By Mobhare Matinyi, The Citizen, Friday, February 03, 2012.
That deadlock, along with other issues, such as the looming crisis over oil business between South Sudan and Sudan, food shortages across the Sahel, the mess in the Horn of Africa, and the controversy over the newly-built headquarters of the AU Commission in Addis Ababa, opens a door for the Western media to report on the African Union in the most belittling manner possible.
The Western media was less bothered to talk about what was achieved in other areas such as the intra-trade talks, infrastructure planning and conflict resolution; they only wanted to badmouth Africa. The New York Times, for example, claimed that China had replaced Colonel Muammar Gaddafi as Africa’s financier simply because Beijing paid $200 million for the new building.
Honestly, I wish we had put up the building with our own financing, but still by any standard this claim is an irresponsible overstatement considering that when China started the project Gaddafi was still in power with his dollars. After all, what was wrong with Gaddafi’s massive support of the AU if the United States does the same to the United Nations?
Speaking of Chinese financing, how about the $1.2 trillion in treasury bills, notes and bonds that the US owes China? When China finances Africa, it’s an issue but when it finances the US it’s alright!
Again, I am not condoning the building and financing of the AU headquarters by Beijing, which could easily be seen as a form of colonisation, but I think the West has no business with that glittering 20-storey structure in Addis Ababa; that’s our own problem.
The Guardian of London, like so many Western media, both print and electronic, lamented about the deadlock in electing the head of the AU Commission but didn’t say much about what was going on at the European Union Summit in Brussels. The EU had their own deadlock in signing a new agreement with Great Britain and Hungary saying no. This wasn’t the first deadlock since the start of the European financial crisis. Why make it a big deal for Africa?
At least the decision by the prominent French daily, Le Monde, to ignore the Summit was much better than other media outlets which wasted their time criticising the African Summit, forgetting that one of their own, Belgium, struggled without a central government from April 22, 2010 to December 6, 2011.
Honestly, I wish we had put up the building with our own financing, but still by any standard this claim is an irresponsible overstatement considering that when China started the project Gaddafi was still in power with his dollars. After all, what was wrong with Gaddafi’s massive support of the AU if the United States does the same to the United Nations?
Speaking of Chinese financing, how about the $1.2 trillion in treasury bills, notes and bonds that the US owes China? When China finances Africa, it’s an issue but when it finances the US it’s alright!
Again, I am not condoning the building and financing of the AU headquarters by Beijing, which could easily be seen as a form of colonisation, but I think the West has no business with that glittering 20-storey structure in Addis Ababa; that’s our own problem.
The Guardian of London, like so many Western media, both print and electronic, lamented about the deadlock in electing the head of the AU Commission but didn’t say much about what was going on at the European Union Summit in Brussels. The EU had their own deadlock in signing a new agreement with Great Britain and Hungary saying no. This wasn’t the first deadlock since the start of the European financial crisis. Why make it a big deal for Africa?
At least the decision by the prominent French daily, Le Monde, to ignore the Summit was much better than other media outlets which wasted their time criticising the African Summit, forgetting that one of their own, Belgium, struggled without a central government from April 22, 2010 to December 6, 2011.
Ironically, even the difficulty over who should lead the Commission arose from the suspicion that Paris was interfering with affairs in Addis Ababa. The Chairman of the Commission was Dr Jean Ping, 69, from Gabon, a former French colony.
Often, Africa’s Francophone countries find it difficult to disengage themselves from their former coloniser, France, and with Gaddafi incident still fresh in the memory, some African leaders saw it fit to change the helm of power in Addis Ababa.
In any case, African leaders did their best by agreeing to disagree on such a serious matter without incident as has been the case in the recent EU summits. Yes, the division among African countries may have occurred, based on history and geopolitics, but nothing more than what we have witnessed in other international organisations. Probably, the noise is overhyped simply because it happened in Africa.
At the next African Summit in Malawi in June, hopefully, the Commission will have new leadership since the current one will have to step down. It was South Africa supported by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and a couple of other African countries that initiated a move to remove the incumbent leadership.
South Africa, apart from other national strategic reasons, was arguing that the AU Commission needs new direction and vigour, hence, proposed its Interior minister, Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, 63, to replace Dr Ping. Neither of the two received a two-third majority to win the post.
Often, Africa’s Francophone countries find it difficult to disengage themselves from their former coloniser, France, and with Gaddafi incident still fresh in the memory, some African leaders saw it fit to change the helm of power in Addis Ababa.
In any case, African leaders did their best by agreeing to disagree on such a serious matter without incident as has been the case in the recent EU summits. Yes, the division among African countries may have occurred, based on history and geopolitics, but nothing more than what we have witnessed in other international organisations. Probably, the noise is overhyped simply because it happened in Africa.
At the next African Summit in Malawi in June, hopefully, the Commission will have new leadership since the current one will have to step down. It was South Africa supported by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and a couple of other African countries that initiated a move to remove the incumbent leadership.
South Africa, apart from other national strategic reasons, was arguing that the AU Commission needs new direction and vigour, hence, proposed its Interior minister, Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, 63, to replace Dr Ping. Neither of the two received a two-third majority to win the post.
The mere fact that African leaders can act to prevent a European power from interfering in African affairs is very impressive indeed. Let us hope that the move has nothing to do with creating a safe haven for those who want to remain in power forever. This new generation won’t take it.
Frankly, however, we need to do a lot more. We have to run while others crawl if we seriously want to be the next “global economic wonder” as the Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi promised the audience at the past week’s World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Meanwhile, our friends in the Western media ought to chill out a little bit.
No comments:
Post a Comment