AU denying presidency to Sudan: Is it a case of succumbing to pressures?

he decision of the African Union (AU) to turn down Sudan’s bid for the presidency for the second consecutive year because of the crisis in its strife-torn Darfur region is a magnanimous stand by the continental government but it whiffs of pressures from outside Africa. Both Jendayi Frazer, US’s secretary for African affairs and UN Secretary General’s visits coinciding with the AU summit leave awkward feelings towards the root causes of the decision.

The move by the AU though deserving merit does cast a dark shadow in regards to African leaders’ commitment to rein in their own. Often the AU would opt to not intervene or criticize conflicts, abuse of human rights and corruption as internal affairs of its member states. The AU still lacks the political will to address grievances within the continent and allows through its silence carnage and heartache among fellow Africans. Not granting Sudan’s bid for the presidency can be looked at as a symbolic gesture unless the AU actually comes out and point fingers at the perpetuators of the massacres and pass resolutions to punish these groups.

Symbolic quick fixes cannot hold down the tide of grievances fellow Africans face every year. The AU has engineered mechanisms and initiatives that can deal with such situations but lack of political will continues to be a stumbling block towards achieving equality, justice and democracy in the continent.
One wonders what would take place whenever say, certain African nations that have fallen out of favor with the West bid for the presidency? Would we see the same resolve as we have seen in the case of Sudan? And is denying the presidency of the AU really going to change the crisis in Darfur? These are issues which African states need to brood over and come up with a comprehensive solution to the crisis. The African Union did attempt at curtailing the conflict by monitoring a battered cease-fire between the government of Sudan and rebel groups from Darfur. To date, they have been widely criticized for their lack of efficiency. But this is mostly due to the fact that they were sent under equipped, poorly funded and there was no clear mandate. The lessons from the darfur experience should be benchmarks where the AU needs to work better at.

We should not forget there are other crises as well as looming ones that require the attention of the continent’s governing body. Somalia,the issue of the Great Lakes, the Ethio-Eritrean conflict all demand attention. All of these crises have started long before we even heard about Darfur. They continue to wreak havoc and anxieties in parts of Africa. The pressures of refugees and internally displaced persons continue to cause tensions, humanitarian agencies have stretched the limit and thousands of children are dying from preventable diseases.

The AU is at a crossroads with attention focusing on Africa as well as the AU seeing its 4th anniversary in a month’s time. The AU should review its performance during these past four years and come out with a resolve to commit to the tasks it has promised to the African people. Preventing conflict must be the only options that the AU should take making sure that its member states abide by the various agreements they have signed at the AU and follow up on hot spots in the continent. The AU has the tools; what continues to be missing is the political will to see processes through.


February 2, 2007