Kenya is set to receive oil from Libya at preferential rates according to a bilateral agreement signed earlier this month between the leaders of the two countries. Insiders in the oil industry say this makes it likely that Kenya will award the contract for the establishment of a petroleum facility of 45 million US dollars and a truck and rail loading project worth 22 million US dollars to a Libyan-connected investor.

Malawi's death row prisoners are breathing more easily after three High Court judges unanimously agreed in a test case that the courts are not bound to sentence anyone to death for murder, as this would be a violation of that person's human rights. "The mandatory death penalty violates an individual's right that protects one from inhuman treatment or punishment and denies them the right to fair trial and have the sentence reviewed by a higher tribunal," said Justice Elton Singini, reading out the joint judgment on Apr. 27.

Africa is vulnerable to numerous risks and shocks, including drought, natural disasters, conflict and political instability, and high levels of child and adult mortality and morbidity. This paper by ESRC Global Poverty Research Group reviews micro-level evidence on risk and its implications for growth and poverty in Africa.

How has South Africa’s Civil Society fared? This paper by the Cetnre for Policy Studies examines how specific civil society organisations (CSOs) have influenced state, and what lies behind the success or failure of these actions. It focuses on CSOs engaged in influencing post-apartheid policies.

Despite Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe’s incessant homophobic public comments, Gays and lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ) is spreading its wings. The organisation which pushes for social tolerance of sexual minorities and the repeal of homophobic legislation in Zimbabwe, has recently established a new centre for its Bulawayo members.

Attacks on civilians and clashes between Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwandan rebels have hindered efforts to reach affected populations in the east, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said. The attacks were mainly perpetrated by the Forces démocratiques pour la libération du Rwanda (FDLR) rebels, who fled their country after the 1994 genocide and have continued to resist the Forces armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (FARDC).

A UN report says Sudan is unlikely to achieve lasting peace unless it addresses the problem of growing damage to its environment. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) report said on Friday that Sudan's main cause of unrest has been the scarcity of resources and other phenomena such as desertification and deforestation that are likely to worsen.

In less than a month since the massively fraudulent election that ushered in the present administration, the Nigerian working class is in a determined mood and on the offensive against it. This comes as somewhat of a surprise to some on the left and seems almost miraculous to those sectarians who had earlier condemned the Nigerian workers as reactionary, simply because the Labour leadership refused to mobilize the rank and file behind one wing of the ruling class in opposition to the fraudulent election.

Through personal stories, songs and their memories, these Ethiopian narrators talk about the sharp contrast between the past and present. Their key concerns are conflict, deforestation, the decline of pastoralism, and the impact of agriculture.

Malian security demonstrated their true unfriendly media colours when they pounced on a group of journalists protesting against the imprisonment of their colleagues in the capital Bamako. The riot police mercilessly assaulted the President of the Malian and West African Journalists’ Associations, Ibrahim Famakan Coulibaly.

With the return of peace and stability in Burundi, the Tanzanian President, Jakaya Kikwete, sees no reason why thousands of Burundian refugees should remain in his country. President Kikwete, who flew to the Burundian capital Bujumbura, disclosed that all Burundian refugee camps will be closed by December 2007.

Sierra Leonean women can now rest, and enjoy the fruits of their long walk to freedom. The country's parliament took the bull by the horns to enact a law that outlaws domestic violence in all its forms as well as guarantees the rights of women to inheritance and registration of customary marriages.

Concerns that Ivorian leaders might block the UN from helping to organise and supervise long-delayed elections were allayed on 19 June following a meeting between with a UN Security Council delegation and the country’s president and former rebel leader-turned-prime minister

There have been promising developments in the case against judge Abdel Fatah Murad, who has filed multiple fabricated charges against the Hisham Mubarak Law Center and HRinfo, as well as bloggers and human rights and news websites, report the law center and HRinfo.

The Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in Abuja, Nigeria has issued a hearing notice for a suit filed against the Republic of Gambia by the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) on behalf of a "disappeared" Gambian journalist, Chief Ebrima Manneh, reporter of pro-government Banjul-based "Daily Observer" newspaper.

They range from surgeons and scholars to illiterate refugees from some of the world's worst hellholes -- a dizzyingly varied stream of African immigrants to the United States. More than one million strong and growing, they are enlivening American cities and altering how the nation confronts its racial identity.

On July 2007 the ordinary Assembly of Heads of State of the African Union will meet to discuss the nature of the continent’s integration agenda and the progress that has been made. This is the next, and probably the most important step to date in what started off as a desire to create continent-wide ministerial portfolio and has now grown into a full-scale drive to establish a Union government for the continent. This intergovernmental forum will assess the state of the Union and attempt to map a way forward in terms of nature, scope and time frame of a continental arrangement. In the lead-up to the grand debate there has been substantial consultation among interested parties at country and regional level across aimed at soliciting and articulating the views of the African people on the proposal for a continental government.

It is within this context that civil society groups met in Midrand, South Africa to first and foremost reaffirm the need for broad based consultation and input of the peoples of Africa. The meeting underlined the importance of the Pan African Parliament in seeking out and representing the views of their constituencies in the matter. The meeting stressed the primacy of democracy and rights-based governance. The groups also emphasized the need for governments to facilitate the input of their citizens on the issue. Of equal importance was the free movement of citizens of the continent through the abolition of visa requirements as well as exploring mechanisms for economic sustainability.

Nigerian civil society groups echoed these views when they met in May. The meeting concluded that whereas the idea of a Union government was desirable, there were challenges that needed to be overcome before the vision became a reality, such as common political and cultural values, identity, citizenship integration and state power. Again the issue of democracy and human rights was highlighted as an area of grave concern, and although fora such as theirs were taking place there was a need for greater attention to maintaining the vital link between the leaders and the people they represent in as far as the latter’s views were expressed and taken into consideration. Needless to say, this is a major challenge given that there still is a dearth of true democratic representation on the continent.

In June civil society groups in Kenya met to discus the proposed union government. In addition to echoing calls for greater attention to democracy, governance, human rights and free movement and economic participation for citizens across the continent, the meeting called for public access to information about the process, principles of good governance within the AU and African peoples sovereignty over the continent’s natural resources.

Debate in Ghana focussed on the institutional implications of the Union Government, as well as the need for the people of Africa to participate fully in the process. Concern was raised about foreign interest in the process, as well as the risks inherent in modelling western constructs of integration. As one speaker put it, “if indeed Africa has to come together in a continental and economic bloc, we all have to go back to school and unlearn what we have learnt in order to connect top the peculiar circumstances of Africa”.

Two schools of thought seem to emerge in the discussion. One favours a rapid formation of a Union government as a clear sign of intent and determination that will drive the process on. In other words, the political will involved in forming the union will provide the necessary impetus to ensure success of the venture, and advance the goal of a United States of Africa from a nebulous dream cherished since the heady beginnings of Pan-Africanism to a concrete reality. The other seems to favour a more gradual process based on strengthening the existing framework of the AU to ensure before creating a full-fledged United States of Africa. This school of thought is cognisant of the shortcomings of the AU as it exists today, and the challenges faced even at the level of regional economic communities in trying to forge greater integration.

African scholar Demba Moussa Dembele point to the lack of political will as evidenced by numerous agreements on regional integration dating back as far as thirty years that still remain unimplemented. He attributes this to a lack of willingness of leaders to put the interests of the continent above the personal and national. It is however impossible to have this discussion without considering the legitimacy of Africa’s leaders and whether their authority stems from the their own people. Dembele mentions external and internal factors that challenge the process, and states that the external factors both take advantage of, and aggravate the internal ones. He emphasizes the need for a leadership that both listens to its citizens and stands up to foreign domination.

At the Kenyan consultation forum Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem stated “it is better to have imperfection with ownership than perfection without any ownership”, underlining the primacy of the African peoples in the process. Whereas not all governments provide a voice for their people, other equally important channels continue to open up, through various national and trans-national civil society groupings that are increasingly articulating the views of the people. These channels must be encouraged and given voice. Whereas there have been various consultations, clearly this is by no means sufficient or widespread enough as far as the continent is concerned. Suffice it to say that there is a commonality of views raised at these meetings in terms of the issues affecting the rest of the continent

The debate has begun already and the voices of the people clearly say that they must lead and the governments follow on the road to a United States of Africa.

Useful links and Further Reading:

1. Grand Debate on the Union Government

2. Pambazuka News AU Monitor
http://www.pambazuka.org/aumonitor/
3. Communiqué from Kenyan Public Forum to popularise and inform the Government’s position on the AU proposal on Continental Government.

5. Involve the masses in the fight for African unity. Dr. Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem
http://www.africa-union.org/comments.htm
6. The Untied States of Africa: The Challenges. Demba Moussa Dembele

8. Africa needs to look at the past to forge ahead. Dr. Mammo Muchie
http://www.africa-union.org/comments.htm
10. Afrimap – Africa Governance Monitoring and Advocacy Project http://www.afrimap.org/research.php

* Joshua Ogada works with Fahamu and is Links and Resources editor of Pambazuka News
** Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

President Umaru Yar'Adua and other African leaders have been called upon to devise strategic ways of establishing effective, meaningful and people-oriented African Union (AU) Government. Foreign policy experts made this call yesterday at a roundtabble discussion on AU Government organised by the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), to review the socio-economic and political prospects of African integration in the face of deepening crisis of under-development.

Uganda's Communications Commission (UCC) is to spend a total of one million dollars (USD$1 million) to connect eighty secondary schools to the Internet. "We have worked with the ministry of education and sports and have selected eighty schools that would be connected in the next financial year," said the commission?s executive director Eng. Patrick Masambu. "This is one of the key targets to be achieved by the year 2010 according to the proposed telecommunications policy," he told HANA in an interview in Kampala.

The penetration of Telecommunication services in sub-Saharan Africa remains minimal on average. For some nations like Rwanda, penetration is as low as 4 percent when compared to the country's total population figures. Some times limited telecom penetration in sub-Saharan Africa can be as a result of lacking basic telecom infrastructure in place but also simply failure, on the part of those countries with the right infrastructure, to design ample and affordable telecom products for the rural poor.

Prince Collins Eselemo, the national president of the Warri National Congress (WNC), a non-governmental organization and grand patron of the Ijaw Youths Congress (IYC) in the Niger Delta, is not new to controversy. Some two years ago, he led a protest against the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) over a strike action by the then leadership of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole on the grounds that it was of no benefit to the people of the Niger-Delta.

Building public support for genetically modified crops in sub-Saharan Africa means developing a homegrown solution to the region's own needs. Last week representatives from African countries gathered in Johannesburg, South Africa, for Agricultural Science Week.

Ishmael Reed Publishing Co. is looking for new (and preferably not published elsewhere) short stories by Kenyan authors to be published in January 2008. Translated work from any of the Kenyan languages into English is particularly welcome. The submission deadline is July 15, 2007.

The 9th Assembly of the African Union Heads of States and Governments will convene from 1-3 July 2007 in Accra, Ghana under the theme, ‘The Grand Debate on the Union Government.’ It is significant that the debate takes place nearly two years since the ratification of the African Union Protocol to the Charter of African Women’s Rights, and three years since the adoption of the Solemn Declaration on Gender Equality in Africa, which reaffirms the commitment of African States to advance the agenda of gender equality. Both instruments provide a critical framework to address the rights of women and girls in Africa. To date 21countries have ratified the protocol on Women’s Rights, leaving 32 yet to ratify. The delay in ratification of the protocol by member states of the union undermines the universal achievement of continental standards on women’s rights.

In the proposal of the Union Government lies a long held vision to consolidate African unity, and an affirmation of the quest to unite Africa’s peoples across shared values and rights. Unfortunately, across the continent, the status of women continues to deteriorate under war and conflict, deeply rooted economic inequality, repressive undemocratic regimes, domestic violence and trauma, harmful cultural practices and poverty. In spite of the continental instruments for change, women’s rights remain elusive.

At the heart of the union debate must be a commitment to unite Africa’s people across gender by upholding respect for women’s rights and equality of opportunities for both men and women.
Specifically, the African Heads of States and Government meeting in Accra should show commitment to continental unity by embracing the following:

• Incorporation of gender equality in the values underpinning the Proposal of United States of Africa
• Instituting and making public during the next Summit a performance audit of the Directorates of the African Union Commission in terms of the incorporation of gender concerns (2004-2007)
• Prioritization of the rights and entitlements of refugees and displaced populations, particularly women and girls.
• Prioritization of full citizenship status for women in terms of rights, particularly women who marry across nationalities and lose their rights.
• Guarantee to women the freedom to trade and work across states’ borders. Women small traders manage a high degree of non-formal cross border trade
• Conduct analysis into the gendered implications of macroeconomic policy with respect to the ‘convergence criteria’.
• Enable total factor mobility—the free movement of all factors of production (labour as well as capital)—by addressing questions of African citizenship, including African women’s equal citizenship rights and freedom of movement at the continental level.
• Embedding the principle of gender parity in the election and appointment of persons to the continental institutions.
• Ensuring that the principle of appointing 50% women commissioners at the African Union Commission continues to be honored.
• Increasing the minimum threshold for women MPs elected to the African parliament to at least two per country
• Review all recommendations (in the continental government proposal) in light of deficiencies already noted by the African women’s movement with respect to ensuring the equal representation of African women at the AU’s highest decision-making organs—for instance, the Commission’s Chair could also have a Deputy responsible for gender mainstreaming across her/his ‘Cabinet’ and all Commissioners responsible for programs and projects under the strategic focus areas should ensure that gender implications are taken into account in their elaboration and implementation;
• Publicly censuring countries that have yet to ratify the Protocol on the Rights of African Women.
• Honor their commitment to deliver on the Solemn Declaration on Gender Equality in Africa.
• Demonstrate greater commitment to the normative framework already established by the AU—particularly with respect to the promotion and protection of human rights (including women’s human rights), peace and security.

The debate on the Union Government is timely, but it will only be relevant in as far as it will recognize that the majority of the African people are women and girls; and that to win their confidence African Leaders need to seriously take up their concerns head on.

This paper attempts to re-visit the history of African unity and highlight the reasons for the current impetus toward union among Africa’s leadership; explore the implications of the union on Africa’s current inter-governmental organisation, the AU; outline challenges to the union project and set out conditions for its success.

The upcoming mid-year African Union (AU) summit of heads of state and government has as its primary agenda a ‘Grand Debate on the Union Government’. The ideological differences present in the first three decades of Africa’s political independence seem to have been rendered irrelevant due to the current ascendancy of neoliberalism as the only valid ideological basis for economic organisation both within national political-economies as well as globally. But new political distinctions have emerged - in part due to the emergence of the so-called ‘new breed’ of African leaders following the end of apartheid in South Africa and the movements towards political pluralism elsewhere. Such leaders have posited themselves as both able and willing to speak and act on behalf of the rest of Africa - Africa presented as being determined to re-birth itself as encapsulated in the concept of the ‘African renaissance’. Similarly, economic distinctions are now also clear - in part as a result of the economic directions initially pursued post-independence, in part due to variations in both the presence and utilisation of mineral and other natural resources and in part due to governance.

The result is that certain African states are, in effect, positioned as metropoles for the other African peripheries. Such African states, worried about the potential impact of union on their national political-economies, are hesitant about the potential for immediate union. Other African states, seeing nothing but advantages from a union, argue that, given Africa’s diversity, there will never be an ideal time and now is as good a time as any. Others are simply sceptical.

The scepticism is not unwarranted? Has the time come for union? Is Africa’s leadership genuinely ready for what union would entail?

The ‘Grand Debate’ in (fittingly) Accra this June seems set to answer these questions. While idea of the ‘Grand Debate’ may seem incredible given the lack of popular awareness of (let alone informed debates around) the process leading up to it, its potential impact on Africa and African peoples’ is not in question. But the process leading up to it is informed by motivations and rationales that are not as incredible. In fact, an exploration of these motivations and rationales reveal the process leading up to the ‘Grand Debate’ as somewhat inevitable - informed both by history and by the current context of Africa within the global political economy.

This paper thus attempts to re-visit that history and highlight the reasons for the current impetus toward union among Africa’s leadership; explore the implications of the union on Africa’s current intergovernmental organisation, the AU; outline challenges to the union project and set out conditions for its success. In so doing, the paper sets out and critically assesses the study which will inform ‘the Grand Debate,’ and drawing from debates within African civil society (including the African women’s movement) on the experience of the AU to date. It also assesses the financial proposals made by the study from the perspective of theory relating to processes of integration.

It concludes by noting that the time frame given in the study is too short. The low level of public awareness about the study, its recommendations and the upcoming ‘Grand Debate’ are bound to militate against implementation of the recommendations - even if the idea of pan-Africanism is an idea that has long been aspired to. The recommendations will be seen as imposed on African populations from the top-down, rather than arising from a consultative process which all Africans buy into and support. In addition, the financial proposals in particular cannot be achieved (as the study itself notes) within the nine years. Technical questions aside, they hinge on critical pre-conditions for success such as, at best, African citizenship (including African women’s autonomous citizenship rights) or, at least, freedom of movement across the continent - the achievement of either which will be difficult to implement given the varied economic performance of individual African states as well as the persistence of internal conflicts across the region.

This is not, however, to suggest that the study’s recommendations are unfeasible. True, the experience of the AU to date paints a picture of somewhat inconsistent and patchy progress that is more incipient than felt on the ground. But it also points to a significant shift towards meaningful collective action that bodes well for further intensification of the regional integration agenda.

But for the study’s recommendations to be achieved and the clarion call ‘Africa Unite’ to be realised, political will will need to be built up at the highest and lowest levels. Enhanced delivery by the AU as currently constituted is critical. While working towards an aspirational framework within a more reasonable timeframe, the focus should now be on resolving the gap between the AU’s normative framework and institutional and programmatic or project delivery.

* This paper was commissioned by, and reproduced here with the kind permission of, the Africa Governance Monitoring and Advocacy Project (AfriMAP), a project of the Open Society Institute (OSI).

* L. Muthoni Wanyeki is a political scientist based in Nairobi, Kenya.

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

Popularise the Union, its time has come
Interview with Bougouma Diagne, Cultural Association for Social and Educational Self-Promotion.

Without free trade and free movement, no need for Africans to unite
Interview with George Adhanja, The Kenya National Council of NGOs

No continental union without peace and security
Interview with Joseph Yav is a senior researcher at the Institute for Security Studies based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Give room for civil society participation before adoption
Interview with Sanusi Ibraheem, The Intellectual Group, Nigeria

Democratic political leadership: pre-condition for continental union
African Union Monitor
Interview with Arnold Tsunga, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights

This week, to coincide with civil society meetings being launched in Accra, Ghana, in the run up to the African Union (AU) Summit on Continental Government, we publish a special issue of Pambazuka News. Given the large number of articles and issues addressed, we will be sending out Pambazuka News in three parts. Part 1 and Part 2 will contain the main articles on the topic, and will be sent out, respectively, today (Thursday), and tomorrow (Friday). Part 3, the Links and Resources section, will contain some of your usual favourites, letters to the editor, as well as the summaries of useful websites. Thanks for your understanding.

While the futuristic idea of an African superstate is a necessary and desirable alternative to the contemporary reality of an Africa of states, the political union of African states can only come to fruition if the lessons of the OAU’s failures are fully mastered. The AU will continue in the foreseeable future to be an important vehicle for addressing the continent’s numerous projects, argues Kwame Akonor. But the AU cannot empower and develop Africa, nor guarantee Africa’s collective security or provide a common platform for Africa’s collective diplomacy, if the AU remains the way it is today.

'A bunch of broomsticks is not as easily broken as a single stick' – African proverb.

As the African Union (AU) enters its fifth year of existence, it is rather fitting that it has devoted its annual summit to be a 'Grand Debate on the Union Government'. Since its inception on 9 July 2002, at Durban, South Africa, there have been conflicting perspectives on the AU’s role in Africa’s development. Africa’s political elite, and supporters of the AU, generally argue that the new institution would enhance the economic, political and social integration and development of African people. A great deal of Africa’s civil society however are not so optimistic: they perceive the AU as a mere continuation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) under a different name.

This essay argues that while the futuristic idea of an African superstate is a necessary and desirable alternative to the contemporary reality of an Africa of states, the political union of African states can only come to fruition if the lessons of OAU’s failures are fully mastered.

At the heart of the OAU’s failings was not so much a structural as an ideological shortcoming. The OAU lacked a cohesive ideology that could provide the proper situational interpretation of the African context. Ideologies not only rationalise and explain the reasons for a given situation; they also provide strategies toward future goals. (Zartman, 1966, p. 38). What the OAU lacked then was an ideology capable of rationalising and explaining Africa’s balkanisation, dependency and underdevelopment, and an ideology capable of providing strategies that would guarantee and enhance Africa’s power, prestige and progress in the postcolonial era.

Which ideology is capable of filling this vacuum? Pan-Africanism! Ofuatey-Kodjoe (1986) defines Pan-Africanism as an ideology with a cognitive component that recognises all African peoples, both in Africa and the diaspora, as being of one folk or nation, as a result of a shared cultural identity, a shared historical experience, and an indivisible future destiny (p. 391). And he goes on to argue, that the most fundamental goal of Pan-Africanism is the commitment to the collective empowerment of African peoples, wherever they are (p. 391). Thus, it must be quickly added that calling oneself Pan-Africanist does not make one so, and being of African descent does not automatically make a person a Pan-Africanist. Indeed, most of the OAU founders of yesteryear, and the AU founders of today, label themselves Pan-Africanist, without any appreciably clarity and commitment to the ideology of Pan-Africanism.

By rejecting the brand of Pan-Africanism advocated by the Casablanca group, the OAU at its birth, consciously or not, gave its blessings to the colonial political and economic formation - together with its ideological and cultural systems. Indeed, the final curse of African independence, and the OAU’s ascendancy, was that it solidified the balkanisation and dependency inherited from colonialism. The problem was compounded when the Casablanca group rather than opting out of the OAU decided to remain in it, perhaps for fear of isolation. Ghana’s Nkrumah, a staunch advocate of the Casablanca thinking, on arrival from the OAU’s inaugural summit even remarked triumphantly that 'the political unification of the African continent, my lifelong dream, is finally here'. (cited in Rooney, 1988, p. 223).

But of course, this was not the case; his Pan African ideal of a continental African government had been soundly rejected. And it also did not help much that none of the 22 countries, newly independent since the OAU’s founding, refused to join. Some newly independent countries joined the OAU merely for geographic reasons, well aware of the organisation’s impotence. Eritrea, OAU’s last but one newest member, when joining the OAU in 1993 declared: 'we are joining the OAU not because of your achievement, but because you are our African brothers (Afeworki 1993). According to Eritrea’s Issaias Afeworki, membership of the OAU was 'not spiritually gratifying or politically challenging [because] the OAU has become a nominal organization that has failed to deliver on its pronounced goals and objectives'. (Afeworki 1993). Nevermind that the OAU had failed to support Eritrea’s bloody 30-year struggle for independence (the continent’s longest civil war) from Ethiopia, incidentally the seat of the OAU headquarters.

Not surprisingly, the OAU became a geographical entity with no geopolitical weight. It forged a unity that further deepened the political marginalisation, economic dependence, and cultural doubt of the continent; the very antithesis of Pan-Africanism. The lesson here is that a union cannot be effective without ideological uniformity or unity of purpose. For while it is necessary for all Africa and Africans to unite, there is no point to this project if the result is a united Africa with divergent and confusing perspectives on the goals of unity, or a united Africa where consensus on a shared African worldview is elusive.

From a Pan-Africanist perspective therefore, it is better to have a united, empowered and independent Africa, comprising some African states, rather than to have a united, but weak and dependent Africa, comprising of all African states.

The old patterns persist

Unfortunately, like the OAU before it, an overwhelming majority of the AU’s founding members, eschew any genuine commitment and seriousness to the Pan-African ideal of an empowered African superstate that would increase the capacity of Africans to take direct control of their destinies. The preference for the status quo was made apparent during the Sirte Summit in September 1999, when African leaders, once again, retreated from the continental government thesis. While Libya’s Qathafi (1999) argued passionately for a transformative entity, in the form of a confederation of African states, as a ‘historical solution’ to the continent’s numerous problems, an overwhelming number of his fellow African leaders remained deeply skeptical about his vision of a ‘United States of Africa’.

Qathafi’s plea that African leaders 'give up a little bit of their sovereignty in the interests of the whole of Africa' was not even entertained as a realisable goal (Pompey 2000; Rosine 1999). The leaders of Egypt, Kenya and Uganda spoke for many when they said publicly that the idea of an African superstate was premature (Kipkoech 1999; Rosine 1999). Granted, Qathafi’s Arabic persuasion may predispose him to use non-African cultural perspectives, rather than an African centred paradigm, as a basis for defining a better world vision. Be that as it may, his call for an African superstate, like that of the Casablanca bloc of the 1960s, is a central pan-africanist strategy to achieving collective power in the contemporary international system.

Needless to say, the AU that was created has limited authority and coercive powers capable of changing the behavior of member states. Furthermore, since its ideological underpinnings does not promise the eventual collective acquisition of power, the AU cannot be expected to significantly transform the lives of Africans for the better. When we consider the AU’s current efforts in the areas of security, economics, and politics, it becomes obvious, but not surprising, that these are contrary to the fundamental goal of Pan-Africanism.

In the area of security and the preservation of peace, the formation of a single African High Command is considered central to the fundamental Pan-Africanist objective of collective empowerment. First, it is logical from a Pan-Africanist perspective to have one army to manage conflicts on the continent and to maximise the power of Africa, relative to other actors, in the international system. Africa has a combined 3,500,000 men and women in its armed forces, a number that any power bloc would be forced to reckon with. Secondly, an African High Command would help to reduce the military expenditures of individual African countries and divert such expenditures to much needed social services. Taken together, African countries spend in excess of US$20 billion annually on the military. A significant reduction in such spending would result if Africa had an efficient joint force and a central command. However, Muammar Al Qathafi’s call, since 1975, for abolishing national armies to create a single African army has been constantly rebuffed by his counterparts. The last time his idea was rebuffed was at the AU’s extraordinary summit in March 2004.

At this summit, a watered down version of Qathafi’s single army proposal, based on the maintenance of each African state's independence and sovereignty, was created instead. The creation of the African Standby Force (as this force is known) represents a marked departure from the OAU days. However there are numerous problems with its structures, important amongst these are: the lack of mechanisms to counter unilateral action of strong member countries; the non-veto power decision making structure; and the selection and inclusion of conflict prone countries as force members. Egyptian Foreign Minister, Ahmed Maher, later told reporters after the AU Summit that delegates rejected the Qathafi’s proposal because 'Africa is not ready yet for this [single African army] idea' (quoted in Pitman 2004).

Regarding economics, the strategies and programs pursued by the AU and its member states indicate continued reliance on international capital and the uncoordinated development of individual national economies. No real attempt has been made to achieve continental African economic unity despite the obvious economic wisdom of such an approach. The observation by Green and Seidman (1968), almost four decades ago, is still true today:

'Africa as a whole could provide markets able to support large-scale efficient industrial complexes; no single African state nor existing sub-regional economic union can do so. African states cannot establish large-scale productive complexes stimulating demand throughout the economy as poles of rapid economic growth because their markets are far too small. Instead the separate tiny economies willy-nilly plan on lines leading to the dead ends of excessive dependence on raw material exports and small scale inefficient ‘national factories’ at high costs per unit of output. Inevitably, therefore, they fail to reduce substantially their basic dependence on foreign markets, complex manufactures and capital.' (Green and Seidman, 1968, p. 22)

It should be noted that the specific economic policies pursued by the majority of African states are determined largely by the International Monetary Fund and other international financial institutions (IFIs), who demand explicit commitments from governments to implement remedial policies that the IFIs deem essential to the continued disbursement of loans. The impact of these structural adjustment conditionalities, while mostly negative, compromises the economic autonomy of African countries.

The AU’s economic blueprint, the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD 2001) does not veer off the path traveled by the individual African member states: it too sees international capital and the separate development of national economies as a panacea. NEPAD has serious flaws, too many to list here (for a concise critique, see Taylor and Nel 2002).

From a Pan-Africanist viewpoint however, NEPAD’s biggest failing is that it does not sufficiently recognise African peoples as partners for, and of, development. As it stands now, NEPAD is an appeal to the goodwill and benevolence of the industrialised countries for aid and investment. Even so, NEPAD is an elite driven process that provides no means for mobilising the African masses for real development. The AU’s interest in securing international capital and maintaining neo-colonial relationship with the West, (rather than pursuing genuine inter-African cooperation), led the authors of NEPAD to consult first with the G8 industrialised countries, before African governments had had a chance to discuss it amongst themselves and with their own people. There is even talk of constructing a tunnel linking Africa with Europe.

Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade (2002), one of the authors and spokesperson for NEPAD has said: 'NEPAD plans to construct a tunnel linking Africa to Europe under the Mediterranean Sea from the northern tip of Algeria through to Gibraltar.'

What about a much needed railroad or highway linking the continent, from Algiers to Antananarivo? The fact that NEPAD was conceived by a small group of African leaders, without any input from the masses, coupled with the rush to the G8 (G8 2002) for the programe's endorsement, made several AU leaders question the wisdom of the entire enterprise. One such critic was Gambia’s president, Yahya Jammeh, who said: 'People are sick and tired of African beggars. Nobody will ever develop your country for you. I am not criticising NEPAD, but the way it was conceived to be dependent on begging' (Lokongo 2002, p. 18).

Needless to say, NEPAD, as presently constituted, has the potential of dividing, not unifying, Africa: The G8, on which the AU relies for the programme's major funding, has already made it clear that it would only help African countries 'whose performance reflects the NEPAD commitments' (G8 2002). Western nations can thus pick and choose which AU member states are deserving of assistance, and those that are not. The overall effect would not be a stronger Africa. At best, it would reward individual African countries for good behaviour. Thus one cannot expect NEPAD to transform Africa from its disarticulated, dependent and underdeveloped status.

When it comes to politics, it has been established that the AU’s founding majority has no desire for a supranational political entity that would lead to a full and complete African unity. Africa today therefore does not have one state to represent it or a single voice to articulate its concerns in the international system; hence no power. Also, the political map of African remains a sacred cow despite the fact that Africa’s 165 demarcated borders (the world’s most fragmented region) have in of themselves become the basis of many African conflicts. Unfortunately, Article 4(b) of the AU Constitutive Act, like Article 3(3) of the OAU charter before it, affirms these colonial demarcations.

The AU should amend the principle of inviolability of the colonial borders and negotiate new boundaries that have more meaning for Africans. It must be borne in mind that the carving up of Africa in 1884 was not meant to unify, but rather to divide the continent. These are by no means easy political choices, but African leaders have to confront them before any real chance of optimising Africa’s power can be realised.

Politically, it seems what binds the AU is a professed commitment to democracy and good governance. Even on this score, the AU’s efforts so far have, at best, been confused. This is because the AU has no established criteria on what constitutes ‘good governance’ or ‘democracy’, beyond the minimalist procedural requisites of free and fair elections.

At its inaugural launch in July 2001, the AU barred Madagascar from the new organisation and refused to recognise Ravalomanana as Madagascar’s new president, citing the contentious nature of the elections and the unorthodox way Mr. Ravalomanana consolidated his 'victory'. The AU maintained that it would admit Madagascar only if fresh presidential elections were held. That the AU showed resolve early, on a key principle on which it was founded is noteworthy. But it appears, in this particular case, that the resolve shown was not carefully thought through. Madagascar’s Supreme Court ruling that Ravalomanana’s victory and government were legitimate, coupled with dissent among AU members on the issue, should have given the AU pause and deep reflection on its decision.

Not long after AU’s decision, several African countries (Senegal, Burkina Faso, Mauritius, Libya and the Comoros islands) broke ranks with the AU and endorsed Ravalomanana’s government – so much for Africa speaking with a single voice! The AU did a face saving U-turn and recognised Ravalomanana the following year, a move which no doubt has cost AU some credibility, especially since no new presidential elections were held.

In any case, on the democracy question, the AU does not have much credibility to begin with: African leaders do not easily give up the reins of power, and represent some of the world’s longest-serving presidents. The following sample proves the point: Gabon's Omar Bongo Ondimba has been at the helm of his nation for 40 years. Libya has been under Muammar Al Qathafi for 38 years. Angola’s Jose Eduardo dos Santos has 28 years under his belt. Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe has been in power for 27 years.

If the AU were serious about democratic values and good governance, membership of that body should not have been automatic, but rather, granted on merit or a set of political criteria. For example, the basic membership prerequisites of the European Union (after which the AU is modelled) has three basic thematic criteria - political, economic and institutional - also known as the Copenhagen Criteria), where the political criteria directs the applicant country to achieve stability of its institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.

What the AU needs now is clear and consistent guidelines on what it considers to be the consent of the governed and enforcement mechanisms to ensure strict compliance. Ideally, the democratic principles advocated must be compatible with the values and practices of the African society.

More than Pan-Africanism

Aside from the lack of, and/or commitment to, a transformative and empowering ideology based on Pan-Africanism, the OAU did not flourish, due to operational failures caused by a lack of popular legitimacy, administrative bottlenecks and financial stress. I will only discuss here the issue of popular legitimacy.

A major hurdle to the OAU’s efficacy was that it was a state-centric elite political organisation that did little to involve the average African in its operations and decision making. Consequently, it had a flag and an anthem that no one saluted or recognised, and an Africa Day that was hardly celebrated.

As indicated, the AU promises citizen involvement and participation. Especially the Pan African Parliament (PAP) holds promise of broadly representing the African citizenry. Though in its first five years of existence, the Pan African Parliament is to have advisory and consultative powers only. A lot more can be done to make it an effective body by 2007, when it assumes legislative functions.

First, the PAP representation should be broadened with respect to gender, the African diaspora constituency and cross-national party coalitions. The seat currently allocated to women members in the PAP now stands at 20 per cent. This can be said to be a good beginning, however, there is room for improvement as this 20 per cent quota is 10 per cent less than that which the Fourth UN Conference on Women urged as minimum for women parliamentarians. While it is true that representation of women in African national parliaments is scarce, it is not unreasonable to increase their quota, especially if we consider the fact that African women hold the keys to Africa’s overall development.

Next, is the issue of diaspora representation. Following a proposal by the Senegalese government that diaspora Africans be considered the 'Sixth Region' of Africa, the AU has been working on the institutional development of the African diaspora in organs. This is a move in the right direction, toward the pan-africanist goal of an empowered African collective at the global level.

The challenge the AU faces is to clearly define the criteria for membership of the African diaspora, its rights, duties and privileges. The African diaspora constituency must be accorded real and tangible (and not merely symbolic) membership. Their representation in the PAP will signal that the AU is serious in its efforts to integrate the continent and the diaspora.

A final area where PAP representation can be made more inclusive is to provide mechanisms that allow the development of continent-wide political groupings, as opposed to national parties now envisaged for the PAP. Should this occur, the PAP members could form coalitions along ideological and tactical directions such as workers, pan-Africanists, liberals, socialists, conservatives etc.

Conclusion

The AU will continue, in the foreseeable future, to be an important vehicle for addressing the continent’s numerous projects. But the AU cannot empower and develop Africa, nor guarantee Africa’s collective security, nor provide a common platform for Africa’s collective diplomacy if the AU remains the way it is today: bereft of a genuine commitment to Pan-Africanism and an empowered African superstate.

Moving beyond this status quo would require, amongst other things, leaders who share a pan-Africanist commitment, and who are willing to engage the African citizenry in a search for solutions that preserves Africa’s independence and dignity: strategies which reflect Africa’s image and interests. As we have seen, much work must be done before the dream of the collective empowerment of all African peoples comes true; until then, the dream of African unity remains only a mirage.

(See for full list of references)

*Dr. Kwame Akonor is director of the African Development Institute (ADI), a New York based think tank that advocates self-reliant and endogenous development policies for Africa. He is also Assistant Professor of International Relations at Seton Hall University, and acting Chair of the Africana Studies Department. The full text of 'Stuffing Old Wine in New Bottles: The Case of the Africa Union' will be published in Africa in the 21st Century: Toward a New Future edited by Ama Mazama (Routledge 2007).
* Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Is it a realistic debate to be having at this time, when the continent is afflicted with so many other problems and challenges? To what extent are the majority of African people aware that this debate is going on? Before we can even begin to grapple with these questions, says Tim Murithi, we need to pose the question: how we have got to the point that we are discussion a Union of Africa Government or the so-called United States of Africa?

It is appropriate to reflect on the debate that has been raging on the prospects for further continental integration and the impending discussions on the Union Government Project. During the 8th Ordinary Session of Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union (AU) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 29 to 30 January 2007, the decision was taken to devote the next meeting of the Assembly to an elaborately titled 'Grand Debate on the Union Government'. From 8 to 9 May 2007, the Executive Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs met in Durban, South Africa to brainstorm on the state of the Union. The groundwork has therefore been laid for discussions to take place in Accra about the direction that the AU should take.

We could question whether it is indeed appropriate and realistic to be debating a Union Government at this time. Have AU member states mastered the art of rudimentary unification? Do they yet speak with a unified voice and act based on a common purpose? To add to this casserole of doubt the continent is still afflicted by so many other problems and challenges from conflict, to underdevelopment and inadequate public health services. Ultimately, by adding a pinch of scepticism about the genuine political will of AU member states to pool their sovereignty, it seems that the Grand Debate may be no more than a storm in a tea cup, much-ado-about-not-very-much. But perhaps this is a bit dismissive!

Is it indeed a realistic debate to be having at this time, when the continent is afflicted with so many other problems and challenges? To what extent are the majority of African people aware that this debate is going on? If they are not aware, who is having this conversation on their behalf? How can a Union Government Project succeed if it does not have the buy-in and the support of the people of Africa?

But before we can even begin to grapple with these questions we do need to pose the question: how we have got to the point that we are discussion a Union of Africa Government or the so-called United States of Africa? Only by tracing the trajectory of the evolution of the notion of Pan-Africanism can we begin to contextualize the impetus behind the impending 'Grand Debate on the Union Government'.

This paper will assess the origins of Pan-Africanism and discuss the norms that animated this movement. It will then assess how Pan-Africanism was institutionalized in the form of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the present day African Union (AU). It will argue that the Grand Debate on the Union Government is only the latest incarnation of an attempt to institutionalise Pan-Africanism. Understanding the reasons why Pan-Africanism gained currency as a movement and liberatory ideology will help us to understand this Grand Debate. The past in this sense is influencing the present and will ultimately inform the future. The paper will assess the role that civil society can play in contributing to the Union Government debate. The paper will also question whether the Union Government of Africa Project will be built on a solid enough foundation to realize the aspirations of Pan-Africanism. It will conclude by assessing the limits of continental integration.

What is Pan-Africanism?

It is often assumed that the process of continental integration begun with an Extra-ordinary Summit of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) convened in Sirte, Libya, in 1999. In fact, the process begun with the Pan-African movement and its demand for greater solidarity among the peoples of Africa. To understand the emergence of the African Union we need to understand the evolution of the Pan-African movement. A review of the objectives and aspirations of Pan-Africanism provides a foundation to critically assess the creation of the AU and its prospects for promoting the principles and norms of peace and development.

Historically Pan-Africanism, the perception by Africans in the diaspora and on the continent that they share common goals, has been expressed in different forms by various actors. There is no single definition of Pan-Africanism and in fact we can say that there are as many ideas about Pan-Africanism as there are thinkers of Pan-Africanism. Rather than being a unified school of thought, Pan-Africanism is more a movement which has as its common underlying theme the struggle for social and political equality and the freedom from economic exploitation and racial discrimination.

It is interesting to note that it is the global dispersal of peoples of African descent that is partly responsible for the emergence of the Pan-African movement. As Hakim Adi and Marika Sherwood, observe in their book Pan-African History: Political Figures from African and the Diaspora Since 1787, ‘Pan-Africanism has taken on different forms at different historical moments and geographical locations’. Adi and Sherwood note that, what underpins these different perspectives on Pan-Africanism is ‘the belief in some form of unity or of common purpose among the peoples of Africa and the African Diaspora.’ One can also detect an emphasis on celebrating ‘Africaness’, resisting the exploitation and oppression of Africans and their kin in the Diaspora as well as a staunch opposition to the ideology of racial superiority in all its overt and covert guises.

Pan-Africanism is an invented notion. It is an invented notion with a purpose. We should therefore pose the question what is the purpose of Pan-Africanism? Essentially, Pan-Africanism is a recognition of the fragmented nature of the existence of African’s, their marginalization and alienation whether in their own continent or in the Diaspora. Pan-Africanism seeks to respond to Africa’s underdevelopment. Africa has been exploited and a culture of dependency on external assistance unfortunately still prevails on the continent. If people become too reliant on getting their support, their nourishment, their safety, from outside sources, then they do not strive find the power within themselves to rely on their own capacities. Pan-Africanism calls upon Africans to drawn from their own strength and capacities and become self-reliant.

Pan-Africanism is a recognition that Africans have been divided among themselves. They are constantly in competition among themselves, deprived of the true ownership of their own resources and inundated by paternalistic external actors with ideas about what it ‘good’. Modern day paternalism is more sophisticated and dresses itself up as a kind and gentle helping hand with benign and benevolent intentions. In reality it seeks to maintain a ‘master-servant’ relationship and does not really want to see the genuine empowerment and independence of thought in Africa.

The net effect of this is to dis-empower Africans from deciding for themselves the best way to deal with the problems and issues they are facing. Pan-Africanism is a recognition that the only way out of this existential, social, political crisis is by promoting greater solidarity amongst Africans. Genuine dialogue and debate in Africa will not always generate consensus, but at least it will be dialogue among Africans about how they might resolve their problems. If ideas are not designed by the African’s, then rarely can they be in the interests of Africans.

Institutionalisation of Pan-Africanism: The OAU

In the twentieth century, the idea of Pan-Africanism took an institutional form. Initially, there were the Pan-African Congress’ which convened in the United Kingdom and the United States of America, under the leadership of activists like the African-American writer and thinker WEB. du Bois; the Trinidadian Henry Sylvester Williams; and inspired often by the ideas of people like the Jamaican-American Marcus Garvey. These ideas were adopted and reformed by continental African leaders in the middle of the twentieth century. Kwame Nkrumah who later became the first president of Ghana, Sekou Toure of Guinea, Leopold Senghor of Senegal, Banar Abdel Nasser of Egypt, Ali Ben Bella of Algeria took the idea of Pan-Africanism to another level on 25 May 1963 when they co-created the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). The principles of the OAU kept the spirit of Pan-Africanism alive. The primary objective of this principle was to continue the tradition of solidarity and cooperation among Africans.

During the era of the OAU the key challenge was colonialism. Since 1885, in what was then known as the 'Scramble for Africa' European colonial powers had colonized African peoples and communities across the entire continent. The Belgians were in the Congo, the British in East, South, West and North Africa. The French in West Africa, Somalia, Algeria and other parts of north Africa. The Italians in Somalia. The Germans, who later lost their colonies following their defeat in the Second World War, had to relinquish Namibia and modern day Tanzania. Africans had successfully fought on the side of the allies in the Second World War and after its conclusion they brought their struggle for independence back home to Africa.

The OAU embraced the principle of Pan-Africanism undertook the challenge of liberating all African countries from the grip of settler colonialism. The main principle that it was trying to promote was to end racial discrimination upon which colonialism with its doctrine of racial superiority was based. In addition, the OAU sought to assert the right of Africans to control their social, economic and political affairs and achieve the freedom necessary to consolidate peace and development. The OAU succeeded in its primary mission, with the help of international actors, in liberating the continent on 27 April 1994, when a new government based on a one-person-one-vote came into being in South Africa under the leadership of Nelson Mandela. The OAU however was not as effective in monitoring and policing the affairs of its own Member States when it came to the issues of violent conflict; political corruption; economic mismanagement; poor governance; lack of human rights; lack of gender equality; and poverty eradication.

The preamble of the OAU Charter of 1963 outlined a commitment by member states collectively establish, maintain and sustain the 'human conditions for peace and security'. However, in parallel, the same OAU Charter contained the provision to 'defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of the member states'. This was later translated into the norm of non-intervention. The key organs of the OAU - the council of ministers and the Assembly of heads of state and government - could only intervene in a conflict situation if they were invited by the parties to a dispute. Many intra-state disputes were viewed, at the time, as internal matters and the exclusive preserve of governments is concerned.

The OAU created a Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution in Cairo, in June 1993. This instrument was ineffective in resolving disputes on the continent. Tragically, the Rwandan genocide which was initiated in April 1994 happened while this mechanism was operational. It was also during this last decade of the twentieth-century that the conflict in Somalia led to the collapse of the state and the violence in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Sudan led to the death of millions of Africans.

These devastating events illustrated the limitations of the OAU as an institution that could implement the norms and principles that it articulated. Despite the existence of the OAU’s mechanisms for conflict prevention and management, the Rwandan tragedy demonstrated the virtual impotence of the OAU in the face of violent conflict within its member states. The United Nations (UN) did not fare any better as all of its troops, except the Ghanaian contingent, pulled out of the country leaving its people to the fate. Subsequently, both the OAU and the UN issued reports acknowledging their failures. The impetus for the adoption of a new paradigm in the promotion of peace and security in the African continent emerged following the Rwandan tragedy.

Regrettably due to the doctrine of non-intervention, the OAU became a silent observer to the atrocities being committed by some of its member states. Eventually, a culture of impunity and indifference became entrenched in the international relations of African countries during the era of the 'proxy' wars of the Cold War. So in effect the OAU was a toothless talking shop. The OAU was perceived as a club of African Heads of States, most of whom were not legitimately elected representatives of their own citizens but self-appointed dictators and oligarchs. This negative perception informed people’s attitude towards the OAU. It was viewed as an Organization that existed without having a genuine impact on the daily lives of Africans.

The African Union

The African Union came into existence in July 2002, in Durban, South Africa. It was supposed to usher Africa into a new era of continental integration leading to a deeper unity and a resolution of its problems. The evolution of the AU from the Organisation of African Unity was visionary and timely. The OAU had failed to live up to all of its norms and principles. Africa at the time of the demise of the OAU was a continent that was virtually imploding from within due to the pressures of conflict, poverty and underdevelopment and public health crisis like malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS. The OAU effectively died of a cancer of inefficiency because it basically had not lived up to its original ideals of promoting peace, security and development in Africa. The African Union has emerged as a homegrown initiative to effectively take the destiny of the continent into the hands of the African people. However, there is a long way to go before the AU’s vision and mission is realised.

The AU is composed of 53 member states. It is run by the AU Commission based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The Chairperson of the Commission is Alpha Oumar Konare. Its top decision making organ is the Assembly of the Heads of State and Government, its executive decision-making organ is the Executive Council of Ministers, who work closely with the Permanent Representatives Committee of Ambassadors in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The AU has also established range of institutions which will be discussed below.

If we know the ‘purpose’ of Pan-Africanism then the steps to achieve its goals become clearer to understand. It is in this context that we can begin to understand the emergence of the African Union. It would be a mistake to view the African Union as an aberration that just emerged in the last few years. It would be more appropriate to view the AU as only the latest incarnation of the idea of Pan-Africanism. The first phase of the institutionalization of the Pan-Africanism was the Pan-African Congress’ that were held from the end of the nineteenth-century and into the beginning of the twentieth-century. The second phase of the institutionalization of Pan-Africanism was the inauguration of the Organization of African Unity. The third phase of the institutionalization of Pan-Africanism is in effect the creation of the African Union. It will not be the last phase. Subsequent phases and organizations will bring about ever closer political, economic, social and ties among African peoples. African unity is an idea that can be traced back to the nineteenth-century. The African Union is a twenty-first century expression of a nineteenth-century idea. As such it is an imperfect expression, but nevertheless the best expression of Pan-Africanism that can be brought forth at this time.

Towards a Union of Africa?

The agenda to establish a Union Government of Africa or the so-called United States of Africa is well underway. At the core of this debate is the desire to create several ministerial portfolios for the African Union. During the 4th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government, from 30 to 31 January 2005, in Abuja, Nigeria, the AU agreed to the proposals made by the Libyan Government to establish ministerial portfolios for the organisation.

Specifically, in the 6th Ordinary Session of the Executive Council of AU Ministers, Libya proposed the establishment of the posts of Minister of Transport and Communications to unify transportation in Member States to be under the competence of the AU which will include airports and main ports of African capital cities, highways, inter-State railways, State-owned airline companies which are to become the basis for a single African airline company. Ultimately, Libya proposed that this should lead to 'the creation of a post of Minister of Transportation and Communications'.

Similarly, Libya also proposed the creation of the post of Minister of Defence to oversee 'a joint policy on defence and security of the Union and provide for the reinforcement of peace, security and stability on the continent'. This Libyan proposal noted that the provisions of the AU Constitutive Act, of 2000, and the AU Protocol on Peace and Security, 0f 2002, have effectively established a 'Joint Defence Framework'. As a logical step in the implementation of the Protocols and establishment of the institutions of the AU the Libyan proposal emphasised the importance of establishing this post to oversee and 'defend the security of Member States against any foreign aggression and to achieve internal security and stability'. In addition,

Libya also proposed the establishment of the post of an African Union Minister of Foreign Affairs. Central to its argument is that AU countries undermine their own influence when its 53 Foreign Ministers, each individually representing their own governments speak simultaneously and occasionally in contradiction with each other. The Libyan proposal notes that this post is necessary in order to expedite 'the Continent’s political, economic and social integration and to reinforce and defend unified African positions on issues of mutual interest' in the international sphere.

In order to respond to these proposals the AU Assembly decided to 'set up a Committee of Heads of State and Government chaired by the President of the Republic of Uganda and composed of Botswana, Chad, Ethiopia, Niger, Senegal and Tunisia' to liaise with the Chairperson of the AU Commission submit a report by the next summit in July 2005. In November 2005, the Committee convened a conference under the theme 'Desirability of a Union Government of Africa'. This meeting included members of the Committee, representatives of the Regional Economic Communities (RECs), technical experts, academics, civil society and Diaspora representatives, as well as the media. The conference came up with three key conclusions including the recognition that the necessity of an AU Government is not in doubt; such a Union must be of the African people and not merely a Union of states and governments; its creation must come about through the principle of gradual incrementalism; and that the role of the RECs should be highlighted as building blocks for the continental framework.

Based on the findings of this conference the Assembly mandated the AU Commission to prepare a consolidated framework document defining the purpose of the Union government, its nature, scope, core values, steps and processes as well as an indicative roadmap for its achievement. The Assembly reaffirmed 'that the ultimate goal of the African Union is full political and economic integration leading to a United States of Africa'. The Assembly further established a Committee of Heads of State and Government to be chaired by President Olusegun Obasanjo, Chairperson of the African Union, and composed of the Heads of State and Government of Algeria, Kenya, Senegal, Gabon, Lesotho and Uganda. More specifically, the Assembly requested the Committee to consider 'the steps that need to be taken for the realization of this objective, the structure, the process, the time frame required for its achievement as well as measures that should be undertaken, in the meantime, to strengthen the ability of the Commission to fulfill its mandate effectively'.

The Chairperson of the Committee of Seven, President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria, submitted a detailed report entitled: A Study on an African Union Government: Towards the United States of Africa, on July 2006, to the 7th Ordinary Session of the AU Assembly in Banjul, Gambia. Some of the key themes emerging from this report highlighted the fact that Africa is over-dependent on the external world particularly with regards to expatriate technicians and technology.

It also noted that Africa has not fully exploited its potential at national, regional and continental levels with reference to trade, education and health sectors. It notes that 'a United Africa would have the unique potential of producing most types of food and agricultural produce throughout the year'. The study also notes that in the context of globalization 'the challenges of overdependence and under-exploitation of its potentials have increased the marginalisation of the continent in world affairs'. The study further outlines the 16 strategic areas that an African Union Government should focus on including continental integration; education, training, skills development, science and technology; energy; environment; external relations; food, agriculture, and water resources; gender and youth; governance and human rights; health; industry and mineral resources; finance; peace and security; social affairs and solidarity; sport and culture; trade and customs union; infrastructure, Information technology and biotechnology.

The study notes that the 'design and functioning of a Union Government as a tool for integration would have far-reaching implications on the existing institutions and programmes of the African Union'. It further assesses the implications of a Union Government on the organs of the AU. The most notable impact would be the 'need to consider allowing a longer tenure (about 3 years for example) for the President of the Assembly' of the AU. The President of the Assembly would also be the unique spokesperson of the Union at world or other special summits. Therefore the study notes that, 'it would be desirable that the function of President be on a full time basis and could be assigned to a Former Head of State or any distinguished African with the necessary background and track record for the job'. Another notable innovation would be that 'under the Union Government, the AU Commission will be entrusted with the implementation of decisions, programmes and projects in the Strategic focus areas, which will constitute the Community Domain'. This notion of issues falling under the Community Domain would assign the Commission with 'the executive authority and responsibility to effectively implement' policies. The study also recognises that 'the logic of using the RECs as building blocks for the eventual deep, continental integration remains valid. The challenge is in aligning, synchronizing and harmonizing the integration efforts of member states, the RECs themselves, and the AU'.

There are also national implications of the establishment of a Union Government. The study notes that it is vital 'to build the necessary constitutency for advancing political integration'. In this regard, some countries have already set up Ministries in charge of integration and other countries should follow suit. The study notes that 'there is also a need to devise appropriate mechanisms for legislative implications at the national level' and 'the direct involvement of the people in promoting the Union Government could also be in the form of national associations or commissions for the United States of Africa'. In terms of financing the Union Government the study discusses the possibility of establishing indirect taxation schemes particularly with regards to an import levy and an insurance tax. A meeting of ECOSOCC in March 2005 proposed 'imposing a five US dollar tax on each air ticket bought for inter-state travels and 10 US Dollars on each ticket for travelers between Africa and other continents'. Ultimately, the study is positive about the prospects for a Union Government and outlines 3 phases for the transition to a Union Government, including:

1. The initial phase – commencing immediately after the decision of the Assembly at the AU summit in July 2007. It will include all the steps and processes that are necessary for the immediate operationalisation of the Union Government.

2. The second phase – will be devoted to making the Union Government fully operational in all its components and to laying the constitutional ground for the United States of Africa.

3. The third phase – will aim at the facilitation of all required structures of the United States of Africa at the levels of states, the regions and the continent.

The study recommends a 3-year period for each phase which will mean that the United States of Africa will be formed by the year 2015. Elections at continental, regional and national levels would be held, paving the way for the official constitution of the United States of Africa.

The study was considered by the Executive Council at its 9th Extraordinary Session held from 17 to 18 November 2006 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. According to the report of this meeting there was a view that

1) 'all Member States accept the United States of Africa as a common and desirable goal', but differences exist over the modalities and time frame for achieving this goal and the appropriate pace of integration; and

2) there is a common agreement on the need for an audit review of the state of the Union in order to know the areas in which significant improvements have to be made to accelerate the integration process.

The report of the Executive Council was submitted to the AU Assembly in January 2007 which decided to devote the July Summit to a Grand Debate.

The role of civil society in continental integration

It is important to include people and civil society in this Grand Debate. To what extent are the majority of African people aware that this debate is going on? If they are not aware, who is having this conversation on their behalf? How can a Union Government Project succeed if it does not have the by-in and the support of the people of Africa? Can there be an African Union Government without African Citizenship? Where are the African citizens in this debate? More questions than we care to answer. To be fair the AU will convene from 28 to 30 May an all-inclusive continental consultation on the Union Government Project, at its headquarters in Addis Ababa, as part of the preparations towards the Accra meeting.

So civil society will have the opportunity to contribute to this Grand Debate. There is also the issue of the extent to which the AU is consulting with the wider African public on the issue of the Grand Debate. The AU has established a website inviting public contributions on this Grand Debate. However, some civil society activists have argued that an African Union Government is a pipe dream without laying the foundations for genuine African citizenship.

The limits of top-down continental ontegration

Will the establishment of a United States of Africa generate accusations of lack of originality? Some key actors within the AU want to have a US of Africa so that they can rival the power of other global players. There is nothing wrong with such an objective in principle. However, there are limits to a US of Africa. Notably, the USA as it is currently framed is:

1. A top-down approach to continental integration;
2. Governed by the whimsical will of the leaders of African governments;
3. Has a tendency towards un-democratic practices, like lack of consultation;
4. Through its formulation, which largely excluded African civil society, effectively governed by the rule of Heads of State and not the continental rule of law.

The objective behind the US of Africa should not be primary one of increasing the level of global competitiveness of the continent. Rather a primary focus should be on improving the livelihood of African people as a whole. For this to happen further continental integration has to be motivated by the founding principles of Pan-Africanism, namely a commitment to democratic governance, human rights protection and the rule of law. Anti-democratic actors who herald and proclaim the importance of establishing a United States of Africa, should not be allowed to replicate the anti-democratic policies and practices at a continental level.

If Africa is striving for genuine continental integration based on progressive principles, we should perhaps seek to forge a Federal Union of Africa (FUA) rather than a United States of Africa. This will begin to delineate and demarcate and articulate the founding principles of a union of African countries and their societies. A Federal Union of Africa should ideally be at once federal in nature; based on the democratic will of its people; governed through the consent of African people; and governed by the rule of law and the protection of human rights for all African peoples.

Conclusion

In the final analysis, the Grand Debate on the Union Government is indeed welcome. The injunction that the great Pan-Africanist Kwame Nkrumah left us with is still valid: 'Africa must Unite, or disintegrate individually'. Somehow the Grand Debate captures this spirit and could be viewed as only the latest incarnation of an attempt to institutionalise Pan-Africanism. Understanding the motivations between Pan-Africanism will help us to understand this Grand Debate. But it is also appropriate to question whether the Union Government of Africa Project will be built on a solid enough foundation to realise the aspirations of Pan-Africanism and improve the well-being of Africans on the continent and in the Diaspora. The past in this sense is influencing the present, it remains to be seen whether it will ultimately inform the future.

* Dr. Tim Murithi, Senior Researcher, Direct Conflict Prevention Programme, Institute for Security Studies (ISS-Addis Ababa Office). This paper was presented on Africa Day, 25 May 2007, at the Department of Political Studies and International Relations, Addis Ababa University and an Oxfam-AfroFlag Vision Seminar, at Axum Hotel, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

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

It is essential to address the African diaspora’s involvement in the process of continental government. As we descend into the next phase of the African Union’s summits in Ghana, critical analysis of the African diaspora’s meaningful contribution must be integrated from here on, writes Selome Araya.

‘An African, therefore…is one who by accident of history and the reality of geography is wedded to the African continent. A leading advocate of this concept was Kwame Nkrumah’ – Professor Godfrey N. Uzoigwe

The current sea of summits and articles about the proposed ‘United States of Africa’ has raised numerous discussions in regards to its challenges and necessity. While these discussions are imperative, it is also essential to continue to address another key element: the African diaspora’s involvement in the process. As we descend into the next phase of the African Union’s (AU) summits in Ghana, critical analysis of the African diaspora’s meaningful contribution must be integrated from here on.

The African diaspora are people of African descent who live outside continental Africa, having been dispersed around the world through colonialism, the transatlantic slave trade or voluntary migration. The AU has defined the African diaspora as '[consisting] of people of African origin living outside the continent, irrespective of their citizenship and nationality and who are willing to contribute to the development of the continent and the building of the African Union‘.

Though the AU proclaims the importance of the African diaspora’s contribution, the minimal presence of the diaspora in the United States of Africa decision making bodies sparks the question: Is the United States of Africa being proposed only for those living in the African states, or does it extend to those in the diaspora as well? Does this unification really include the contribution of all African people who are willing to participate?

The answer to these questions could potentially be the catalyst to revive the once active plea for Pan-Africanism. More than unifying the 54 states of the African continent, it could serve as the mechanism to facilitate unity and solidarity amongst a people who are dispersed throughout the world, yet still connected by their history, ancestry, and bloodlines.

Though it has been adopted and embraced by African state leaders, the notion of a United Africa has always resonated with Africans in the diaspora. The concept of a ‘United States of Africa’ in fact was originated by Jamaican-born leader and activist Marcus Garvey. He first used the phrase in 1924 to call for the unity of Africans collectively fighting for human rights, resisting racism and exploitation in all parts of the world. Garvey’s teachings helped to shape the Pan-African movement, a movement formed in part with the intent to bridge the diaspora with its homeland. The Pan-African movement was also influenced by a United States-born African, W.E.B. Du Bois.

Professor and author Godfrey N Uziokwe defines Pan-Africanism as ‘a political movement initiated by peoples of African descent in the Americas, and later taken over by continental Africans, which aims to liberate all Africans and people of African descent from the shackles of political, economic, cultural, and intellectual domination’ [2]. Ghanaian president and activist, Kwame Nkrumah, and other leaders from the continent later adopted the Pan-African movement, expanding it to include the decolonisation of the African continent politically. At the first Pan-African Congress to occur in Africa in 1958, Dr Nkrumah acknowledged the extraordinary contribution of people of African origin in the diaspora to Pan-Africanism:

‘... Many of them have made no small contribution to the cause of African freedom. Names which spring immediately to mind in this connection are those of Marcus Garvey, and WEB DuBois. Long before many of us were even conscious of our own degradation, these men fought for African national and racial equality.’

The Pan-African movement solidified the need for global solidarity of people of African descent to defend their human rights. Inspired by the Diasporic Pan African Movement, Nkrumah, Haile Selassie, and others, formed the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in 1963 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. However, though the initial Pan-African movement included Africans in the diaspora, the OAU began to focus more on continental concerns and did not develop a specific role for people of the African diaspora. ‘While the OAU helped speed the independence of African nations, it did not reach out to the African diaspora in a meaningful way.’ This was first seen during the early stages of the OAU, where members of the diaspora were largely absent from the Pan-African meetings.

The OAU transitioned into the AU in 2001, and during this time, ’it began the long-awaited outreach to the African diaspora’ [4]. The AU verbally recognised the diaspora as the ‘6th region of Africa’, adding it to the other five geographical regions on the continent. Article 3 (q) of the AU’s Constitutive Act Amendments states that it shall ‘invite and encourage the full participation of the African diaspora as an important part of our Continent, in the building of the African Union’.

One of these attempts included the creation of the diaspora Initiative within the framework of the OAU, created in 2003 to connect people of spiritual and ancestral kinship to one another through various mechanisms. In 2006, the AU’s 6th Region Education Campaign also partnered with the Western Hemisphere Education Campaign (WHADN) in an initiative to serve as the ‘interface mechanism’ that linked the diaspora with the AU.

However, while the diaspora has been invited to conferences and summits, sometimes to merely ‘observe’, their role in making decisions within the AU appears to still be minimal. The full participation of the diaspora in the development of the United States of Africa has yet to be conceptualised and there is currently no policy to facilitate the involvement of the diaspora in the process. In addition, although the AU’s Constitutive Act states that it will include the diaspora in its processes, there have been no written policy changes. ‘Examination of the Amendment, Article ‘q’ to the Constitutive Act of the African Union reveals, however, that no such ‘significant structural change’ has occurred, stated Professor Maurice Tadadjeu in a recent address to Repatriation News. This is illustrated through the diaspora’s inability to join or take part in an important governmental body in Africa, the Pan-African Parliament (PAP).

The diaspora currently does not take part in any deliberations. The PAP states that it represents all people’s of Africa, yet its objectives focus solely on Africans living on the continent and make no mention of the African diaspora’s inclusion in or benefit from these objectives. Full participation of the diaspora within the AU would mean the diaspora having seats within the PAP. An example of how this could be facilitated is by developing a joint body between the AU and a governmental body in the diaspora. A policy report entitled ‘Building an African Union’ suggests that ‘Existing institutions and organizations in the diaspora should be integrated with the AU. A pan- African parliamentary union between the PAP and the US Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) would be one such Innovation’.

An attempt at including the voice of all African peoples (the diaspora) in the AU’s decision making process was with the creation of the Economic, Social and Cultural Council of the African Union (ECOSOCC) in 2002. The ECOSOCC is to serve as a consultative body and is working to bring together civil society groups, including some from the diaspora, to work with the AU. In regards to the United States of Africa, this body is intended to serve as a consultancy at assembly deliberations.

Diasporic ‘representation’ and decision making within the ECOSOCC, however, doesn’t equate to the diaspora having decision making power within the AU or its United States of Africa government. However, the ECOSOCC claims that this consultative body will play an active role in partnership with African governments to ‘contribute to the principles, policies and programs of the Union’. Dr Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem, General-Secretary of the Pan-African Movement in Kampala Uganda and Co-Director of Justice Africa, however, believes that the diaspora’s role is not quite as active as it appears. He states, ‘Even at the launch of the General Assembly (of the ECOSOCC) the few diaspora persons there were mere observers’.

Mutually beneficial relationship and solidarity

The call for the African diaspora’s full participation in the formation of a United Africa may cause some to wonder, why is the diaspora’s full participation important and who would benefit from such a relationship?

The theme of a proposed global summit in South Africa focusing on the unity of Africa and the diaspora provides an overall response to this inquiry. Entitled ‘Towards the Realization of a United and Integrated Africa and its diaspora’, this summit will aim at producing ‘a shared vision of sustainable development for both the African continent and the millions of people around the world who share an African heritage’. The participants of this summit are calling for a global dialogue regarding regional development and integration, economic co-operation, and historical, socio-cultural and religious commonalities.

There are over 150,000,000 people in the diaspora who not only could play a role in strengthening Africa’s development and attempt at unification, but who could also greatly benefit from a united Africa. In essence, a mutually beneficial relationship would result from the diaspora taking part in the development of a United States of Africa. Revived Pan-African solidarity between Africa and the diaspora would create partnerships needed to address issues of global concern and provide mutual support as both groups are still weaning off the impact that western imperialism had (and still has) on both.

If the diaspora and the African’s living on the continent joined forces with consistent cross-continental relations, support, and inclusion, it could strengthen the entire African presence and power in the world. Empowering Africans both at home and abroad is essential in order to address the inequities and imbalances that continue to bond us by our collective experience of oppression. Through building mutual solidarity, networking, and mobilization, both continental and diasporic Africans would gain strength.

According to the diaspora Initiative within the framework of the AU, the diaspora can be of great benefit to the AU through:

• technical support for programs of the African Union
• public education and sensitization of the wider public in their respective regions
• lobbying
• provision of a domestic political constituency for AU goals and objectives
• advocacy
• fundraising and resource mobilization
• resource support through such measures as creation of Endowments amongst others.

As this initiative reflects, the benefit that Africans in the diaspora could bring to the United States of Africa is multi-layered. Collectively the diaspora possesses an economic power that could greatly assist African economic development initiatives and assist in the continents struggle to break from the shackles of structural adjustment programmes, globalisation, and ‘debts’. The power that the diaspora holds could also knock out the devastating choke-hold that international NGO’s have over continental crises. Due to proportionately more access to resources, there is a wealth of financial, technical and intellectual expertise in the diaspora.

The amount of resources and education that African’s in the diaspora have access to could surely help to strengthen the continental quest at unity, provide support for other concerns affecting Africans on the continent, as well as developing Africa’s human resource capacity. ‘The African diaspora can play a part in enhancing Africa’s role in the world by promoting the development of the continent. A genuine engagement by the AU with the diaspora could enhance Africa’s negotiating and resource mobilization capacity with the international community.’ [2]

However, on the reciprocal end, the AU could also greatly assist in the struggle of African people’s globally. At the Pan-African Congress in 1958, Nkrumah recognised Africa’s unity as being crucial for the human rights of Africans in the diaspora to be respected.

‘Long may the links between Africa and the peoples of African descent continue to hold us together in fraternity. Now that we in Africa are marching towards the complete emancipation of this Continent, our independent status will help in no small measure their efforts to attain full human rights and human dignity as citizens of their country.’ [3]

According to the diaspora Initiative, the AU can offer the diaspora:

• a measure of credible involvement in the policy making processes
• some corresponding level of representation
• symbolic identifications
• requirements of dual or honorary citizenship of some sort
• moral and political support of diaspora initiatives in their respective regions
• preferential treatment in access to African economic undertakings including consultancies, trade preferences and benefits for entrepreneurs, vis a vis non –Africans
• social and political recognition as evident in invitation to Summits and important meetings etc. [9]

The United African governmental body could also show solidarity and provide support for the many injustices being inflicted on people of African descent throughout the diaspora. This includes places like Brazil, the United States of America, Haiti, France and elsewhere, where people of African descent are suffering from human rights violations exponentially by imperialist governments.

Speaking from the experience of an African living in the United States of America, we have repeatedly found ourselves victims of human rights violations and racist oppression by this government since we arrived here. We are not supported, respected, or represented by this government and have been mistreated by the government itself. Examples of this include the continuous unjust murders of African peoples by the state police departments as well as the gross injustices against African people that preceded and followed Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Although there have been governments and leaders in Africa who have fully acknowledged the injustices that are occurring in America and elsewhere, being a part of an African government would strengthen the diaspora’s continual struggle for justice. If Africans in America were a part of the United States of Africa government, they could possibly have a mechanism of support to hold the United States government accountable for the violations they inflict on people of African descent. Africans throughout the diaspora could have a connection to a universal African government that advocates for drastic changes to be made in regards to the global mistreatment of people of African descent. In other words, Africans in the diaspora would have a government that they feel a part of, instead of one they are in constant combat with.

Just One Struggle

Proclamations about the African diaspora’s right to play a crucial role in the development of a United States of Africa also call for an all-inclusive definition of what it means to be African.

Whether you identify as African, Black, being of African origin or descent, African-American, Caribbean, Afro-Latino, New Afrikan, or an African living abroad, one common trait holds true: we are all bound by our origination from and lasting connection to the same land. The African world is bigger than the territory and borders of the continent. It spans the entire globe, and includes our presence on all seven continents. The linguistic, geographic, and cultural differences amongst us cannot negate the reality that we are brothers and sisters. Separated by force, we have clearly been fragmented in a myriad of ways. But beyond the borders and boundaries, throwing away visas and passports, sidestepping our lack of common languages, combating the cowardly European divide and conquer techniques, and underneath any perceived differences, we are yet roots from the same tree.

This attempted disjointing and cultural destabilisation should not be the excuse for not supporting one another’s struggles for emancipation and freedom. In this case, realised Pan-African unity could be our channel to justice on the continent and abroad.

This common ancestry has made our universal struggles and resistance against oppression one in the same. Human rights activist and Pan-Africanist El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Malcolm X) stated in his address at the OAU summit in Cairo, Egypt in 1964, ‘We in America (and elsewhere) are your long-lost brothers and sisters, and I am here only to remind you that our problems are your problems’ [10]. He also added, ‘Since the 22 million of us were originally Africans, who are now in America, not by choice but only by a cruel accident in our history, we strongly believe that African problems are our problems and our problems are African problems’10. More than being bonded by our common African descent, Pan-Africanism was born out of this collective bond to resist these ‘powers’ in solidarity, hoping to strengthen our calls for justice and accountability. Shackled by European states and scrambling for civil rights, the only true difference in our struggle is geographic location.

We (African’s globally) are all continuing to endure various forms of oppression and atrocities inflicted on us directly, indirectly, institutionally, economically, and even under the guise of ‘humanitarian assistance’ and development projects. Whether we live in the United States, Europe, the Caribbean, or Africa, African peoples have been subjected to imperialist policies that have undermined our worth, dehumanized our souls and attempted to keep us enslaved under capitalism.

The diaspora Initiative also recognises this common African struggle:

‘Indeed, the activities and challenges of both continental Africans and Africans in diaspora continued to impact upon each other, with history as a common reference point. Those transported across the Atlantic began as second-class citizens in their new abode just as the establishment of the colonial order of the African continent relegated their brothers to the same status on the continent. Hence, the quest for freedom and social emancipation became a shared concern. Africans on both sides of the Atlantic divide felt the impact of vestigial discrimination in the aftermath of the abolition of the Slave Trade and the onset of the twentieth century.’

And so, if Africans in the diaspora are truly embraced as being African and if the African struggles globally are acknowledged as being one in the same, their inclusion in the development of a United States of Africa should be automatic, clearly defined, and truly participatory, and move beyond observer status. While there have been attempts over the last six years to include the diaspora in discussions pertaining to the African Union, a stronger presence in the United States of Africa must be actualised and written policy on the reciprocal relationship must be created.

*Selome Araya holds an MPH in Forced Migration and Health from Columbia University. She works with the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement in New York and is a freelance writer.

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

Eyob Balch writes as a young and concerned African who aspires to see the realisation of the dreams of our forefathers. This can also be considered as one of the many suggestions and recommendations that will be forwarded to the AU Commission on its timely engagement of establishing the African Union government.

I am writing this article only as a young and concerned African who aspires to see the realisation of the dreams of our forefathers. This can also be considered as one of the many suggestions and recommendations that will, certainly be forwarded for the AU Commission on its timely engagement of establishing the African Union government.

For the last four and more years, I have been engaged with different activities that have increased my understanding about the current situation of our continent, and the paths that it is embarking on towards its future. I’ve read different books and articles, discussed with different people around me and attended various panels, lectures, conferences and forums both at home and abroad as well as with high level dignitaries/diplomats and with other ordinary African citizens. All the times, I was eager to know the ideas and feelings of these people about the issues of Pan-Africanism and the unity of our continent.

Truly speaking, I myself have gone through different levels of understanding about this particular issue and what I am thinking of at this very moment is very much different from what it has been a couple or more years before. Needless to say, peoples’ perception is also on process of change either to the pessimistic or to the optimistic corner, even to no where. But their might be some basic grounds where we should have, or better to have, common consensus about the process of building the United States of Africa (USA).

I am a youth activist and a sociologist by profession and above all a Pan-Africanist by spirit. And all what I’ll be talking about will be the results of these and other multiple identities that I acquire. I’ve personally and organizationally involved in organizing a public debate on May 25, 2007; marking the African Liberation Day in Addis Ababa. I’ve come across different views and ideas of many Africans on due process with their hopes, fears, concerns and even jokes. But my basic concern is beyond all these. Through the related readings with regard to the topic, I’ve come to know that there are two basic arguments on the establishment of the African Union Government or the USA.

The first bloc, alternative A, insists on the immediate union of African states with one government citizenship, a common foreign minister, a common defense force and a leader or a president of the would be government. And the other, alternative B, is a proposition based on gradual and time proven process of integration through the regional economic communities (RECs) like the COMESA, ECOWAS and SADEC towards the higher level of the union. Moreover, another alternative, more likely alternative C, is cognisant of the fact that gradual transformation is more acceptable but argues that the establishment of the union should be through the existing system of the AU because it has ‘enough’ Acts and procedures to do so.

According to Dr. Tajudeen Abdul- Raheem, General Secretary of the Global Pan African Movement, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is leading the first bloc through his project of the USA since 1999. Whereas the second bloc has no recognized leaders but government officials (ministers and ambassadors) of different nations are working on it. Our PM, Meles Zenawi and Thabo Mbeki of South Africa are proponents of the third alternative. In spite of all the fact that I’ve read and heard about this issue, I haven’t had any information about the ideas of ordinary African on this issue. I remember that, when the then OAU was transforming into the AU, the leaders were telling us that from that very moment the level of interaction and engagement which was restricted at heads of states and government officials’ level will be trickled down to people-to-people level. But what I am witnessing at this very moment is that, it is still our political leaders who are deciding on our lives without going through the rational process. As far as I’m concerned, our leaders are once again too busy of establishing another bureaucratic and cumbersome political system which wouldn’t belong to the real African people. They are still doing their best to take forward their corrupted and mismanaged economic system which is full of imperfect markets and inter-competition; and their political system whose basic character is understood in terms of lack of good governance and democracy, breach of human rights and being considered as ‘indigenous colonizer’. What would we come up with finally when these incompetent and imperfect states become united, ‘United Weak States of Africa (UWSA)’!? May be the UWSA will help us to differentiate the other USA from ours.

Finally I want to make two basic suggestions on the entire process. The basic thing is a rights issue. We African citizens have the right to be involved, consulted and be aware of each and every decision to be made on our fate. What would a Cameroonian, a Zambian or an Ethiopian, for that matter, would feel when s/he is told on one blessed morning that he/she is no more a citizen of Cameroon, Zambia or Ethiopia but Africa? We, African people, have the right to get meaningfully involved on every process that concerns us and we should claim our right in every appropriate manner and through all the legitimate channels.

Besides this, I personally argue that neither political nor economic integration is the sole means for the realisation of the union government. I would say, social integration is the most appropriate tool in our context. One may argue that both political and economic integrations are part of the social integration.

But I would once again argue that I’m afraid that they are considered in such a way since there are many non-political (I mean non-state politics) and non-economic activities that have created a greater bond among African people beyond any other means. Like for example, the civic and non-governmental associations and organizations, the trade unions, youth associations, women’s’ associations, the academic institutions (think tanks), traditional and religious institutions and the like should be given a much more emphasis and meaningful role to play in the process. It is in these groups and institutions that we can find real Africans at the grass root level. Just to mention, according to the African Youth Charter, young people are defined with in the age limit of 15 to 35, which is believed to constitute nearly half of the entire population of the continent. And it is this segment of the society on which all the social, economic, political and whatsoever kinds of positive and negative realities of the continent are manifested.

Therefore, on what kind of rational ground that we would accept the decisions of our political leaders to establish the continental government; without incorporating these peoples’ idea. We should first enjoy the real brotherhood and sisterhood in our respective areas, through our cultures, arts and societal values among ourselves in the spirit of being African, which will be a cornerstone for the realization of our dream. It is people-to-people interaction and integration that should be given the greater value in this process, more than the periodic conferencing of the political leaders.

Let me be, humbly, sure that the process of establishing the union government is for the mere benefit of each and every citizen of the continent. Then, why do our leaders fail to materialise the basic feature of ‘democratic governance’, i.e. participation. The AU will be having its heads of states meeting coming July in Accra, Ghana where they will be discussing about one and only one agenda – the African Union Government/ the United States of Africa. But the significant part of this continent’s citizen are not aware of the process let alone forwarding ideas and failed to be heard.

Finally this is the concern of one young African that, our leaders should have a moment to set-back and to revisit their steps and we Africans should demand our rights to decide on our fate by ourselves, of course legitimately, for the realisation of our dream.

* Eyob Balcha, a youth activist in Ethiopia, is currently a graduate student of sociology at the Addis Ababa University. His is also the founding member of Afroflag Youth Vision (AYV), a local civic youth organisation and the programme manager of the organisation.

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

ACORD is in process of streamlining and focusing her interventions to the four thematic areas of livelihoods, HIV/AIDS, gender and conflict. ACORD is implementing a Pan African advocacy programme on food sovereignty and overall thematic strategies. Similarly ACORD's country and regional strategies are being thematically aligned. In this context the volunteer will contribute towards aligning grants with ACORD's strategic objectives.

The Programme Specialist is responsible for: Supporting implementation of projects in the Rule of Law and Security (ROLS) Programme area; Ensuring high quality monitoring and evaluation, reporting and oversight/quality control for the ROLS programme area; Coordinating the monitoring of progress on Country Programme outcomes and outputs; Liaising and strengthening partnerships with other UN agencies, government officials, technical advisors and experts, multi-lateral and bi-lateral donors and Somali civil society; Providing policy and programmatic advice and facilitating knowledge management. Closing Date: 27 June 2007

This course, intended for people concerned with social change in Africa, aims to build capacity for advancing rights within development and activist organizations. It will assist researchers, advocates, trainers and programme officers from civil society and state institutions to develop practical approaches to using rights advocacy and development programmes. The application is due by 6 July 2007.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/blogs_01_kush.gif An uplifting short piece from the Sudan. Kush reports on a huge animal migration (to rival that of Serengeti) in Southern Sudan:

'Many people have thought that twenty years of war may have devastated the vast animal resource in South Sudan. But lo, and behold: they have survived! See the pictures for yourself.'

Looks like elephants, ostriches, and possibly wilder beasts running free on the plains.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/blogs_02_johnakec.gifJohnAkecSouthSudan comments on a recent statement by the new Sudanese ambassador to the US whose response to US sanctions was to threaten to block the export of 'gum arabic' used in the production of coca-cola...

'...asserted that there is no genocide in Darfur, and called Darfur’s armed groups 'terrorists'. He then issued a thin veiled threat that his country could retaliate by blocking the exports of Gum Arabic to the US. Gum Arabic, the Ambassador declared, is indispensable ingredient of Coca-Cola. Washington Post’s Dana Milbank coined the term "Khartoum Karl" to describe the ambassador.'

The surprise is not that Sudan should respond in this way but that the ambassador who is from the South should so easily and willingly parrot the words of the Khartoum regime.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/blogs_03_waridaad.gifVoice of Somaliland Diaspora-Ottawa writes on the new Scramble for African oil and the strategic preparations of the US which will become increasingly dependent on African oil.

'The Pentagon is to reorganise its military command structure in response to growing fears that the United States is seriously ill-equipped to fight the war against terrorism in Africa. It is a dramatic move, and an admission that the US must reshape its whole military policy if it is to maintain control of Africa for the duration of what Donald Rumsfeld has called "the long war". Suddenly the world's most neglected continent is assuming an increasing global importance as the international oil industry begins to exploit more and more of the west coast of Africa's abundant reserves.'

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/blogs_04_civilexp.gifNo Longer at Ease reports on Ethiopian brutality in the Ogaden region of Western Somalia. Abdulrahman also provides a brief background to the conflict which is one of those that receives little coverage in the press.

'In recent years Ethiopian troops increased their brutality of jailing, torturing and killing young Ogaden men suspected of being ONLF members. Their families have also been punished as well but worst of all is the rape of the rape of women by Ethiopian soldiers...In village after village, people said they had been brutalized by government troops. They described a widespread and longstanding reign of terror, with Ethiopian soldiers gang-raping women, burning down huts and killing civilians at will. It is the same military that the American government helps train and equip — and provides with prized intelligence.'

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/blogs_05_ethio.gifEthiopundit comments an article by Christopher Hitchens on the fall of ex-head of the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz.

'He begins a customary flurry of blows to the heads and necks of assorted pundits (sadly, not all are as committed to truth and justice as we are) whose "eagerness for prurience, the readiness for slander, and the utter want of fact-checking" would have us believe that Paul Wolfowitz and Shaha Riza were financing some sort of "shameless lasciviousness out of the public purse and the begging bowls of the wretched of the earth.'

Hitchens states that it is hardly Riza's fault (no relation to THE RZA mind you) that she was working at a senior position at the World Bank when Wolfowitz, with whom she had a private adult consenting relationship, was appointed to head up the whole thing ALL THE WAY BACK in 2005. He told the Bank up front and the 'ethics committee' at the Bank decided she had to leave. The committtee suggested that any disruption to her career could be made up with a salary increase at her new job.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/blogs_06_filweha.gifFilwehapundit on ceremonial coffee drinking in the Semein Mountains in Ethiopia (a World Heritage site and National Park) which apparently is being discouraged in some local area by priests.

'Sometimes this country is as much amazing to me as it is to a foreigner. The Church banning coffee is unheard of- so far as I know. I do not really know how it works in remote rural places. As far as I know and as it is written elsewhere in the report, coffee-drinking is a ceremonial culture of the society. I guess this should be a local thing.'

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/blogs_07_bl.gif

Become an essential part of a growing, dynamic organization. ACTION for Conflict Transformation (ACTION) is a global network of grassroots peace builders with a Support Centre in Johannesburg, South Africa. Closing date for applications: 26th of June 2007. Interview will be held on the 1st week of July.

I shall start with Annwen's contribution (which, by the way could also go to Tutu's successor's comments on the G8).

Thank you for all of these contributions they have encouraged and inspired me to write a few things which, I hope, can to this sort of live parliament of the people. It could also be a Shir or a Mbongi or a baraza or a plaver. In a sense, as we keep trying to say affirm who we are, one of our difficulties is that, now and then we keep (often unconsciously) borrowing from the very definitions which have come about through the very processes we are denouncing and condemning. Africa's 'discovery'/'definitions/anthropologisation/' of Africa has created, over time, a multiple battle front.

For the sake of simplicity, let us keep it at two: one against the enemy from outside and the other against the enemy from within. The 'discoverers' have kept destroying from without and from within. Their logic is quite coherent: destruction is only destruction if it is carried out by the Africans. Discovery is only discovery is it is done by the inaugural 'discoverers'. And with this kind of mindset other things are pushed through, such as the Enlightenment which, in terms of Africa, should be refered to as the darkest period of humanity (see Louis Sala-Molins' Les misères des Lumières, among others).

Nothingness shall only become something through the charitable works of reconstruction (Here we should revisit the US historical period referred to as The Reconstruction and see what it meant for the black population following the so-called abolition in 1865, itself the launching pad for the Prison Industrial Complex - see Angela Davies' Are Prisons Obsolete?

Charity and solidarity Out of capitalist destruction/reconstruction/destruction/reconstruction huge profits have been made and continue to be made. Tax laws allow charitable giving which are tax deductible and so, the richest foundations can be found in the countries which have been pushing suicidal, genocidal capitalism to its current limits of globalized destruction/discovery.

In Africa one of the most revered values is solidarity. There is a huge difference between solidarity and charity. Thanks to exchanges with Prof. Ernest Wamba dia Wamba, here are some of them: charity means, by definition submission and silence, contrary to solidarity which means, by definition equality and togertheness. Charity as an outcome of massive accumulation of wealth cannot but reproduce poverty.

One of the reasons why the G8 and their associates can only talk about poverty and its elimination and not do anything about its elimination comes from this every contradiction: the system in place has made them collectively rich, and any attempt to 'fix' it to help the poor would/could spell disaster for their own future. That is how they see it, but just like the whites under apartheid could not help but think as whites and not as blacks, they used their own logic to block the end of a system which was emprisoning them as well.

The mindset which has been built around charity has been devastating for those who have always adhered to the principles of solidarity.

Solidarity history versus the laundering of African history. This brings me to the piece by Wazir which I liked very much, but then, Wazir, I have to ask (I am assuming you are sitting in front of me) why did you leave Haiti out, with regard to the process of healing toward togertheness of all of the Wretched of the Earth. Cuba (which you mention) did in the 20th century what the Africans in Saint Domingue did in the 19th century. For the accumulators of dictatorial wealth, such trespassing ( i.e. doing the improbable, the impossible, the forbidden) must always be punished severely, individually and collectively. I am sure you noticed the pomp which surrounded the 2007 bi-centenary of abolition of the slave trade in London in March. That kind of celebration was principally aimed at showing off the high moral ground of the accumulators after they have consolidated and laundered their gains into an unassailable financial and economic system.

By now they have consolidated the mindset of this anonymous financial and economic system where no one and everybody is responsible, so to speak. This unassaiblable system has spawned ancillory structures like a so-called justice system which is deemed superior to anything which could be the alternative.

Thank you Robtel for your piece. I would add this. It is true that Gachacha originated in the world where solidarity dominated, but the resort by a state structure to Gachacha contains dangers and problems which should not be minimize. I also agree that TRC's are fundamentally flawed and should be replaced by processes which borrow from the spirit of healing solidarity so well described in Ayi Kwei Armah's novel Healers.

Thank you for your patience.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/309/Africa-Vol2_42075.jpgThree new books, African Literature: An Anthology of Theory and Criticism, edited by Tejumola Olanyiyan and Ato Quayson (Blackwell Publishing 2007); and The Study of Africa. Vols 1 & 2 edited by Paul Tiyambe Zeleza (CODESRIA 2006/7) are being launched on Thursday 21 June at 7.30pm at Barabara's Bookstore, 1218 South Halsted Street (lower floor of Thomas Beckham Hall), University of Illinois at Chicago.

African Literature: An Anthology of Criticism and Theory represents 'a gathering of the best critical work on African literature and larger questions of literary history, the sociology of literature, criticism and theory', according to Simon Gikandi, professor of English at Princeton University. It brings together previously published essays from Alain Ricard, Bernth Lindfors, V. Y. Mundimbe, Abiola Irele, Chinua Achebe, Nadine Gordimer, Naguib Mafouz, Ngugi wa Thing'o, Breyten Bretenbach, Nawal El Saadawi and Zoe Wicomb. See for details.

The Study of Africa is a two-volume work which takes stock of the study of Africa in the 21st century: its status, research agenda and approaches, and place. Volume one covers the academic disciplines, African studies and interdisciplinary studies. Volume two addresses globalisation, African studies and regional contexts. According to Bethwell Ogot, Chancellor of Moi University and Professor Emeritus of History, the publication 'provides the most comprehensive and critical analysis of African studies in the world today. Globally the book reveals a fundamental, though depressing, fact that the terms of global intellectual exchange are unequal. There is therefore a need to construct an African "library", a body of knowledge that can fully encompass, engage and examine African phenomena. And it is the responsibility of African scholars, both in the continent and in diaspora, to spearhead this struggle for intellectual decolonization and deconstruction'. For details, see http://www.codesria.org/Links/Publications/new_publications.htm.

The launch is being sponsored by the Department of African American Studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago. For further details, please contact the department through www.uic.edu/las/afam/aasthome.html or Paul Zeleza, email [email][email protected].

Nine years ago, Santonino Otok fled his home in the green fields of northern Uganda for a refugee camp, fearing attack by marauding rebels. Now he is back under his old mango tree. "My parents are buried here and my parents' parents, so it's a blessing to return," said a beaming Otok (66), surveying the birthplace he thought he might never see again.

The Zimbabwe government's plan to change the Constitution ahead of 2008 elections undermines efforts to broker an end to political turmoil in the African nation, the country's main opposition leader has said. President Robert Mugabe's government has proposed a Bill that would pave the way for joint presidential and parliamentary polls next year and amend the rules for electing a new president should the post become vacant before an election.

Delegates from 20 African countries began talks in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) on Tuesday on the process of disarming and reintegrating former combatants to boost peace and development on the violence-wracked continent.

Zimbabwean police on Monday arrested dozens of women as they staged a demonstration in south-western Zimbabwe, a statement said. The women, all members of Women of Zimbabwe Arise (Woza) had "tried to gather to hold a march in a small administrative centre in Insiza district but were arrested", the group said.

The chairman of the opposition Popular Front political party, Ch'bih Ould Cheikh Malainnie, has withdrawn complaints of defamation he filed against three journalists from privately-owned Nouakchott-based newspapers. The journalists, managing editor of the daily newspaper "L'Authentique", Oumar Moctar, managing editor of the daily "Al Vejr", Tah Ould Ahmed, and managing editor of the daily "Al Alem", Mohamed Mahmoud Ould Bakar, were on 28 May interrogated by police for about one and a half hours, following a complaint against them made by Malainnie.

This call invites applicants from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Zimbabwe to participate in a programme of skills training and national advocacy on trade and health. It involves a workshop on Policy Advocacy for health and trade being held on August 31-September 1 2007 in Tanzania, and a mentored follow up programme of research, advocacy and report back on specific trade and health issues at country level. The call closes On July 3, 2007.

This report by the International Crisis Group addresses the human, political and economic price of the impasse. For the peoples concerned the costs have been varying degrees of displacement, exile, isolation, poverty and denial of political freedom; for the countries, there have been, variously, financial and diplomatic costs, slower national development, and border security tensions.

Poverty, inadequate investment in healthcare services, lack of knowledge about maternal health and pregnancy-related emergencies are some of the limitations aggravating the problem of obstetric fistula in Tanzania, according to a new report. Obstetric fistula is a hole that forms between the bladder and vagina or between the rectum and vagina during prolonged and obstructed childbirth.

The residents of Umkhanyakude, a poor rural district in northeastern South Africa, say they have been producing less food over the past few decades because the rains have become more erratic. Unable to grow enough food, many have been forced to seek work away from home for long periods of time. HIV then rose, said development agency Oxfam Australia, which has been working with the community since 2005, and has tried to help the people of Umkhanyakude understand the link between their altered lifestyle and climate change.

If the "human cost" of climate change is calculated, countries will be forced to sit up and take notice, according to a former senior United Nations official. "Most people are unable to relate to the projections of increase in temperature or the impact of climate change on the economy, but if the climate change forecasts are linked to possible deaths, then countries will be forced to contemplate prevention plans," said Yvette Stevens, the former UN Assistant Emergency Relief Coordinator.