July 1-3 African Heads of state and governments will be assembling in Accra for the 9th ordinary session of the African Union. There is only one item on the agenda: the formation of a government for union of Africa, writes Tajudeen Abdul Raheem.

The official title says this is a Grand Debate on a United States of Africa. This is unfortunate because even those of us enthusiastic about the unity of Africa would wish that the leaders are a bit more creative than just wanting to create another USA. Given what one USA is doing to the world and its previous record it would be a disservice to humanity to want to inflict another USA on the world.

Our values is certainly made of better ethics and love for humanity and affirmation of life with dignity than to be copying the United state of America whose unity is based on genocide against indigenous Indians, slavery of people of African origin and continuing plunder of the rest of the world.

The agenda has pitched leaders against leaders and different sectors of our informed and ill- informed publics against one another. But basically there are two broad positions neither of which disagrees about the need for Africa to unite. So if there is no disagreement about the goal what is the debate about?

Calling it a Grand Debate about USA is a misnomer and misleading characterization that has diverted people's attention from the proposal on the table and invited acrimonious 'debates' about form instead of content.

So delegitimised are many governments on this continent, in spite of the fact that an overwhelming majority are now 'elected' that when Africans hear United States of Africa or an African Union government they run. They instinctively think that what is being said is a transferring of the tyrannical, insensitive anti-people state and government that many of us have experienced and in some cases continue to suffer, even in the guise of democracy, to a continental level. What a disaster that would be! However it is a baseless fear.

Even if the leaders all voted for a Union government in Accra it does not mean that it will be formed immediately and all these states as we know them will disappear and many of the presidents may return as ministers or district commissioners or be consigned to the dust bin where they belong. Were this possible I am not sure many Africans will mourn their passing since quite a number of them already willingly act as agents of imperialism and shop keepers for foreign interests against their peoples anyway!

From the inception of Pan Africanism by Africans in the Diaspora in the latter years of the 19 th century but gaining more prominence and political legitimacy in the first half of the 20th century through the first five Pan African Congresses (1900 -1945, all held outside Africa) and subsequently brought home to Africa (through the All African people's conferences of 1958, and much later the 6th and 7th Pan African Congresses held in Africa in Dar 1974 and 1994, Kampala) the destination has always been total unification of Africa under a common government, common citizenship, a common market, from Cape town to Cairo and full participation for Africans in the Diaspora.

This ambition inspired the anti colonial movement in Africa and got expression in the formation of the OAU. Even though the OAU compromise was to respect the colonially imposed borders they were not meant to be permanent detention centers or garrisons on our way to total liberation and unification. But this is what they became under the multiple pressures of neocolonialism, cold war authoritarianism, militarism and opportunistic elites. The formation of the AU was meant to correct some of the weaknesses of the OAU especially in the areas of state sovereignty that operated as 'sovereignty of dictators that induced official indifference to the suffering of other Africans including Genocide; collective security instead of regime security; people-driven or at least people friendly union instead of a leader-centric OAU; and finally coordination of African responses to global developments and building of African consensus instead of allowing ourselves to be picked up individually to the slaughter house.

But after five years of the AU we have made progress in some areas but ARE STILL STRUGGLING IN MANY AREAS AND THE FULL POSITIVE AND DEMOCRATIC IMPACT OF THE UNUION are still not being felt.

The Grand Debate is therefore about what more needs to be done to accelerate the process of unity which we have all agreed on. It is not a debate about the desirability of a Union government because by signing up to the ideals of Pan Africanism, the OAU and AU all our states already agreed to that goal.

The reason why the Au may not have performed to the highest expectation has to do with the lack of political authority, enforcement powers and adequate resources to discharge its responsibility. IF unity is our goal therefore the leaders have to decide on a few key areas. One, the Study group on Union government for Africa identified 16 strategic areas (including aspects of foreign policy, defense, security, finance, global negotiations, etc) in which the leaders have to agree to cede some powers to the Au to effectively act in our collective interest. There is no point in us having a Union while many states still deal with the world individually. It undermines the AU and undermines the states themselves. Two, for too long the Au has talked about rationalizing regional economic communities but they keep proliferating even if most of them are struggling. Yet they are supposed to be '; the building blocks' of the AU. How many blocs do we need for the foundation? In Banjul they put a moratorium on forming new ones but the existing or limping ones are still too many. The suggestion is to cut them down to the five regions recognized by the AU charter (the Diaspora is Sixth region but has not regional Economic Community). Africa of five main blocks will be better coordinated. Three, many decisions are made at the Au level but there is no proper mechanism for implementation at the local and national level and do not even have enforcement capacities. If there is agreement on the 16 priority areas then the confusion at the national level; can be eliminated and AU decisions become mandatory. Four, the big issue of funding, the overall budget of the AU is not more than 1 billion Dollars annual. It is an insult that 53 states in a continent so rich in human and material resources cannot raise this money and more. Just imagine if JUST 5% of all our national budgets automatically go into the Union budget. That can only come with political authority being given to the union through an accountable government.

Which leads me to my final point about the cynicism of many Africans about the political will and commitment of Africa's current leaders. A genuine worry but these leaders are produced from amongst us therefore we can and should change them where necessary . In addition we need to make sure that the potentially democratic and democratic institutions of the AU like the ECOSOCC and the Pan African Parliament have real power to over see the work of the executive. It means actively taking part in the ECOSOCC at your national level AND ALSO CAMPAIGNING FOR the Pap to be elected on a universal African suffrage and the parliament to have full legislative powers. That way we will become active African citizens instead of the vocal or passive cynics that many are turning to.

* Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is the deputy director of 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 www.pambazuka.org