The European Union Ideals in Relation to the International Relationship - Research Paper Example

Can The European Union ideals in relation to international relationship between the member s ever really be utilized in African Union? Institution: Contents 1.Introduction 3 1.1 Scope of the Paper 4 2.Drive for change 5 2.1 Road to Togo 7 3.The Constitutive Act of the AU 10 3.1 Structure of the AU 12 4.Analysis 14 4.1Comparisons 14 4.2 Challenges 18 5.Conclusion 19 6.References 20 1. Introduction Durban, South Africa was the place 53 Head of States from across Africa met and created the African Union. The Head of States bid farewell to the defunct Organization of African Unity and welcomed the new African Union. All this happened on July 9, 2002. During the gathering, African leaders praised OAU’s achievements. They welcomed the new Union and argued that this was a new dawn for the Africans. The African leaders elected Thambo Mbeki, the host president, as the new AU president. Mr. Mbeki promised that AU would liberate Africans and bring stability to the continent’s economy. He correctly pointed out at poverty and perennial underdevelopment as the central issues to be addressed by the new union. Other African leaders and delegates present at the conference hoped that the new union would intensify African’s economic activity, reduce poverty, resolve social and political issues, foster unity, and improve African’s image in the international stage (Babarinde, 2007). There was great optimism about the African continent at the meeting. However, the then UN Secretary General Koffi Annan warned African leaders not to mistake hope for achievement. According to experts, Annan was just a reminder of how Africa has a poor record on maintaining agreements and treaties (Makinda, 2007). In addition, Annan was stressing on the point most people see. The point is that African leaders always seem to be quick in launching new initiatives and projects, and slower in delivering results. For instance, OAU had many initiatives and proposals, but very few became active. After all, many people see OAU as a failed organization because it failed to deliver in many fronts. An example is the failure of the organization to end white minority rule opposed in South Africa, and liberation of many African countries from colonization. By most account, OAU achievements were fewer than failures. OAU faced mild criticism and commentators summarized that the organization failed to bring African nations together (Welz, 2012). Notably, OAU failed to prevent many civil wars in Africa, such as the Rwanda genocide, wars in Congo, Sudan, Angola, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. Many innocent Africans lost their lives under the watch of OAU. The organization had a notorious principle of ‘non-interference’. This is the principle that most people argue that it caused the loss of millions of lives. Under this loathed principle, OAU failed to stop the rule of Idi Amin regime in Uganda and Sanni Abacha in Nigeria. Furthermore, in the name of the infamous policy, the Organization failed to end the fight over Western Sahara to the needs of its protagonists, especially Morocco. As a matter of fact, Morocco withdrew from OAU in 1986 (Wallace, 2009). Therefore, creation of AU was seen by many as a new dawn for Africa. Many political experts state that AU was a means of unfolding history of post-colonial Africa. However, the same experts doubt the ability of AU of delivering for Africa. AU is a very new Union with ambitious plans. The union has a strike a resemblance of the European Union. In addition, political experts always try to compare, correctly or otherwise AU to EU. The paper wants to find out if this is a fair comparison or not. The primary aim of this dissertation is to analyze AU, compare it with the EU. The paper will explain why the developers of AU used the same template used by the developers of EU (Akokpari, 2008). 1.1 Scope of the Paper The paper is divided into parts. The first parts will explain why African leaders decided to form AU and how the Union is going to stabilize African’s deplorable economic and political conditions. The next part will discuss in detail African’s experiences with initiatives meant at bringing regional unity. The paper will then discuss AU’s main provisions present in the AU constitutive Act. The paper will use available theories to explain AU’s challenges and opportunities. The theories will also measure the Union’s performance up to date. The last section of this paper will be the conclusion. 2. Drive for change Since 1977, there was a growing need for the creation of a new union body. During this period, many African leaders saw the principles of OAU have become outdated. They wanted to reform OAU and review aspects of the OAU charter. On September 9th, 1999, in the conference in Libya, African leaders unanimously agreed to create the AU. On July 11th, 2000, in Lome, Togo, leaders in Africa adopted the Constitutive Act of the AU. Afterward, on March 1st to 2nd 2001, African leaders in Libya declared the formation of the AU. African leaders agreed that the Act would become effective one month after its ratification. This was agreed by 36 African states, which is the required two-thirds of the member states (Makinda, 2007). Many African leaders expected the process to last longer than a year. However, on April 26th, 2001, Nigeria became the 36th country to ratify the Act. Thereafter, a new pan-African agreement became effective on May 26th, 2001. During the 37th summit of OAU, African leaders agreed to a one-year transition plan from OAU to AU. Moreover, at this summit, Thambo Mbeki was elected the new president of AU for a one-year term. The Secretary General of the outgoing OAU, Amara Essy became the chairperson of the transition committee (Babarinde, 2007). OAU became a relic of itself because almost every African country had gained independence by the end of the 20th century. OAU was championing for independence of African states. In fact, after South Africa joined OAU in 1994, many experts argued that OAU had achieved its primary mission. After South Africa had become the last Africa country to gain independence, it was necessary for OAU to change its charter that stated ‘self-rule’ as its central task (Adejumobi, 2008). African states were behind in terms of development. African leaders wanted to raise the economy of Africa by intensifying the cooperation of African states. Such a case demanded a new body to coordinate this cooperation. Many African leaders saw OAU as a failure because under its guidance, Africa still remained the poorest continent in the world. For example, in 2004, statistics indicated that almost 800 million Africans generated only 6% of the national output produced by almost 294 million Americans. Even with this population, the whole of Africa could not match the economy of Canada ($900 billion), Mexico ($700 billion), and many other smaller populations not stated. Another point to note is that Africa’s contribution to the world’s total output was 3% in 1975 and 2% in 2005. The share of global exports reduced from 6% in 1975 to 2% in 2005 (Gelot, 2012). It was not surprising when the World Bank stated that 63% of countries categorized as low-income countries were African states. All indices, such as the Human Development Index, are low for Africans. A good example is the UN’s 2005 Human Poverty Index for least developed countries. From the report, 31 of the 39 ranked countries were from Africa. In summary, OAU failed the African continent because most states were not integrated as it should be. For example, many African countries have better relationships with countries outside Africa, than their immediate neighbors. To put it easier, many Africans find it productive to travel to foreign countries outside the continent, than to countries in Africa (Gelot, 2012). Africa is experiencing worse economic and social climate. Many Africans lay the blame on OAU. Political conflicts in Africa have become bloody and nastier. These political conflicts come from communities, and then it expands to the national level, then to the regional level. Many civil wars have turned into inter-state conflicts (Wallace, 2009). Civil wars are a clear indication that OAU failed to achieve one of its critical roles, that of bringing unity and solidarity to African States. These are just evidences of how OAU was ill equipped to bring prosperity to Africa. States that have experienced civil wars have relied on foreign interventions to resolve these skirmishes. Political scientists had an emerging consensus that OAU was incapable of tackling the problems present in Africa. Therefore, Africa needed a new path and direction in order to survive (Wallace, 2009). 2.1 Road to Togo African leaders started flirting with the concept of African Union in the wake of failures of OAU. The leaders wanted a new body because there was a demand for improvement of African economy and the need for political integration. Hopeful Africans saw this as a conceptual, theoretical construct, as well some truth element. Certainly, African’s flirtation began during the pre-independence period. Surprisingly, even in the 20th century, the idea of regional integration was with many Africans. For example, in 1910, there was the establishment of the Sothern African Customs Union. The union demonstrated the ability of Africans developing a regional integration. Other integration bodies were formulated in the mid of the 20th century, such as the short-lived Union Douaniere L’Afrique del’ Quest in 1959. There was also the Sene-Gambia confederation in 1981 and the Maghreb Permanent Consultative Committee in 1965. There was the three-member East African Community, which was an on-again-off-again local organization. EAC was formed in 1967, disbanded in 1977, and then revived in 1994. In 1983, 11 African countries established the Economic Community of Central African States. In 1993, 19 African countries formed the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa. The same year, 1993, 13 countries in Southern Africa established the Southern Africa Development Community. In 1975, 15 states formed the Economic Community of West African States (Murray, 2004). On the hand, the need for African unity dates back to the beginning of Africa’s independence. A good example is a group of African leaders who gathered in the UK to seek justice and freedom for all African people. This led to the formation of OAU on May 25the, 1963. However, the provisions of OAU did not match what pan-Africanists wanted. Some of these pan-Africanists such as Jomo Kenyatta, Julius Nyerere, and Kwame Nkrumah of Kenya, Tanzania, and Ghana respectively called for African unity. Nyerere himself wanted the creation of United States of Africa when OAU was created. Nyerere and Nkrumah led their respective countries to independence and became the first post-colonial presidents. These leaders called for the creation of a pan-African government as an expression of unity. Surprisingly, critics named these pan-African leaders as African federalists, who did not care the sovereignty of African states (Makinda, 2007). Pan-African leaders had a seemingly hasty federal approach. However, they still believed in African cooperation and unity. Leaders who criticized the federal plan include the Leopold Senghor of Senegal and Boigny Houphet of Ivory Coast. These critics argued that Africa was still young to form a pan-African government because most states were just from gaining independence. These leaders called for cooperation of sovereign African states in developing the whole continent. The leaders argued the call for pan-African government was ill-advised, and compared this to putting the hart in front of the horse. For these leaders, it was necessary to consider African economic condition first, then political integration will come second. They believed putting their nations in order must precede any pan-African construct. For these leaders, they associated pan-African government to the highest order of regional integration. In order to achieve regional integration, these leaders claimed, there must be integration of the economy first (Welz, 2012). Despite the philosophical differences among African leaders, many African leaders kept the dream of African integration alive. The first step was when OAU, in 1977, decided to create a financial community in gradual stages. The Lagos Plan of Action (1980) and secondly the Final Act of Lagos called for the development of an African economic community as by the year 2000. These were plans meant to stimulate the development of African economy. African leaders signed the Treaty of Abuja, in June 1991. The agreement was designed in six phases and was a plan of creating an African Economic Community within the next 34 to 40 years. The treaty was made effective in May 1994. After the treaty had become active, African leaders worked on harmonizing the existing suture sub-continental regional groups (REGs). The harmonizing would take place through 5 main REGs, viz, COMESA, SADC, ECOWAS, ECCAS, and AMU. These bodies would help Africa achieve a common market across the African continent. Then, OAU started operating in two legal instruments. They include the OAU Charter and the Treaty of Abuja. In 1999, Muammar Gaddafi proposed the idea of the United States of Africa during the OAU summit in Libya. Mr. Gaddafi was bringing back the idea of pan-African leaders, Nyerere and Nkrumah. However, just like Nyerere and Nkrumah, Gaddafi was met with criticism. Unlike his forerunners, majority of Gaddafi’s critics came outside the continent. At the same time, South Africa’s president Thambo Mbeki suggested an alternative ‘easy does it’ gradualist approach. Analysts argue that Mbeki was supporting sentiments made by the likes of Senghor and Boigny, in relation to Gaddafi. 3. The Constitutive Act of the AU As stated above, in 1999 in Libya, leaders agreed to change OAU into AU. Afterward, in July 2000, the leaders while in Togo adopted the African Union Constitutive Act. It became effective in May 2001. The paper will conduct a detailed analysis of this Act which had 33 articles. Article 3 stated the objectives of the Union. Article 4 dealt with the principles of the Union. To be more precise, Article 3(a-n) indicated the ways of achieving Africa’s unity and solidarity. It spelt out how to defend territorial integrity and independence of states. This article accelerated the need for economic, social and political integration in Africa. The report stated AU’s aim of defending and advancing Africa’s common positions on issues of interest to it and its people. It supported international cooperation, and promotion of peace, security and stability. From the article, AU wanted to promote democracy, sustainable development, policy coordination, observance of human rights, and cooperation between Africa’s regional communities (Gelot, 2012). There are 16 principles in Article 4(a-p). These principles guide the activities of the union. They define sovereignty equality and cooperation among member states, involvement of the African people in Union’s activities, development of a common defense policy, prohibition of use of force among member states, and establishment of a policy that prohibits interference of a state in internal matters of the other. Moreover, the principles guide the member states on the right for intervention from the Union to restore peace and stability, the right of AU to intervene in regard to war crimes, genocides, and crimes against humanity. There were other guiding principles such as promotion of gender equality, social justice, promotion and respect of democracy, good governance, rule of law, and condemnation of unconstitutional changes of the government (Babarinde, 2007). From article 5 to 22, the Act covers the inclusive 9 institutions of the Union, viz, the Permanent Representatives Committee, the Assembly, the Executive council, the specialized technical Committees, three financial institutions, the Court of Justice, the Pan-African parliament, the Commission, and the Economic and Cultural Council (Murray, 2004). Articles 6 to 9 stipulated the Assembly of Heads of States and Government. The articles stated the composition and operating rules of this Assembly. The Assembly, according to the Act, was the Union’s supreme organ. The Assembly is supposed to meet at least once a year. There are provisions that allowed for the extraordinary session once requested by a member state. The request should be approved by two-thirds of the member states. Article 6(4) stipulates the Office of the Chair of the Assembly. The chair should be occupied by the president of any member state for one year (Akokpari, 2008). Article 7 stipulates that the assembly shall make decisions by consensus. The consensus should be by a two-thirds majority, and by simple majority on procedural matters. While article 8 stipulates the rules and the procedure of the Assembly, article 9 states the functions of the Assembly. In addition, article 9 contains the policies of the Union, the Union budget, procedures of application for membership, procedures of appointment of Judges of Court of Justice, establishing any institutions of the Union, and the Chairman of the Commission and other commissioners. 3.1 Structure of the AU (i) The executive Council: It consists of Ministers of Foreign Affairs or other ministers. They meet twice a year in ordinary sessions. They may also meet in extraordinary sessions. Such happens upon request by a member state, after approval by two-thirds of member states. Voting in the Council is the same as the Assembly. It follows a consensus approach, two-third majority, or simple majority. The functions of this council are in Article 13. The primary functions stipulated in the article are coordination and formulation of policies in areas such as environment, science, and such, and setting up an African awards mechanism. The council is answerable to the Assembly (Akokpari, 2008). (ii) The Specialized Technical Committees: They are accountable to the Executive Committee. Article 14 stipulates the functions of these committees. There are seven committees dealing with (Akokpari, 2008): Rural economy and agricultural matters. Monetary and financial affairs. Trade, customs, and immigration matters. Industry, Science, and technology. Transport, communications, and tourism. Health, labor, and social affairs. Education, culture, and human resources. Ministers always composed these committees. The ministers are in charge of supervising and implementing decisions made by other organs of AU (Akokpari, 2008). (iii) The Pan-African Parliament: The questions concerning this parliament are found in Article 17. The Article allows creation of a pan-African parliament. The African people use the parliament to raise issues and concerns that could aid in the development of the African continent. During the launch of the parliament, members stipulate the composition, powers and functions of this organ (Akokpari, 2008). (iv) The Court of Justice: It is stipulated in Article 18. As discussed above, the Assembly is responsible for appointing the judges. During the time of its inauguration, the statute, compositions, and functions are defined. The Court of Justice is liable for interpreting the whole AU Act (Akokpari, 2008). (v) The Financial Institutions: The African Union created the African Central Bank. The bank is an African Investment and Monetary Bank. During the inception of the bank, the Assembly defines its rules and regulations (Akokpari, 2008). (vi) The commission of the AU: Article 24 calls this commission the de jure secretariat of the Union. It is present in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. A Chairman heads this commission. The Chairman has a deputy or deputies, and other commissioners appointed by the Assembly. The bureaucracy supports the Chairman, his/her deputies, and the commissions in their functions. The Assembly is the one that describes the structure, the functions, and the regulations of the commission (Akokpari, 2008). (vii) The Permanent Representatives Committee: This committee comprises of ambassadors, who are Permanent Representatives of the member states to the AU. The committee always prepares the work of the Executive Council. They always act on the instructions of the Council. The Committee could be divided into sub-committees or working groups, if necessary (Akokpari, 2008). (viii) The Economic, Social, and Cultural Council: It consists of various social and professional groups of the member states. It is the main advisory body of the Assembly and AU in general. The Assembly, therefore, stipulates the council’s powers, functions, and composition (Akokpari, 2008). Article 23 has two paragraphs. These paragraphs stipulate the imposition of appropriate sanctions on member states that does not adhere to their financial obligation to the AU. It has impositions too on member states that do not follow the Union’s decisions and policies. During AU meetings, delegates discuss the appropriate sanctions to be effected on the guilty member state. Moreover, these paragraphs address variety of issues, for instance, the working languages. Article 25 stipulates African languages to be Arabic, English, French and Portuguese. Article 27 states the signature, ratification, and accession. Article 28 stipulates entry force of the Act. Article 29 states the process of admission into the Union. Article 30 stipulates the governments that acquire power via unconstitutional means would be suspended. Article 31 stipulates the procedure of withdrawing from the Union. Article 32 specifies the process of amending and revising the Act. The final Act, Article 33 stipulates the transitioning from the OAU to the AU (Akokpari, 2008). 4. Analysis The paper will now analyze AU in general, and highlight the similarities between AU and the EU. Moreover, the paper will highlight the challenges that AU faces (Akokpari, 2008). 4.1 Comparisons It is critical to note that the Articles of the Constitutive Act came were transferred from the 1991 Abuja Treaty. The Abuja Treaty is the one that launched the AEC. Shortly afterward, the Constitutive Act replaced the AEC. Many institutions such as the Court of Justice, the Assembly, and the Pan African Parliament were previously stated in the defunct AEC. At the same time, it is important to note the similarities between the institutional structures of the AU and the European Union. However, these striking similarities are only found on paper. It is obvious that the architects of AU know they copied their design from the EU. Even Mr. Gaddafi himself admitted to drawing inspirations from EU (Babarinde, 2007). In July 2001, in an OAU summit in Zambia, majority of the speakers noted that the development of African Union was based on the European Union model. The table below summarizes the similarities that exist between the European Union and the African Union (Babarinde, 2007). Function of institution African Union European Union Provision of a general strategy and political direction The Assembly of Heads of State and Government The European Council of Heads of Governments and State and Commission President Supervision, formulation, and coordination of policies Executive Council of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs or other ministers The General Affairs Council, The Council of the EU The secretariat- The bureaucracy and the cabinet Commission of the AU, headed by a chairman appointed by the Assembly The Commission of the EU, headed by a president Parliament Pan-African Parliament, it is an advisory body European Parliament. Power is a function of the legislative process being administered; assent power The Judiciary The African Court of Justice European Court of Justice, the apex court of the EU Ambassadors Permanent Representatives Committee of the member states to the AU Committee of Permanent Representatives of members to the EU Expert Committees Specialized Technical Committees COREPER 1 Advisory Corporatist structure The Economic, Social, and Cultural Council The Economic and Social Committee From the above table, the Assembly of Heads of State and front office of the AU is similar to the EU’s European Council. Both are the supreme organ of these Unions (Babarinde, 2007). The Chair of the European Union lasts for six months. However, the Chair of AU’s Assembly lasts for a year and is headed by a head of state and government of member states. In the EU, the presidency is rotated among the member countries. This means a member country is the one heading the Union. In the AU, a person who is elected for a period of one year heads the Union (Murray, 2004). The Executive Council of the AU is similar to the Council of Ministers. This is comparable to the Council of the EU. The EU’s Committee of Permanent Representatives or ambassadors is equivalent to the AU’s Permanent Representatives Committee. The analog of AU’s Specialized Technical Committee is the EU’s COREPER 1 of technical experts. The ECOSOCC of the AU is related to the Economic and Social Committee of the EU. They are similar mainly because these two committees are advisory bodies to their respective Unions (Akokpari, 2008). The Court of Justice, the commission and the Parliament are key institutions shared by both the EU and the AU. These three organs are the primary decision-making structures of these two Unions. The EU structures are very useful whereas the AU structures are still evolving. The functions of key AU institutions have not been fully implemented as stated in the Constitutive Act. The AU Assembly often discusses the functions of key organs, because they have not settled on a common ground. For instance, the Court of Justice has not handled any case so far, despite the Parliament and the Commission fully functioning. Up to now, the AU has not employed any judge, and there are no defined explicit powers. Experts argue that AU bodies are less effective as compared to the EU bodies (Wallace, 2009). The role of the AU parliament is largely advisory and consultative. The legislature is supposed to meet at least twice per year. However, this body is expected to evolve and become an organ that airs issues of African people. The questions most people still ask is; will AU’s institutions develop into the level of the EU counterparts? Only time will tell (Kane, 2007). There are similarities between the goals of both the EU and the AU. The aspirations of these bodies are similar despite the nature of these bodies. It is obvious both organs aim to bring peace, stimulate economic growth, and strengthen their international profile. For instance, the effects of the World War, especially the understanding between France and Germany, caused the EU to believe this integration would bring everlasting unity in Europe, thereby fostering economic development. When it comes to AU, the effects of the civil and inter-state wars have compromised economic development in Africa. Wars scare away potential investors. Therefore, just like EU, which used regional cooperation to promote peace and economic growth, the African Union too has to ensure there is regional integration. Regional unity is a tool that promotes peace, and in the end, experience positive economic results. In other words, AU has to make African states depend on each other. Many hopeful Africans expect their leaders to learn from the European Union counterparts. The point to note is that, European countries do not turn to war as a solution for conflicts, rather they encourage dialogue. Such case has seen European countries making long strategic decisions. In the end, the EU grows immensely economically, which in turn reinforces political stability (Welz, 2012). 4.2 Challenges (a) Decision making and size: The sheer membership size of the African Union is a tremendous challenge. There are over 50 member states, hence potential differences could be a significant setback AU has made. Most decisions take a lot of time to hit a conclusion. In extreme cases, decisions grind to a halt. In EU, there are only six nations, hence easy to reach consensus on many issues. The neo-realistic theory, nations are rational actors and behave in self-interested manner. Nations are mainly influenced by domestic actors. Therefore, making a decision at international levels may be very difficult. AU with 53 member states, each with its interests, will find a challenge in making decisions on sundry issues. In 1968, EU faced the challenge of an Empty Chair. Despite being only six countries, EU faced the challenge of making decisions. The AU usually faces this problem in many times, but they are hiding it from the public. The Union does not want some African States to withdraw from the Union because it will damage the credibility of the AU in international stage (Babarinde, 2007). (b) Weak economies of member states The African Union has 53 members, and these members’ economies demonstrate broad development dispersions. For example, South Africa has a GNP of 165 billion dollars, whereas Guinea-Bissau has a GNP of 0.3 billion dollars. The problem seen here is how these countries can work together. In similar situations, the GNP per capita in Africa ranges from the high of $5,000 in Mauritius, and to the low of $90 in Burundi. These are statistical data of the year 2004. From the above examples, it is evident African countries have a challenge of pulling together their diverse financial capabilities to benefit all the Africans. The African Union has a challenge of developing mechanisms that could ensure trades between African States bring massive economic benefit to the continent (BBC, 2001). (c) Follow up on commitments OAU demonstrated they could not be able to follow through on commitments. The common question many Africans ask themselves is that, is AU capable of following through on commitments? A good example is that in 2003, the AU amended the provision by loosening the grounds for intervention, although the Constitutive Act in Article 4h included the right of the Union to intervene in a member States in times of difficult situations. Experts argue that this article was amended after the US president at that time, Mr. Bush, invaded Iraq in 2003. A close analysis of the amendment finds out that African leaders always care for their personal interests. One of the effects of this amendment is the civil war in South Sudan, which lasted very long. The AU has failed to respond to the genocides taking place in Sudan (BBC, 2001). 5. Conclusion From the discussion, it is evident that lack of regional integration is the reason for Africa’s deplorable condition, especially economically and politically. However, AU is the new dawn that wants to change Africas image in the global stage. Despite AU sharing many similarities with EU, it does not mean Africa will develop just like Europe. Beginners will say these two countries have different historical circumstances. EU begun with only six states, which were wealth starts, where as AU started with 53 countries, and the majority of these countries were poor. As stated in the introduction, Koffi Anna warned African leaders in 2002 that they have a difficult task of developing Africa as a continent. Mr. Annan argued that Africa has a larger geographical area but has fewer resources. Nonetheless, most Africans still have hope. There was a glimpse of hope when AU member states quickly adopted the Consultative Act. They ratified the Act a year ahead of schedule. This can be a sign that AU is prepared to follow in EU’s footsteps. In addition, this demonstrates the urgency of African’s new leaders to bring change to Africa. AU has many encouraging developments. For instance, in 2001, the Union while in a summit in Zambia adopted the NEPAD initiative. Analysts called this AU’s economic blueprint. In addition, the Union developed the Peer Review mechanism. The development encouraged member states to submit their respective macroeconomic strategies for close analysis by experts. Moreover, in 2003, the Chairman of the council, President Obansajo of Nigeria reversed the coup attempt in Sao Tome and Principle. The chairman was adhering to the Article 23(2) of the Constitutive Act. These hopes bring happiness to many Africans, or else they would react as they did with respect to OAU (Babarinde, 2007). 6. References Adejumobi, S. (2008). The African Union and New Strategies for Development in Africa. Cambria Press. Akokpari, J. (2008). The African Union and Its Institutions. Fanele. Babarinde, O. (2007). The European Union as a Model for the African Union: the limits of imitation. Glendale, Arizona : Thunderbird, School of Global Management . BBC. (2001). BBC news. African Union: Can it work?, 1-3. Gelot, L. (2012). Legitimacy, Peace Operations and Global-regional Security: The African Union-United Nations Partnership in Darfur. Routledge. Kane, I. (2007). Towards a People-driven African Union: Current Obstacles & New Opportunities. African Minds. Makinda, S. M. (2007). The African Union: Challenges of globalization, security, and governance. Routledge. Murray, R. (2004). Human Rights in Africa: From the OAU to the African Union. Cambridge University Press. Wallace, H. (2009). ELIAMEP Thesis. The European Union and its Neighbourhood: Time for a rethink, 1. Welz, M. (2012). Integrating Africa: Decolonizations Legacies, Sovereignty and the African Union. Routledge. Read More

Many political experts state that AU was a means of unfolding history of post-colonial Africa. However, the same experts doubt the ability of AU of delivering for Africa. AU is a very new Union with ambitious plans. The union has a strike a resemblance of the European Union. In addition, political experts always try to compare, correctly or otherwise AU to EU. The paper wants to find out if this is a fair comparison or not. The primary aim of this dissertation is to analyze AU, compare it with the EU.

The paper will explain why the developers of AU used the same template used by the developers of EU (Akokpari, 2008). 1.1 Scope of the Paper The paper is divided into parts. The first parts will explain why African leaders decided to form AU and how the Union is going to stabilize African’s deplorable economic and political conditions. The next part will discuss in detail African’s experiences with initiatives meant at bringing regional unity. The paper will then discuss AU’s main provisions present in the AU constitutive Act.

The paper will use available theories to explain AU’s challenges and opportunities. The theories will also measure the Union’s performance up to date. The last section of this paper will be the conclusion. 2. Drive for change Since 1977, there was a growing need for the creation of a new union body. During this period, many African leaders saw the principles of OAU have become outdated. They wanted to reform OAU and review aspects of the OAU charter. On September 9th, 1999, in the conference in Libya, African leaders unanimously agreed to create the AU.

On July 11th, 2000, in Lome, Togo, leaders in Africa adopted the Constitutive Act of the AU. Afterward, on March 1st to 2nd 2001, African leaders in Libya declared the formation of the AU. African leaders agreed that the Act would become effective one month after its ratification. This was agreed by 36 African states, which is the required two-thirds of the member states (Makinda, 2007). Many African leaders expected the process to last longer than a year. However, on April 26th, 2001, Nigeria became the 36th country to ratify the Act.

Thereafter, a new pan-African agreement became effective on May 26th, 2001. During the 37th summit of OAU, African leaders agreed to a one-year transition plan from OAU to AU. Moreover, at this summit, Thambo Mbeki was elected the new president of AU for a one-year term. The Secretary General of the outgoing OAU, Amara Essy became the chairperson of the transition committee (Babarinde, 2007). OAU became a relic of itself because almost every African country had gained independence by the end of the 20th century.

OAU was championing for independence of African states. In fact, after South Africa joined OAU in 1994, many experts argued that OAU had achieved its primary mission. After South Africa had become the last Africa country to gain independence, it was necessary for OAU to change its charter that stated ‘self-rule’ as its central task (Adejumobi, 2008). African states were behind in terms of development. African leaders wanted to raise the economy of Africa by intensifying the cooperation of African states.

Such a case demanded a new body to coordinate this cooperation. Many African leaders saw OAU as a failure because under its guidance, Africa still remained the poorest continent in the world. For example, in 2004, statistics indicated that almost 800 million Africans generated only 6% of the national output produced by almost 294 million Americans. Even with this population, the whole of Africa could not match the economy of Canada ($900 billion), Mexico ($700 billion), and many other smaller populations not stated.

Another point to note is that Africa’s contribution to the world’s total output was 3% in 1975 and 2% in 2005. The share of global exports reduced from 6% in 1975 to 2% in 2005 (Gelot, 2012). It was not surprising when the World Bank stated that 63% of countries categorized as low-income countries were African states.

Read More