AFRICA UNION BARKS AT MALI COUP D’ETAT (Part 1)

WHO IS CHARGE OF OUR UNION?

WHO IS IN CHARGE?
The African Union puppy was heard this week barking from far away Addis Ababa in a reaction to the recent coup d'état by young army officers led by Captain Amadou Sanogo that resulted in the over throw of President Amadou Toumani Toure. The President of the Africa Union Commission Dr. Jean Ping sprung into his traditional role of condemnation and issuing of verbal threat on behalf of the Union to the young army officers for their action. The funniest part of the comedy is when the AU Chief stated that the continental authority has now suspended Mali until the dethrone president is re-instated.

The Malians coup plotters and their sympathizers as expected could not contain their laughter at the African Union's comical puppy that sits in Addis Ababa issuing verbal response to any misfortunes befalling the poor citizens of the Union but, this was short lived. The honeymoon mood in the Malian capital Bamarko changed when some other voices beyond the African Union joined in expressing interest against the Malian's people effort to self-determination. The difficulty in distinction between the voices and intentions of Dr. Jean Ping and that of Mr. Ban Ki-moon changed the attitude of the Malian new authority towards the voices from far beyond the Africa continental boarders. In short, the concerns of the Malian authority is not the Africa Union's authority but that of the powerful institution of the far away United Nations backed up by the Americans and the Europeans whom most African Union citizens are of the impression to be the “gin” behind the continental gloomy fate.

Most people will agree with me that the business of the African Continent is not run by Africa Union but by the United Nations who claim to be running the business of the world (international community). To make matters worse, the idea of the Africa Union has been deceptively sold to its average citizen as part of the “international community” than the personal business of the citizens. In short, unlike the European Union and its citizens, the impression being given to the ordinary man is that the AU is an integral part of the international community than an independent body of its own. So instead of being answerable to the ordinary man on the street of the African continent, the AU and its Commission Chairman Dr. Jean Ping are actually answerable to the United Nations in the name of international community that put the fate of every one of us squarely in the hand of the International community than ourselves.

The big question our fathers of the OAU (organization of the African Union) struggled with centred on what to do whenever it becomes obvious that the African in his nation state is incapable of doing it by him/herself? They seek to provide the answer to who determines the destiny of the African when he, as an individual or a state on the continent, slips into chaos? These concerns were raised and possible answers considered, with the double standard of the International Community fresh in mind, on how these powerful institutions skilfully twist things among the Africans to their own advantage. This fundamental challenge is the only reason for the formation of the African continental “potentially powerful” body with the duty of taking an objective and independent decisions, free of any external influence, in the business of the continent. Basically the continental body headed by an “African super personality” was to re-shape the destiny of the whole continent.

In redirecting responsibility to ourselves than daily pointing our dirty accusing fingers at the Europeans and Americans as the determinants of our fate, is it fair to start asking ourselves what we are also doing wrong that continue to sustain the statuesque? Proceeding further to the anomalies of the Africa Union a little bit beyond the Malian action that humanly become inevitable when conditions call fort it, is the question of, do the heads of states and government of African Union themselves take the president of the Union Dr. Jean Ping serious? A very good evidence of a disrespectful member state leader to Jean Ping was captured in a recent picture taken in N'Djamena, Chad 03 March 2012 of the Presidents, Idriss Deby and Dr. Jean Ping. The obvious was that of a scout master and his boy. The picture of the event titled AFRICAN UNION CELEBRATES THE AFRICA ENVIRONMENT DAY, (DIRECTORATE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION, PRESSE RELEASE Nº009 /2012), forced tears out of our eyes. This was so degrading and speaks volume in the attitudes of individuals like deposed President Amadou Toumani Toure whom the president of the AU authority seeks to re-impose on the masses. This explains why the latter remains a “barking puppy of the AU in faraway Addis Ababa, useful only when it's “54 democratic masters” are in trouble.

The elite politicians on the continent of Africa are getting wiser in the scheme of fooling the masses while the masses in turn are getting more stupid in not seeing the trick of continental disempowerment they suffer. If the purpose of the AU is not only to shield the continent and its inhabitant from unnecessary external influence but also to control the internal factors that destabilizes this effort, how and who then check the leaders of the AU member states in their day-to-day activities that result in frustrating the effort of the Union? If this individual, the Chairman of the AU Commission Dr. Jean Ping, is the one responsible for these member states leaders who in turn are the leaders of their various states, why then should any of these leaders be stronger individually than the president of the whole Union? Again, why should the election of the Chairman of the AU Commission continue to be limited to the Union's 54 head of states and governments when these very individuals are themselves part of the problems of the member states as well? Is this not a case of a group of criminals choosing a person to check criminals? Is it sensible to understand that the individual chosen by these few 54 criminals will only be there to serve the interest of some few criminals than the interest of everyone else? Is the AU boss's expression of interest as centred on the re-instatement of Amadou Toumani Toure, in the name of democracy than the real reason for toppling him in the first place, not so strange? Does this not explain the expression that “the Africa Union is only for the African leaders and not the African people”? Is the answer to this not in the African Union's own version of continental democracy that excludes everyone else in the decision of what concern everyone on who heads the Union, except just the 54 individuals? How democratic is the election of Dr. Jean Ping in which only 54 individuals participated on behalf of 986 million citizens of the Africa Union that gives him the democratic moral authority to tell the disfranchised Malians on how to run their democratic Malian business? If a group of few individuals in the holy name of African leaders feels it is democratically right to impose Dr. Jean Ping on the AU population of 986 million regardless to whatever the masses feels about it, what makes a few military personnel wrong to democratically choose Captain Sanogo to head the Malian government against the wish of the majority of the Malian people? What makes Captain Sanogo's version of democracy morally wrong to be hounded by Jean Pig in the name of democracy? Is this not the case of the kettle calling the pot black? (Continue in Part2)

Kofi Ali Abdul-Yekin
Chairman/Coordinator Action Group of Africa (AGA) and

Leader of the Africa Redemption Centre (ARC)
[email protected], www.aga4fed.com