Sudan eats humble pie as Ghana takes the prize

Ghana has been elected, by consensus, as the new chair of the African Union. Ghana is set to host the next AU Heads of State summit scheduled for July. Ghana’s election averted a potentially embarrassing moment for the AU after Sudan failed to relinquish its bid in spite of widespread disquiet and opposition over its complicity in the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Darfur where thousands have been killed and an estimated half a million forced to flee to refugee camps.

Even as Sudan failed to relinquish its bid, the writing was clearly on the wall that a Sudanese presidency would not be countenanced. The African Union Commission chair Alpha Omar Konare set the stage in his key note address to the summit in which he criticised the bombardment of villages in Darfur by the Sudanese government; reiterating a finding made by the AU last month of Bashir’s government complicity in carrying out armed attacks in the region.

The new UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon, in his inaugural address to the African Union, termed Darfur “the largest humanitarian crisis in the world” and pledged to make it a key priority of his leadership.
“ The toll of the crisis remains unacceptable”, he warned. The UN Chief said the Darfur crisis was “holding back the potential of Sudan to [develop] as a peaceful, prosperous and democratic nation”.
Short of terming the Darfur crisis, genocide, ki-Moon called for an end “to the violence and scorched-earth policies adopted by various parties, including militias”—an indication that he considers communities in Darfur, victims of ethnic cleansing.

While Ghana’s election gives the AU a sigh of relief in its efforts to apply pressure on Sudan to resolve the Darfur crisis—a possibility which would have been complicated by a Sudanese presidency—it raises legitimate questions on whether the system of a rotational presidency should be reviewed in favour of a strict and cognisable eligibility criteria. The potential showdown with Sudan raises the risk that a country acting against the values of the AU charter could assume the AU’s leadership which could create a potential paralysis for the organisation.
--

<< Back to main