AU ineffective in asserting powers

• Union has poor record in living up to the mission of finding “African solutions to African problems”

The establishment of a United Nation’s office to deal with the African Union is viewed as the latest illustration of the latter’s failure to live up to the grandiose aims for which it was set up.

The appointment of veteran diplomat Zachary Muburi-Muita to head the UN mission was viewed positively in Nairobi, because Parliamentarians have in the past complained about Kenya’s fairly low representation in top levels of major multilateral organisations, despite its relatively large pool of professionals.

But analysts say the fact the UN is establishing an office dedicated to dealing with the AU is an indication of the African body’s poor record in living up to the mission of finding “African solutions to African problems”.

Major problems

The AU has been confronted by several major problems in the past decade and, on almost each occasion, it has been forced to turn to outside help.

A joint UN-AU force is currently deployed in Sudan, after the mission in the country’s Darfur region was handed over to the UN in January 2008.

UN forces are also present in the Democratic Republic of Congo, although President Joseph Kabila has been agitating for their exit for some time.

The one major exclusively African force deployed on the continent is the coalition of troops tackling the al Shabaab in Somalia.

But they have complained of being underfunded and poorly equipped. At the recent AU summit of heads of state in Kampala, African officials urged the international community for contributions to aid the mission in Somalia.

Few successes

There have been a few successes, such as the AU deployment in Burundi in 2003. Another was the mediation process in Kenya, which was carried out under the auspices of the AU.

But even in Kenya, there was heavy involvement by Western allies with strong interests in the country.

“The AU has a very straightforward problem,” says Macharia Munene, a professor of international relations at the United States International University.

“The organisation is unable to raise sufficient resources within the continent because member states do not remit enough money to the organisation. That creates a dependency syndrome, which in turn means its scope for autonomous action is very low.”

The founders of the organisation had far grander plans. The AU was established through a process that lasted between 1999 and 2002 as it became clear that its predecessor, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), was largely ineffective.

The OAU was formed at the height of the fight for independence on the continent. It placed the concept of sovereignty at the heart of its charter as the early African leaders sought to keep Western and Soviet imperialist intrusions at bay.

But as they consolidated their hold on power, sovereignty became an excuse to maintain tyranny at home.

Transnational problems such as the movement of refugees illustrated the inadequacy of the “sacrosanct sovereignty” concept and African leaders began to mull options for a replacement of the OAU charter.