The African Union (AU) 33rd extra-ordinary summit just took place between the 21st of January and 10th of February 2020 at the AU headquarters in Ethiopia, Addis-Ababa. The 55 blocs represented by Heads of States, invited guests and special representatives convened to deliberate on one of the most pressing challenges bedeviling the African continent – the proliferation of guns. Under the theme “Silencing Guns: Creating Conducive Conditions for Africa’s development”. The summit also discussed a number of issues pertaining to Africa’s predicaments, but the thrust of the convening resonated around aspects of Africa’s security. The new AU Chair, H.E Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa re-iterated the need to convene two other important meetings before the second half of the year begins to discuss primarily the issues of conflicts in Africa and on free trade.
The history of insecurity and violent conflicts is not new in Africa. Despite this recognition, security efforts aimed by the continental body to address the vice has always fallen short of expectations. This concern is re-echoed by Senegalese President, Mackay Sall who pointed out that the “continent is worried about the consequences” including what is happening in Libya. Perhaps, this degree of worry is reflected in the voice of the new AU Chair when he says, “we will focus our efforts on conflicts across the continent, especially those experiencing protracted conflict”. Yoweri Museveni; the Ugandan President is reported during the conference to have felt “embarrassed” at how the situation in Libya unfolded and decried the failure of the African leaders to respond and intervene on behalf of their continental ally, Libya.
The African Union was formed against the backdrop of achieving continental unity amidst historical phase of decolonization and the need to revert future recolonization of the African continent. It was also aimed to help other countries that had not yet attained decolonization to do so. The need to strengthen the unity and the security architecture of the new African countries were one of the most predominant ideas in the minds of the new independent leaders such as Kwame Nkrumah. However, before explaining the historical development of the AU, the challenges that it faces and what might need to be done, I would like to delve a little briefly on the situation regarding this year’s theme.
The theme on silencing guns adopted by the continental body is one that has been marked by doubt and degree of pessimism by many AU political commentators and analysts. The scarce optimism about the year’s theme is reflective of Africa’s discontent on what is perceived to be lack of political commitments to address the root causes of conflicts. African countries are riddled by all sorts of security challenges. Particularly, violent conflicts that challenges the internal security status and power structures of African nation states as well as security that extends to the society – the societal security.
Diseases, famine, terrorism, transnational drug trafficking and money laundering, violent extremism, poverty, ignorance, backwardness are some of the most pressing challenges of the continent. Yet, the continental leaders seem to be only concerned about the security of their nation states as far as political power is concerned. Subsequently, discussions around conflicts are relegated and narrowed down to the urgency to contain, thwart and crush threats to their own political and stability of the power they hold as well as its survival without delving into the intricacies of what causes violence or re-surgence of violent conflicts including what needs to be done about it.
The inherent lack of democratic values, freedom of expression and assembly, lack of transparency and accountability as well as corruption, bribery, election rigging, arrests, disappearance of citizens and stifling views critical of the regimes in power remain everyday experiences of the African citizens. This is not to downplay efforts that have been advanced to promote freedoms and other important aspects of human rights. It is also aimed to stress that such discontents arising from the feeling of political marginalization, discrimination, neglect and persecution may at some time be precipitated when political demagogues take advantage of such through rhetorical speeches and dramatization to cause or lead to resurgence of violence.
Its not surprising therefore, to see continental heads decrying security challenges bedeviling the continent. The AU is likely to continue facing numerous challenges if its not quickly reformed. The leaders of the AU have been criticized as power hungry, self-aggrandizing actors. These leaders are alleged not to care about the human security needs of their people. The AU is handicapped due to lack of resources with over 50 percent of its budget funded by the European Union (EU), China and other donors. The continental leaders’ membership contributions to the AU fund is quite minimal or even lacking to the extent that, the financial pool, cannot meaningfully support a budget not only to undertake any serious security intervention anywhere in the continent but also pay salaries of the Panel of the Wise consistently.
Furthermore, the security integration of bodies such as SADC, ECOWAS and EAC are at different levels of development and sometimes, security cooperation is hindered. Amidst all of these challenges, the AU leaders really have a lot to contend with. It’s also possible to assume that sometimes, the AU leadership do not reflect on the historical development of the continental body and learn from it. I would therefore like to present such historical trajectory including the evolution – from the Organization of the African Unity (OAU) to the African Union (AU) to show that, while the efforts of the current AU leadership may be applauded to some extent, for instance on the degree of institutionalization, the failure to reach a common consensus, the bickering, the rhetorical characters of the leaders isn’t something new – and which started with the founding leaders, but one in which if not carefully addressed, is likely to continue to affect future AU leadership.
It is important to note that the history of post-colonial African states shortly after independence was greatly geared towards preservation of independence, maintaining the territorial integrity of the states, its equality and sovereignty. This Westphalian state conception and interpretation hindered possibilities for security cooperation in Africa. Whereas, shortly after the independence of Ghana and in 1958 All Africa conference, there were calls for the need for greater African security to preserve the independence but also support the decolonization process of many other African states that had not yet attained independence, many newly independent states didn’t see this as immediate issue for discussion at that time.
Kwame Nkrumah had articulated the need for an African High Command and this call was re-echoed in the 1958 All Africa Conference and subsequent pan African meetings. This was however neglected. The call to have a common African high command was opposed by several leaders of newly independent African states. Those termed as the ‘Casablanca group’ verses the ‘Monrovia group’. The latter believed in a process of gradual incrementalism in achieving continental unity and did not support Nkrumah’s call for total unification.
Post-cold war period saw many African states grappling with civil wars, coups and human security threats and therefore there was urgent need to address the continent’s problem from a different perspective. The need for cooperation to address common challenges facing the African states were birthed in the formation of the Organization of the African Unity (OAU). The OAU formed in 1963 established a far less authoritative security arrangement than that which was articulated by Nkrumah – the Defense Commission. The OAU methods of operation ensured non-interference in the domestic affairs of the States while upholding its principle of equality and sovereignty. As many States were grappling with serious security challenges, others were watching.
The nature of the security threats the African States were facing in the post-cold war period necessitated a new vision for an African continental body necessary to redefine the continent’s future. Through the fourth and fifth extraordinary summit of the OAU in Sirte Libya in 1999, the OAU was transformed to the African Union and subsequently in 2002, the African Union was created. The body begun to create institutional frameworks and models for greater security cooperation and to tackle the various security threats that had bedeviled the continent.
At this stage, it’s important to remind ourselves about the concept of security community. The transformation of the OAU to the AU and from non-interference to non-indifference is what Adler and Barnet argued – are precipitating conditions necessary for security cooperation which is often manifested by the degree of institutionalized frameworks among the states. So, within the context of the AU, we see the evolution of security communities.
The African Union subsequently, created institutional framework for greater security cooperation through the African Union Peace and Security Architecture. The AU Peace and Security Council, the African Standby Force, the Panel of the Wise, the Continental Early Warning System and a special fund was created. Again, this institutional arrangement in a way, speaks volumes to the vision that Nkrumah had articulated before. The African Union Peace and Security architecture was decentralized through the Regional Economic Communities (RECS).
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), East African Community (EAC), The Southern Africa Development Cooperation (SADC), The Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and others were created to support the African Union Peace and Security Council in preservation of the continental security and peace. The RECs support the AU peace and security council and may be called to intervene in affairs including domestic affairs of any regional member. The ECOWAS mechanism has been key in ensuring peace and democracy in countries like Liberia, Sierra Leone, Gambia and Ghana among others and joint military interventions have been conducted in areas such as Somalia, Darfur and Ethiopia to mention but a few of them.
Therefore, for the AU to remain relevant, it needs to rethink and refocus on many important areas that affects its growth and development. They need to work hard around mobilization of resources to sustain its work. The leaders need to improve on their membership contributions to increase on their funding base and reform process should be stepped up. The AU needs to address their own internal democratic flaws and promote democratic values. The body should address in addition to the traditional based conception of security but also the human security needs of its people. The need for great security cooperation is possible but to be able to sustain the many security aspiration of the continent, the body must not only democratize but industrialize. They should strengthen economic growth of their polities, empower local industrialists and promote trade amongst themselves and reduce on capital flight.
Moses Owiny
Co-Founder and Chief Executive,
Centre for Multilateral Affairs
@mosesowiny
