This piece was originally published by AllAfrica here.
Since its foundation in 2001, the African Union (AU) has established an ambitious interest in preventive diplomacy and conflict management and has had a significant effect on security outcomes across the African continent and beyond. However, many external observers see a disconnect between the extent of security concerns on the continent and the AU’s ability to respond with ‘African solutions to African problems’.
The origin of African solutions to African problems principle lie in the anti-imperialist spirit that united the continent in 1963 through the Organization for African Unity. The continued ambition for regional autonomy and for the provision of region-led solutions has dominated regional security practices and is central to the AU’s mandate. However, its commitment to wanting African solutions to African problems is also practical and logistical, as the AU and its member states believe that such solutions are more effective and more appropriate than those imposed from outside.
African Union security culture in practice: African problems and African solutions | International…
Abstract. This article examines an apparent contradiction in the normative order and security culture of the African…
Despite its desire for autonomy, the AU exhibits institutional weaknesses and a logistical reliance on actors outside the continent. This is demonstrated by the AU’s finances as, while improving, the Peace and Security Department’s external support often accounts for 90 per cent of its yearly funding, and by the fact that the AU remains understaffed with only some 1,600 employees. This relative weakness and dependence undermines its autonomy, authority and ability to provide region-led solutions, as was shown by the failure of western powers to heed the AU’s proposed ‘roadmap’ for Libya — including providing humanitarian assistance, mediating among parties and providing a path for Muammar Gaddafi’s removal. The chosen approach was calamitous, and this remains a point of contention at the AU today. Many AU officials believe that the organization’s voice in the design and operation of AU-supported peacekeeping missions is ignored at the United Nations and that member state peacekeepers are seen as dispensable. Rather than supporting region-led solutions, ‘the UN pays us to die’ is a common sentiment among AU officials.
African solutions matter, and should matter more
Given this, one may be tempted to side with critics: the problems of the continent appear too vast for regional solutions alone. This is not lost on AU officials themselves, of course. And this reality does not mean that the ambition of African solutions to African problems is not upheld at the AU, nor that it should be abandoned in the face of the extent of continental challenges.
African solutions must remain a guiding principle. However more must be done. Crucially, the AU needs more support from its member state governments. In part, this means financial contributions and, while the growing support of the 0.2 per cent levy is a good step in this regard, more is needed. But the AU also needs more member state buy-in and trust. Too often AU officials see member states as unreliable and uncommitted. They complain of leaders’ unwillingness to attend summits and of the limited implementation of AU agreements by member states. For example, the African Union Non-Aggression and Common Defence Pact adopted in 2005 has been ratified by just 22 members and the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, adopted in 2007, only by 32.
African nations and the International Criminal Court: the real motives behind withdrawal
Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer
This perceived apathy and the limited financial support from member states leads AU officials to turn to European and other states for support on a daily basis. And these external partners remain more than willing to fill the void left by AU members. They are driven, at least in part, by an interest in expanding their influence at the AU and across the continent more generally. The US$ 200 million Chinese-built AU Conference Centre and Office Complex, inaugurated in 2012, and the US$36 million German-funded Julius Nyerere Peace and Security Building, opened in 2016, are concrete reminders of this.
At the same time, the AU must also better demonstrate its value to its members. There should be a review of its peace and security priorities and a narrower focus on a set of clear challenges in coming years: election monitoring, as seen in July in Zimbabwe; peacekeeping, visible in the continued commitment in Somalia; and an expanded role overseeing regional responses to terrorism, as with the G5 Sahel Joint Force. If the apathy of member states is to be overcome, the AU will need to lead.
The AU has been and will continue to be the heart of regional cooperation on continental peace and security. African solutions to African problems is an important ambition and should remain a central principle of AU practice.
Aarie Glas is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at Northern Illinois University.
His recent article, ‘African Union security culture in practice: African problems and African solutions’, was published in the September 2018 issue of International Affairs.
Read the article online here.