Registered user login:

How a continent missed its moment

Michela Wrong

Published 03 July 2008

Mbeki's grand project has been sabotaged by his inability to view events on the continent outside a narrow racial prism

As the UN, EU, US and Britain all piled in to cajole or browbeat the African Union into Doing the Right Thing over Zimbabwe at the Red Sea resort of Sharm el Sheikh, I experienced a sudden déjà vu.

There was another occasion when commentators informed us that Africa's leaders had fin ally lost patience with Robert Mugabe and were about to rap him across the knuckles. That would be the August 2007 meeting of the Southern African Development Community - at which Mugabe's entrance triggered a standing ovation. Funny how we keep getting it wrong.

As this column was going to press, the AU had eventually decided to press for "a government of national unity". A call for dialogue between Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai's MDC is perfectly unobjectionable but Zanu-PF and the MDC have been negotiating for years without any noticeable dilution of Mugabe's powers, and the sheer viciousness of the election was an unlikely harbinger of trust and compromise.

The AU had, in any case, already missed its moment. The time for Mugabe's African brothers to speak forcefully was in March, when Tsvan girai won the first round of the election and officials sat on the results for five weeks. Their silence, urged on them by South Africa's president, Thabo Mbeki, encouraged Mugabe to wage a rearguard action. Zimbabweans paid a bloody price.

But what did the international community really expect of the AU? Any organisation that includes among its elder statesmen Egypt's Hosni Mubarak (27 years at the helm), Gabon's Omar Bongo (41 years) and Equatorial Guinea's Teodoro Obiang (a modest 29) will have problems lecturing members on the merits of democracy, as Mugabe himself pointed out. Exactly which recent elections could they have held up as models? Kenya's? Nigeria's? Ethiopia's?

Then there's the mindset. The Organisation of African Unity, dubbed "the dictators' club", was consigned to history back in 2002, its members' knee-jerk tendency to attribute their woes exclusively to colonialism, apartheid and Cold War interference supposedly buried with the title. Thanks to a generation of progressive "Renaissance" leaders, announced Mbeki, an invigorated institution would in future deliver "African solutions to African problems".

The continent would still need western financial and technical help, of course, but the world should no longer assume Africa was incapable of policing itself. A key ingredient would be the African Peer Review Mechanism, which catered for governments to be assessed frankly by their counterparts. Six years on, Uganda's Yoweri Museveni, Eritrea's Isaias Afewerki and Ethiopia's Meles Zenawi no longer look like enlightened Renaissance leaders. Or rather, theirs is the Renaissance of the Borgias and Machiavelli, not that of the Medicis and Galileo.

On the policing front, it is true that Nelson Mandela managed to negotiate a peace deal between rebels and the government in Burundi, and that an AU force successfully snuffed out a separatist movement in the Comoro Islands. But it took a British military operation to stop civil war in Sierra Leone and Somalia. AU forces have proved little more than token presences, short of equipment, manpower and political backing.

During Kenya's election crisis in December, what was striking was the ruling party's open contempt for Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Ghana's president, John Kufuor, two eminent Africans who flew in to mediate. It was only when the British and US governments told President Mwai Kibaki that travel bans had been drawn up and asset freezes were being prepared that it stepped back from the brink.

Zimbabwe tops the list of failures. The classic explanations for African leaders' long indulgence of Mugabe - respect for an elder and former liberation guerrilla, irritation at being lectured by the west, a preference for quiet diplomacy - lost most of their force in the dreadful run-up to the second poll. The facelift has slipped, leaving the AU today bearing a depressing resemblance to its predecessor.

Mbeki's grand project has been sabotaged by his inability to view events on the continent outside a narrow racial prism, and by his refusal, having publicly adopted a position, to be seen to backtrack.

As the South African president was the man who first championed the notion of "African solutions to African problems" with such passion, it is fitting he should now bear the blame for discrediting it in the eyes of the world.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

10 comments from readers

Aly-Khan Satchu
03 July 2008 at 10:25

Michela Wrong is right to be disappointed with recent developments but change is never a smooth and easy process. With respect to President Mbeki, it is evident that rather than seeing Mugabe through a 'narrow racial prism' , he is intimidated by President Mugabe and a pygmy when it comes to dealing with him.

It is worth noting that there are several African voices [Raila Odinga and Jacob Zuma are two of the most obvious] who are breaking with consensus and I would also mention this as a commendable development.

However, I remain of the view that Africa is set to undergo an unstoppable convergence with the Global Economy, an 'Industrial Revolution' that will be breathtaking in its speed and intensity. This Tsunami wave of development, will make it increasingly more difficult for the unreconstructed political class to exist.

Lets not give up! These are the last vestiges and they are expected to put up a fight but things are changing at an unprecedented speed.

Aly-Khan Satchu

www.rich.co.ke

fairplay
03 July 2008 at 13:13

africa is rich in mineral wealth. western governments have exploited this for decades along with their corporate cronies. a lot of african leaders are still puppets of the west. the mugabe situation in their eyes is short term and once the situation there becomes complete chaos and the people rise up the west will be ready to step in, invest, and take what they want as is usually the case.

there is still huge UK investment in zim. mugabe isnt stupid. he knows the zim elites tills will keep ringing while he has mineral wealth. it wont last forever but the corporates can wait. unfortunately, the average man on the street cannot.

Amanuel
03 July 2008 at 18:26

One should not expect anything positive come out of African Union- A dysfunctional, corrupt organization established only to protect and safeguard the wish of the narrow western interest. One indication on how despicable this organization is that, while condemning Mugabe over the election with a bit exageration, it failed to even mention the US/UK sponsored atrocities taking place in Somalia by the brutal Ethiopian junta. What a shame. How long are these corrpupt African leaders keep silent to the real issues Africa is faced with? Kenya and Ethiopia's leaders have stolen people's votes in recent election which resulted in blood shed of innocent lives. The AU was no where to be found let alone condemn the actions of these ruthless governments. The current Ethiopian regime has been engaging in a number of illegal activities, resulting in countless human sufferings. It invaded sovereign countries with the blessing and material support from US/UK. The double standard being exhibited by the dysfunctional African Union in tackling the problem(s) is mainly a reflection of its limited power in handling its own (African) affairs. It's just there as a symbol for a PR purpose. Any decision and or ressolution adopted by the AU is the work of other Non African powers with huge economic and political interest in Africa. Period.

Amanuel (Eritrean)

AbdlK
04 July 2008 at 03:16

All I can say to my compatriot, Amanuel, is that " clean your house before you try to clean some body's house." Talk about unelected, self serving, arrogant, inhumane,control-freak, murderous and dictatore Issayas Afwerki. forget Somalia or Ethiopia. I would rather have Meles Zenawi as Eritrean leader than Issayas, a once CIA and Mossad Mole. Ethiopia under Meles( an Eritrean through his mother) is much better than Eritrea under Issayas ( Ethiopian through both of his parents).

AbdulKereem

Amanuel
04 July 2008 at 04:34

Dear Abdulkereem, the topic on hand is whether or not African Union is doing what it's set out to do. I am only expressing what I truly feel about this organization on the basis of its past performances. So far as I see neither OAU nor AU has done anything substantial to alleviate the sociopolitical and economic problems of African people. The reason is simple: The ultimate objective (not written) of the organization, it seems, is to keep African states under western subjugation while allowing the corrupted leaders cashing in on their people's suffering. As for your allegation against the Eritrean leader, I would not wish to say much on his behalf except to say that you show me the evidence, not the daily allegation by western media, but a true evidence(i.e authentic pictures) of his "inhumane and murderous" acts for us to discuss futher. As for Meles, the whole world (except you) knows by now the crimes he has committed in gross violation of the international law. I refer you to a most recent report by Amnesty International of a murder, rape and torture of women and children in Somalia and Ogaden area. The sad thing is that it was happening with a full knowledge of US/UK governments. But, Abdulkadeer, if you wish to have him for your leader then be it. One word of advise though, don't blink an eye while around him for you'll never know what hit you.

Amanuel (Eritrean)

ikotubo
04 July 2008 at 09:28

My only surprise is that anyone seriously regards any African regime as a "government" in any sense. Forget the obvious dystopias - like Equatorial Guinea and Zimbabwe itself. Think of South Africa, for example - a one-party "democracy" in which the ruling ANC has turned grand corruption into a virtue and has consigned countless black people to a life of eternal misery; whose "intellectual" ruler still does not accept the scientific link between HIV and AIDS. Or take Nigeria - yes, that oil-rich "lion of Africa" which still has no pipe-borne water, electricity, roads or hospitals or basic infrastructure; whose collosal oil wealth is routinely stolen in a manner that would put any criminal gang to shame.

Are these really the sort of "governments" that were expected to condemn a mere brutal and kleptocratic misrule in Zimbabwe? Dream on!

Riaz Ahmad
05 July 2008 at 01:06

Michela Wrong's assertion that Mbeki cannot see anything outside the racial prism, what about Europe and America, are they capable of seing anything outside their prism of imperialist supremacy. Mugabe has always been an evil man, when he conducted a mass slaughter in Matabeliland, Europe and American showed complete disregard for human rights. As soon as Mugabe confiscated land from the white farmers, Europe America and Michela Wrong suddenly discovered their love for human rights by looking through the racial prism. Michela, are you blind to reality, in response to what Europe and America saw through their racial prism, Mbaki is doing no different, he is responding by looking through his racial prism. It is a classical case of the pot calling the kettle black.

danyandom
06 July 2008 at 16:08

One thing I am concerned is why so much attention on Mugabe? Africa is full of Mugabes. Look at my native country Eritrea once it was a bright star in Africa however, now we are it is just another country no better no worest than Zimbabwe. And Yes I would rather take Meles, Mengistu before I take Isayas.

ikotubo
06 July 2008 at 18:50

danyandom:

Great post! It's a question I've asked over and over again, especially on realizing that Western observers were expecting other African "leaders" to denounce a fellow kleptocratic tyrant in Zimbawe. And I believe Michela Wrong is making the same point too.

It seems that when it comes to Africa, most Western observers prefer to dispense with common sense. And this explains why their governments are so determined to support every tyrant and crook who calls himself an African "leader" with limitless aid - always in the knowledge that it never benefits the people. What chance have our longsuffering people got to escape economic misery, with such powerful forces lined up against them?

Liberdemocrat
09 July 2008 at 18:49

Michela,

You are right on as always. What I see missing from your article is the role of the U.S. and U.K. in fostering and encouraging African leaders who are blatant violators of international law and free and fair election norms such as Ethiopia's Meles Zenawi. His defiance of the rule of law in the Int'l Court's verdict on the border with Eritrea; his adventure in invading the sisterly nation of Somalia, and his brutal suppression of dissidents such as the Ogadenies, the Oromos, and the opposition parties is rewarded by an invitation to attend the G-8 meetings. How can the West expect good governance, respect for the rule of law, and free and fair elections in Africa with such example? Tyrants like Mugabe and Issaias are emboldend not by the actions of thier neighbors but by the deeds of the West.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Michela Wrong

Michela Wrong has spent 13 years reporting on the African continent and is the author of two non-fiction books, "In the Footsteps of Mr Kurtz," about the Congolese dictator Mobutu, and "I didn't do it for you", about the Red Sea nation of Eritrea.

Read More

Vote!

Does Hillary Clinton deserve to be secretary of state?