Kabirr
  Once again thanks for your interesting forwards. It may notice that it cross into my political thinking that devorce from such postings. Pan African is an utopian dream and I don't know whether with its socialist school of thoughs is the solution to our continent's predicament. I know with this world of globalisation small nation state are really marginalise in global economy with market force. Africa as a continent must be  unite as one country. I really respect the views of Tajudeen Abdul Raheem a great expert of Pan Africanist. I will defer with him on the socialist vision. I value liberal democracy with both right and left wing perspective but dragging us toward scientific socialism will remote the dream of continental unification. The only way forward to unite Africa is putting in place functional democracy, respect liberal values, human rights and rule of law, grass roots development etc. We have seen Pan Africanist leaders metamorphosis into dictators and when is
 the next Uhuru! You critical suggestion to the issue is welcome.
  Best Regards!
  Abdoukarim

Kabir Njaay <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
  Pan-African Postcard

UNION GOVERNMENT OF AFRICA: IT'S NOW OR NEVER
Tajudeen Abdul Raheem

July 1-3 African Heads of state and governments will be assembling in
Accra for the 9th ordinary session of the African Union. There is
only one item on the agenda: the formation of a government for union
of Africa, writes Tajudeen Abdul Raheem.


The official title says this is a Grand Debate on a United States of
Africa. This is unfortunate because even those of us enthusiastic
about the unity of Africa would wish that the leaders are a bit more
creative than just wanting to create another USA. Given what one USA
is doing to the world and its previous record it would be a
disservice to humanity to want to inflict another USA on the world.

Our values is certainly made of better ethics and love for humanity
and affirmation of life with dignity than to be copying the United
state of America whose unity is based on genocide against indigenous
Indians, slavery of people of African origin and continuing plunder
of the rest of the world.

The agenda has pitched leaders against leaders and different sectors
of our informed and ill- informed publics against one another. But
basically there are two broad positions neither of which disagrees
about the need for Africa to unite. So if there is no disagreement
about the goal what is the debate about?

Calling it a Grand Debate about USA is a misnomer and misleading
characterization that has diverted people's attention from the
proposal on the table and invited acrimonious 'debates' about form
instead of content.

So delegitimised are many governments on this continent, in spite of
the fact that an overwhelming majority are now 'elected' that when
Africans hear United States of Africa or an African Union government
they run. They instinctively think that what is being said is a
transferring of the tyrannical, insensitive anti-people state and
government that many of us have experienced and in some cases
continue to suffer, even in the guise of democracy, to a continental
level. What a disaster that would be! However it is a baseless fear.

Even if the leaders all voted for a Union government in Accra it does
not mean that it will be formed immediately and all these states as
we know them will disappear and many of the presidents may return as
ministers or district commissioners or be consigned to the dust bin
where they belong. Were this possible I am not sure many Africans
will mourn their passing since quite a number of them already
willingly act as agents of imperialism and shop keepers for foreign
interests against their peoples anyway!

From the inception of Pan Africanism by Africans in the Diaspora in
the latter years of the 19 th century but gaining more prominence and
political legitimacy in the first half of the 20th century through
the first five Pan African Congresses (1900 -1945, all held outside
Africa) and subsequently brought home to Africa (through the All
African people's conferences of 1958, and much later the 6th and 7th
Pan African Congresses held in Africa in Dar 1974 and 1994, Kampala)
the destination has always been total unification of Africa under a
common government, common citizenship, a common market, from Cape
town to Cairo and full participation for Africans in the Diaspora.

This ambition inspired the anti colonial movement in Africa and got
expression in the formation of the OAU. Even though the OAU
compromise was to respect the colonially imposed borders they were
not meant to be permanent detention centers or garrisons on our way
to total liberation and unification. But this is what they became
under the multiple pressures of neocolonialism, cold war
authoritarianism, militarism and opportunistic elites. The formation
of the AU was meant to correct some of the weaknesses of the OAU
especially in the areas of state sovereignty that operated as
'sovereignty of dictators that induced official indifference to the
suffering of other Africans including Genocide; collective security
instead of regime security; people-driven or at least people friendly
union instead of a leader-centric OAU; and finally coordination of
African responses to global developments and building of African
consensus instead of allowing ourselves to be picked up individually
to the slaughter house.

But after five years of the AU we have made progress in some areas
but ARE STILL STRUGGLING IN MANY AREAS AND THE FULL POSITIVE AND
DEMOCRATIC IMPACT OF THE UNUION are still not being felt.

The Grand Debate is therefore about what more needs to be done to
accelerate the process of unity which we have all agreed on. It is
not a debate about the desirability of a Union government because by
signing up to the ideals of Pan Africanism, the OAU and AU all our
states already agreed to that goal.

The reason why the Au may not have performed to the highest
expectation has to do with the lack of political authority,
enforcement powers and adequate resources to discharge its
responsibility. IF unity is our goal therefore the leaders have to
decide on a few key areas. One, the Study group on Union government
for Africa identified 16 strategic areas (including aspects of
foreign policy, defense, security, finance, global negotiations, etc)
in which the leaders have to agree to cede some powers to the Au to
effectively act in our collective interest. There is no point in us
having a Union while many states still deal with the world
individually. It undermines the AU and undermines the states
themselves. Two, for too long the Au has talked about rationalizing
regional economic communities but they keep proliferating even if
most of them are struggling. Yet they are supposed to be '; the
building blocks' of the AU. How many blocs do we need for the
foundation? In Banjul they put a moratorium on forming new ones but
the existing or limping ones are still too many. The suggestion is to
cut them down to the five regions recognized by the AU charter (the
Diaspora is Sixth region but has not regional Economic Community).
Africa of five main blocks will be better coordinated. Three, many
decisions are made at the Au level but there is no proper mechanism
for implementation at the local and national level and do not even
have enforcement capacities. If there is agreement on the 16 priority
areas then the confusion at the national level; can be eliminated and
AU decisions become mandatory. Four, the big issue of funding, the
overall budget of the AU is not more than 1 billion Dollars annual.
It is an insult that 53 states in a continent so rich in human and
material resources cannot raise this money and more. Just imagine if
JUST 5% of all our national budgets automatically go into the Union
budget. That can only come with political authority being given to
the union through an accountable government.

Which leads me to my final point about the cynicism of many Africans
about the political will and commitment of Africa's current leaders.
A genuine worry but these leaders are produced from amongst us
therefore we can and should change them where necessary . In addition
we need to make sure that the potentially democratic and democratic
institutions of the AU like the ECOSOCC and the Pan African
Parliament have real power to over see the work of the executive. It
means actively taking part in the ECOSOCC at your national level AND
ALSO CAMPAIGNING FOR the Pap to be elected on a universal African
suffrage and the parliament to have full legislative powers. That way
we will become active African citizens instead of the vocal or
passive cynics that many are turning to.

* Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is the deputy director of the UN Millennium
Campaign in Africa, based in Nairobi, Kenya. He writes this article
in his personal capacity as a concerned pan-Africanist.

* Please send comments to [log in to unmask] or comment online at
http://www.pambazuka.org

/\/\//\/\/\//\/\/\//\/\/\//\/\/\//\/\/\//\/\/\//\/\/\//\/\/\//\

KILLING OF JOHN GARANG: WHO DID IT?
Tajudeen Abdul Raheem

"When my husband died, I did not come out openly and say he was
killed because I knew the consequences. At the back of my mind, I
knew my husband had been assassinated"

Those were the chilling words of Mrs. Rebecca Garang, the widow of
the late Liberation fighter, Dr (Col) John Garang de Mabior, leader
of the SPLA/M who was killed on July 30 2005 in a helicopter crash on
the borders of Uganda, Kenya and Sudan. The helicopter he was
traveling in belonged to President Yoweri Museveni, Dr Garang's
closest ally and comrade.

I was one of many people who refused to accept the immediate
conclusion then that it was an accident. Not because we missed Garang
too much and found it impossible to let go which we did but because
the explanation was too obvious.

If anyone wanted to kill Garang (and there were many forces) there
was no better cover for an almost perfect crime than for him to be
traveling unofficially in the helicopter of his closest ally. Since
Khartoum did not officially know that he was leaving the capital
anyone of the many vested interests who felt threatened by Garang's
messianic entry into Khartoum early in July that trip provided your
best opportunity.

Mrs. Garang has now thrown open widely what many had been suspecting.
All the inquiries so far have 'concluded' that it is pilot error, bad
weather, and other technical conclusions but the dearth was political.

So who could have done it?

My first suspect was and remains the extremist wing of the government
and Northern hegemonists in the security and intelligence of the
country. Their heart must have shook and their desperation further
heightened by the tumultuous welcome from all Sudanese commitment to
creating a New Sudan when he arrived in Khartoum to be sworn in July
9 2005. They must have seen their world collapsing before their eyes.
A Black prophet arising from the South must seem like end of the
world for them. Garang was not the first Black Sudanese to have been
made Vice President. Khartoum has had a succession of Black poodles
willing to be tools of misrule against their people and the whole of
Sudan. But in John Garang, a formidable personality who had
distinguished himself both militarily and politically the hegemonists
shook at what would happen to their rule were Garang to have the
opportunity to reshape the country because Garang could be no one's
errand boy. For Sudanese democrats he was a bridge of hope with the
potential of turning the country into a genuinely democratic
environment where Sudanese might, in the Martin Luther King hope , '
be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their
character ' . The enemies of hope had to act and act quickly before
goodness broke out in a country that has been in conflict for most of
its post independence (1956) existence.

Khartoum is not the only suspect in Garang's death. Chief amongst
other suspects could be extremist wing of Southern Nationalists whose
agenda was to secede from Sudan and may have great fears that Dr
John's commitment to creating a New Sudan uniting the North and the
South was a betrayal. Plausible but not probable. They needed Garang
and backed him in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) which gave
them the option of full independence by referendum in the course of
the 6 year term of the agreement.

Mrs. Garang is herself a believer in Southern Sudan Independence, and
between her and her husband they agree to disagree on this issue
therefore it is highly unlikely that Southern nationalists killed Dr
John.

Mrs. Garang made her public disclosure at an award ceremony by the
Jaramogi Oginga Odinga Foundation (JOOF) in Nairobi, Kenya. The late
John Garang had been honored with a posthumous Uhuru Award for his
contribution to the liberation struggles of Africa. Prof. Dani Wadada
Nabudere was the guest speaker on the theme of CONFLICT AS A CATALYST
FOR CHANGE.

It was not just about her husband's death that Mrs. Garang spoke. Her
speech also touched on a number of sensitive issues across Africa.
One of them is how we treat. Partners of our heroes. Often they are
not seen as persons in their own right. They may have been married to
heroes but some of them have a place in the struggle in their own
rights. Mrs. Garang spoke from the heart but not as a grieving widow
rather as a combatant. She disclosed the embarrassing fact that that
award by the JOOF was the first time that Dr John was being honored
by an African organization. What doe this tells us about the way in
which we treat our heroes and heroines. Garang was the recipient of
many awards from all kinds of people in Europe ands North America but
his first ward from Africa is posthumous and even then from an
Independent foundation. Is this yet another case of a prophet having
honor but not in his village or not in his life time?

* Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is the deputy director of the UN Millennium
Campaign in Africa, based in Nairobi, Kenya. He writes this article
in his personal capacity as a concerned pan-Africanist.

* Please send comments to [log in to unmask] or comment online at
http://www.pambazuka.org

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤


¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤