*African Union failed the crucial test*
* *
Posted: Wednesday, July 11, 2007

*By Caesar Zvayi*
*
The Herald <http://www.herald.co.zw/>

July 12, 2007*

No one denies that it is only through a Union government and unity of
purpose that Africa can claim its rightful stake in the world.

Barring unity, Africa would continue suffering the depredations of Western
nations bent on exploiting its vast resources for self-enrichment.

But so vast are the challenges Africa has to overcome that a really radical
approach is needed if the dream of a United States of Africa is to be
realised, which means there is no room for placating the West in this
revolutionary undertaking.

Radicalism, however, does not mean haste, which is where Libyan President,
Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, appears to have got it wrong. Col Gaddafi wanted a
Union government elected at the African Union Summit in Accra, and did not
make it a secret whom he believed should lead it.

A few examples of the hurdles to be overcome will suffice here; all of which
are linked to the colonial legacy of divide-and-rule politics.

The biggest obstacle of all is, of course, crunching poverty. That and
differential development are major stumbling blocks to the proposed Union
government, which would demand, among other things, a vibrant unified
economy with economic parity. This does not exist on a continent that
largely plays host to economies dominated by multinational corporations and
foreign investors.

Even where the impressive economic indicators exist, they do so on paper
only as the profits are repatriated to the metropole. In fact, most African
countries, with the notable exception of South Africa, rely on the World
Bank and International Monetary Fund for alms, two organisations that are
used by the United States and the European Union to entrench their interests
in the developing world.

This dependence is also manifest in the AU institutions, some of which are
African in name only; this is why it is vital that all institutions are
truly African before they can be trusted with propping up the envisaged
Union government.

It is also unforgivable that in this day and age, if one wants to go to the
so-called Francophone West Africa, from, let's say, largely Anglophone
Southern Africa, one is forced to pass through that region's former
metropolis, France, unless the flight is charter. Likewise, if one wants to
travel from Francophone West Africa to Anglophone East Africa, one has to go
via London.

In short, there are no direct flights between most African countries, yet
there are direct flights from nearly every African country to the capitals
of the countries' former colonisers.

What this means is that the transport links existing in much of Africa today
were not developed to promote intra-continental communication, but to make
it easy for settlers to siphon the continent's resources to their home
countries since most of them lead either to the coast or directly to Europe.

In fact, to this day, some poor countries route their international calls
through former colonial capitals.

Similarly, if one wants to know about, say Malawi, one has to rely on
Associated Press, CNN, BBC, AFP, and many other Western news agencies that
never really mediate accurately, but always package their news in the
service of Western interests.

While Africa saw the dangers of this and sought to address the problem
through the Pan-African News Agency, perennial dependency saw Westerners
compromise the agency with their ruinous conditional funds. To this day,
PANA has failed to live up to expectations, which is why Africa continues
relying on Western news agencies. Any wonder then, that at the just-ended AU
Summit in Accra, Ghana, Western news agencies were given royal treatment
where African media was treated like trash?

The organisers saw it fit to give Western media organisations unfettered
access into the Accra International Conference Centre, while African
journalists were barred, save for those from the host country, of course.

In fact, the officials in charge of media liaison read out the names of the
agencies from a list they had, and did not even have time to hear the
protests of the African media personnel present. African journalists had no
choice but to picket the Conference Centre to present a strongly worded
petition to the General Assembly.

What this simply showed was that the organisers were keen to ensure that the
West was kept well-informed of deliberations, while Africans, whose lives
were bound to be changed by the decisions reached in Accra, were kept
largely in the dark.

Africa must really be wary of such signs that simply confirm that Western
approval is still highly valued by some, meaning Western tentacles are still
very much alive on the continent.

This brings in the question, for whose interests are some leaders pushing
for hasty continental unity, even when it is apparent that as currently
constituted, some of the AU institutions supposed to prop up the Union
government are African in name only, with many others existing only on
paper?

This writer will not mention names here, but neither will he draw punches.
Some African leaders known to be darlings of the West even threatened to go
it alone in a Union government if those counselling a bottom-up approach
remained adamant.

Again, no names here, others questioned the similarity between the Africa
itinerary of former British prime minister Tony Blair's last tour, and the
countries that a certain African leader visited as part of his grand
campaign for a Union government.

Again there is no finger pointing at anyone, but eyebrows were also raised
as to why a certain African government appears to have bought all copies of
New African's May edition that had a splash on Zimbabwe.

The jury is still out on whether the government in question bought the
copies because of an unflattering article therein that questioned its cosy
relationship with the West, or whether it had to do with an attempt to
obliterate the truth about the situation in Zimbabwe?

Whichever reason one wants to believe, in Accra, the AU failed one major
test that would have confirmed it was man enough to face the Western bullies
on equal footing.

Granted, the Assembly made it unequivocally clear that Zimbabwe has every
right to attend the EU-Africa Summit set for Lisbon, Portugal, in December;
but that does not remove the fact that the AU failed where it matters most,
that is in condemning the illegal Western siege on Zimbabwe.

What is more, it was actually Portugal, an EU state, that came closest to
speaking like an African when it said the dispute between Harare and London
was merely bilateral and should not be allowed to scupper engagement between
Africa and Europe.

The irony was too deafening to ignore, here were 51 African heads of state
and government, convening in Accra to deliberate on forming a Union
government, yet those mandated to speak on the continent's behalf had
nothing to say over the attempted siege on one of their own.

The satire did not end there. The AU Summit was in Ghana as part of that
country's golden jubilee celebrations, and also in recognition of the legacy
of Ghana's founding president, Dr Osagyefo Kwame Nkrumah, a man cut from the
same cloth as Cde Robert Mugabe.

In fact, as far as Africa is concerned, the script the West is trying to
direct in Zimbabwe was first tried in Ghana against Dr Nkrumah. The
mediation the Western media is exercising over Zimbabwe was honed on Dr
Nkrumah's Ghana.

The similarities between what is obtaining in Zimbabwe and what obtained in
Ghana from 1960 are so striking.

Ordinary Ghanaians, civil society organisations and university students saw
it fit to speak boldly in solidarity with Zimbabwe to the extent of
organising a resounding welcome for President Mugabe at Kotoka International
Airport on June 30, and a day later, July 1, a solidarity rally at Kwame
Nkrumah Memorial Park where the great African statesman lies today.

In fact, due to his tight schedule, President Mugabe ended up failing to
feature at another rally, dubbed "International Solidarity Forum on
Zimbabwe", that had been organised by the Pan-African United Front at Osu
Presby Hall on July 2. Part of the flyers for that rally boldly declared:

"Africa is under severe attack from the forces of our anti-colonial
struggles. Zimbabwe is a symbol of our struggle for sovereignty and
ownership of our land and all the resources therein. Zimbabwe's fight is
Africa's fight! Touch one! Touch All! African Liberation, no compromise!"

The editor of New African magazine, Baffour Ankomah, in his piece, said,
among other things:

"... Now please come with me to my own country Ghana. At least we have no
hunches there, sorry, the people have no hunches but some officials in
government have. And we shouldn't allow them any longer. I know if Nkrumah
can read this where he lies at the Old Polo Ground in Accra, he will turn
and turn and turn in his grave.

"To the shame of all discerning Ghanaians, our country, the land of Nkrumah,
the torchbearer of African liberation, our beloved Ghana, is fast becoming
the 'weakest link' in the African liberation/solidarity chain. And it is
time members of the current government in Accra sat up in front of huge
mirrors and had a good look at themselves. We have had seven years of
ambling along, seemingly oblivious of our high place in Africa ..."

In fact, one Ghanaian student could not have put it any better: "We should
not delay the Union government in Africa much longer, for we already have
the President, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe."

This writer concurs. If Africa had the courage of its convictions, that is
the only man with the stature to lead a Union government.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤