|
|
|
|
CIAO DATE: 04/05/07
Architects of Peace: The African Union and NEPAD
by James Busumtwi-Sam
The African Union (AU) was officially launched in 2002 to foster closer economic and political integration among African states and to promote peace, security, and development on the continent. An elaborate new institutional architecture has been created, including the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), to provide a framework within which AU members would work with the major aid donors to link peace and security with socioeconomic development via the promotion of “good” domestic governance. The AU replaces the Organization of African Unity (OAU) as the main continental organization in response to the perceived inadequacies of the latter. Yet what has really changed? Is the AU up to the challenges of achieving sustainable peace, security, and development in Africa? The call for “African solutions to African problems” does suggest a greater willingness on the part of African states to address problems of insecurity on the continent that should be supported. However, this goal can only be achieved through greater collaboration and coordination between the AU and sub-regional organizations in Africa, between these organizations and extra-regional actors including the UN, and through the formation of genuine partnerships between African countries and the major aid donors through NEPAD.
Neither the continent nor its conflicts are homogenous and therefore no single response is likely to be effective across a range of conflicts. Nevertheless, in general, insecurity and instability in Africa are rooted in problems of domestic governance and socioeconomic development. The main obstacles to the institutionalization of an effective peace and security architecture in Africa are political and normative. The key role for the AU lies not necessarily in overt interventions involving the deployment of forces but in articulating strong norms and developing a political framework legitimating responsible, representative, and responsive domestic governance in African states. “Good” governance and conflict prevention are two sides of the same coin. This is where NEPAD, with its focus on governance, plays a key role.
The argument is developed in three sections. The first provides historical context by briefly outlining historical patterns of insecurity and instability in Africa and the range of peace and security initiatives, the second examines the key challenges confronting the new AU-NEPAD institutional architecture, and the third assesses its ability to meet these challenges.
The Historical Context. Political instability and violence have been perennial features of the African postcolonial landscape, which has seen over thirty major armed conflicts since the early 1960s. Africa’s wars have assumed many forms and have been accompanied by egregious violations of human rights and humanitarian law. The 1990s began optimistically with the prospects for peace in Africa brightened by the end of the Cold War; the collapse of apartheid in South Africa; the return of minimal stability to Namibia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Uganda after decades of conflict; and a spate of democratic transitions in several other countries. The optimism was soon shattered by dramatic setbacks, including renewed fighting in Angola, the collapse of the state in Somalia, the Rwandan genocide of 1994, and the gruesome maiming and killings in Sierra Leone. Although the initiation of new wars declined after 1996, this period saw African conflicts evolve in hitherto unseen ways. The regional scope of conflicts expanded as neighboring states abandoned their reluctance to cross borders; a new political economy of war emerged where factions turned to trade in high-value commodities (diamonds, oil, and timber) to finance their war effort; and embattled governments and corporations increasingly hired private militias and private security forces.
James Busumtwi- Sam is associate professor of political science at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, Canada.