional arrangements and unclear policies and procedures”.

Significantly, the report which was commissioned by the Africa Governance Monitoring and Advocacy Project (AfriMAP), the African Forum & Network on Debt and Development (AFRODAD) and Oxfam GB warns that the AU is only as strong as its weakest link. It warns that “most African Governments have not reformed their national institutions and processes to respond to the new continental architecture. Consequently, only a few states prepare adequately by engaging across ministries, national assemblies or civil society organisations for the AU summits”.

The creation of the African Union in 2001 created a renewed sense of optimism, which must continue to inform its future by addressing internal and external challenges, which could potentially undermine its vision.

* The writer is the acting editor/policy analyst of the AU Monitor, an e-communication facility managed by Fahamu

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