Gibson Nyikadzino
IT is ridiculous to let the 57th commemoration of the African Union (AU/OAU) pass without putting significant thoughts about the day and try to see it in Africa's post-modern context. It has become tradition for African leaders on this day find excitement in posturing towards the pulpit of unity with esoteric Pan-African ideological inclinations that never translate to the betterment of perilous socio-economic challenges distressing the continent.
While it is crucial to talk of African unity, ironically, Africa Day is observed as a public holiday in only 12 out of 54 African countries: Ghana, Mali, Namibia, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Angola, Chad, Comoros, Equatorial Guinea, Lesotho, Liberia and Mauritania; when over thirty leaders gathered and midwifed the birth of the OAU in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. There is need to reflect!
When I was in grade three, a teacher at St. Francis in Chegutu, Mr. Buns, gave me a sweet at the assembly point after I provided an answer of the name of the organisation that preceded the AU, i.e. the Organisation of African Unity (OAU).
Mr. Buns spoke glowingly about Pan-Africanism. That was a moment of conviction, a moment that shook my conscience and triggered interest to go beyond the usual desire to know mere names of the Founding Fathers to understanding the philosophy behind the OAU/AU; Pan-Africanism.
Without doubt, Pan-Africanism today no longer has the meaning it carried four decades ago. It has become more of a misdirected idea whose objectives need to be revisited and concretised towards service delivery, accountability, transparency, respect for rule of law and good governance.
In 1996, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni, who has been in power since 1986 had a changing perspective about the then OAU: “It is a Club of Thieves,” he said.
Many years after my primary school days, echoes of African unity on Africa Day continue to be heard, alas, only as the fading sound of a horn blown by a watchman from above the tower.
Africa is an unfortunate continent whose fortunes remain linked to its former colonisers (or the G7 of Colonialism) of Italy, Spain, Germany, France, Britain, Belgium and Portugal. From the G7 of Colonialism, many African nationalists used various methods to attain independence. For some African colonies, armed struggle was the alternative, while to others elections and negotiations ended years of colonialism. In extreme cases, some administrations have been established through bloody coup and revolution.
In his book, Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon wrote: “We have seen that the objective of the nationalist parties from a period onward is geared strictly along national lines. They mobilise people with slogans of independence and anything else is left to the future. When these parties are questioned on their economic agenda for the nation they propose to establish, they prove incapable of giving an answer because in fact they do not have a clue about the economy of their own country.”
Contemporary governments have however failed to separate the framework of their modern governments to those that made a transition from colonialism to independence. Because Zimbabwe won its independence through the barrel of a gun, it is inexplicable for the current administration to listen to a voice from Botswana over human rights abuses because Botswana got its independence on a “silver platter.”
The dynamics are so complex that even the development challenges and the needs of Africans require more than what the leaders are doing. Inclination towards the mind of the coloniser remains visible amongst Africans who remain divided along Anglophone, Francophone and Lusophone lines.
In 2012 when South Africa’s Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma was challenging Gabon’s Jean Ping to head the AU Commission, then spokesperson to the late Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe, George Charamba, mentioned the despicable.
“At the election, Zimbabwe is going to vote for Dr. Dlamini-Zuma because we share a similar history. South Africa and Zimbabwe were both colonised by Britain,” said Charamba. To defend one position is to attack another. The Francophone-Anglophone divide remains elusive in comprehending what Africa’s unity entails.
As Dr. Dlamini-Zuma won the election, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) were fighting hard to neutralise rebels in eastern DRC, with the AU pledging to send peacekeepers there.
Since May 25, 1963, Africa has had more wars than those it has managed to solve. The DRC, Central African Republic, Cameroon, South Sudan and Libya are all examples that serve as a reminder that African unity is soon becoming a mirage.
Because of politics of patronage, since its inception, the bloc has not been caring enough to the concerns of the people who today continue to groan under the yoke of dictatorships, military governments, kleptocrats and the comprador bourgeoisie who act as middlemen of the erstwhile colonisers in economic exploitation.
While state's remain sovereign: Is it in the interest of a united Africa to see Equatorial-Guinea's President Teodoro Obiang Mbasogo appoint his son to become the country's vide-president? Is it the continent's satisfaction to see the young men and women wield AK47s to fight in wars they have no contribution to instead of attending school? Is it feasible for Africa's unity to be seen through leaders who endorse military governments that grab power through coups and kill people with impunity and shut democratic space?
Years before the 2011 demise of Libya’s Col. Muammar al Qhatafi, the issue of a United States of Africa (USA) was presented on many African fora, and it had rhetorical buy-in before dying a natural death. The continent’s development patterns are varied.
The issue of unity in Africa is mere rhetoric that is brought up for the convenience of the elite. Today the continent's leaders talk of Agenda 2063, an agenda with a time frame whose burden they will not bear because they will not live to see it.
Africa’s unity does not need geographical explanations to be effective, but needs (re)invented shared values, norms and beliefs. The pan-Africanist gospel is nothing but an idea that never works but refuses to die. In its current form, Pan-Africanism will not go beyond Ubuntuism. It needs an urgent revisit.
Without shared values, norms and beliefs, all slogans and change rhetoric become nothing but a common sight that Africa is united in error!
For feedback: gnyikadzino@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment