African leaders now ready to

By FRED OLUOCH,  The EastAfrican

The African Union is slowly moving out of the shadows of its predecessor – the Organisation of African Unity – because African leaders are determined to show that they are now ready to pass harsh judgments on each other.

Nevertheless, the decision taken by African heads of state at the 6th AU Summit in Khartoum to block Sudan from assuming the chairmanship over its poor human-rights records, has raised eyebrows, with many wondering whether the decision was entirely theirs. But the immediate former chairman, Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria, maintained that “Africa is on the right path and we mean business”.

On the one hand, the African leaders’ decision to back Republic of Congo President Denis Sassou-Nguessou and reject Sudanese President Omar el-Bashir on account of his government’s alleged atrocities in Darfur, has been hailed as a clear departure from the AOU days when leaders were reluctant to hold their colleagues accountable. 

But on the other hand, the leaders were unable to extricate themselves from the perception that they were merely bowing to pressure from the international community, especially the US, which was dead set against President el-Bashir’s chairmanship.

Indeed, US Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, the top advisor to the Secretary of State on African issues, Jendayi Frazer, virtually camped in Khartoum, lobbying African leaders to ensure that Sudan did not get the chairmanship while the issue of Darfur, where 300,000 people have died over the past three years, is still pending. 

The disappointed Sudanese authorities cited US President George W. Bush’s statement of January 23 in which he noted that a Sudanese-led AU should be of equal concern to African nations.

Adil Al Baz, editor of Al-Sahafa, the leading Arabic daily in Khartoum, was, however, comfortable with the decision on the grounds that the Sudanese chairmanship was going to complicate issues at the Abuja talks. “It would not have been logical for Sudan to take over while the government is still locked in negotiations with the Darfur rebels under the auspices of the AU,” he said. 

President el-Bashir’s government had lobbied for the chairmanship banking on the defunct OAU tradition that automatically bestowed the post on the host, plus the fact that East and Central Africa had not had their chance since the AU was founded in 2002.

Sudan argued that besides working round the clock to solve the problem of Darfur, it deserved to be rewarded for signing the January 9, 2005, Comprehensive Peace Agreement with the Southern Sudanese rebels, ending 21 years of conflict.

While East African states were behind Sudan, West Africa disagreed, forcing the elections that were to be conducted on Monday to be referred to a seven-nation committee set up to resolve the dispute.

South Africa, which has contributed generously towards the AU troops in Darfur, was particularly concerned that the Sudan chairmanship was likely to split the organisation at a time when it had made strides in resolving disputes on the continent. 

President Nguesso becomes the fourth AU chairman, the first three having been South African President Thabo Mbeki, Joachim Chissano of Mozambique and Obasanjo.

Like in most previous summits, the main themes of the conference, education and culture, were pushed to the background as the issues of the chairmanship and conflicts on the continent took centrestage. 

Though President Obasanjo was bullish that the culture of good governance was gradually gathering fervour in Africa, the summit merely glossed over peace and security issues facing the continent. 

The looming war between Sudan and Chad over accusations of aggression in each other’s territory, the settlement of the newly installed Somali government, the conflict in Cote d’Ivoire and the stalled Ethiopia/Eritrea border demarcation process were some of the issues that did not get quality treatment. 

Indeed, the decision to alter the seating arrangements at the summit to put a “buffer” between Ethiopia and Eritrea, was a clear indication that the AU was not yet ready to deal with an issue that could result in fresh hostilities between the Horn of Africa neighbours. 

The two countries were kept apart by Gabon, Gambia, Guinea and Ghana.

Still, President Obasanjo was generally positive and enthusiastic about the mood in Africa, saying the challenge was to sustain the momentum and consolidate the gains already made.

Already, the African Union has sanctioned two member states, Togo and Mauritania, for failing to hold democratic elections, and has conducted peacekeeping operations in Burundi and Darfur, where the AU is mediating peace talks and has deployed a 7,000-strong peacekeeping force.

Like President Obasanjo, Kenya’s Nobel Peace Laureate, Prof Wangari Maathai, was optimistic that the much talked about “new order” has finally dawned on the AU. 

She said there was evidence of new thinking and the African leadership was conscious of the way it was being perceived, despite some of them cutting their teeth in the old order.

Prof Maathai said there was a deliberate effort to show concern for human rights and women. “It is encouraging that today, they will not accept a leader who has come to power through a coup or other undemocratic means,” she said. 

Meanwhile, Sudan’s decision to withdraw its bid for the leadership of the AU has been welcomed by human-rights groups and local activists, who say it has enhanced Africa’s reputation.

“I think it’s a wise decision by the Sudanese leadership,” Nhial Bol, editor of Sudan’s independent daily newspaper, the Citizen, said. “It was going to undermine the peace talks between the Darfur rebels and the Sudanese government in Abuja.”