Here are 7 Ways the African Union can Move Away from its Egregious External Strategy

Here are 7 Ways the African Union can Move 

Away from its Egregious External Strategy

By E.K.Bensah Jr

Back in March, I had the priviledge of visiting the African Union, while in Addis for some capacity-building on peace and security of the AU, and I was pretty impressed with the tall building the Chinese are building for the organisation.

Germany's GIZ is also building the AU's Peace and Security Department, and will be completed by 2012. It ought to remind the world, then, that the AU has "arrived" in grand style on managing peace and security.

What irked me, though, were my impressions when I landed in Addis eight days earlier. Given that I want this to be a positive thing, let me offer solutions for the way forward:

First, the AU should have some Memorandum of Understanding between itself and Ethiopian Airlines that would enable it showcase the AU to regular and first-time visitors in the plane. Alright, show your movies, but have a twenty-minute video of what the AU is, what it does and where it will be in the future! Instead, what you have is a fairly modern airport that does not give any impression that it is the capital of African diplomacy.

Secondly, the AU should arrange for every blessed hotel in Addis to host an AU flag. A quick drive through Addis and you will be surprised at the city’s inability to convey that “Africanness” you feel when you arrive in Brussels. From Zaventem airport to the heart of Brussels, where the institutions are, you are likely to see more than hundred symbols depicting that Brussels is the diplomatic capital of Europe! While flags are not the end-all and be-all, they are certainly a step in reminding all and sundry that the AU lives there!

Third, the AU should have information bureaus in every AU country. Failing that, it should have diplomatic missions in “strategic” countries, such as Algeria; Nigeria; Ghana; Senegal. It would admittedly be expensive to have an information bureau or mission in every country, so being selective about the countries where they should be hosted would make sense. In Ghana, only the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has information about the AU, and if you can hold your head in disbelief for a second, it is nothing more than a “desk”. Simply put, they are telling the world that ECOWAS and AU might be important, but they are unwilling to spend resources to project the growing power of the AU. If we can accept that the Cantonments-based “The Round House” is home to the EU in Ghana, why can we not have a comparative mission in the AU in every AU member state? Does the AU not think this to be important enough?

Fourth, the AU is on New Media; it can be found on https://www.facebook.com/pages/African-Union/454340075407 . Truth be told, the AU is now a bit more proactive on Facebook, but could still do better. Despite the fact that it has some 2457 “likes”, it seems to have been overwhelmed by the enormity of the “likes” to the extent that it has not yet managed to respond to one single criticism or query on its apparent ineffectiveness. That said, I must give the AU benefit of the doubt when on 21 September last year, they run a campaign months earlier on http://www.makepeacehappen.net to raise awareness of 21 September as AU and UN Peace Day, and to celebrate the launch of the AU’s Year of Peace and Security. They have regrettably lost the momentum on that, and let the site atrophy without regular updates. 

Fifth, while it is not solely the work of the AU, it should be the frontline actor pushing to ensure that citizens of AU member states travel to the home of the African Union visa-free! In Ghana, cost of a visa is certainly not as prohibitive as that of an EU member state, but it is one cost too many. If we are to accelerate continental unity – whether through the regional economic communities or otherwise – free movement must be an imperative of the solution. If Europeans can travel freely to Brussels, why must Africans have such difficulty traveling throughout the continent?

Which leads me to the sixth point: cost of airline tickets. The AU is a member of the Association of African Airlines(AFRAA), which has for many years been campaigning for airline fuel costs to come down. As recently as July this year, AFRAA initiated measures to tackle the high cost of Aviation Fuel(Jet A1),which is a major operational cost item in the industry.
 

The AFRAA secretariat has resolved to assist airlines meet with fuel marketers to reduce fuel costs in conformity with stipulations in the AFRAA 2011  – 2013 Business Plan. The irony of it all is that the Ethiopian Airlines I have mentioned above is one of those airlines, alongside Kenya Airways, that do not want to be members of AFRAA.

Finally, the AU must get serious on re-vamping the websites of all its institutions, including those of any AU delegations around the world. These should all be found on the main AU site. Up-and-coming institutions like the African Monetary Fund; African Central Bank; and African Investment Bank ought by now to have had websites—at least in beta form—to showcase their history and where they are going. Without these, how are African citizens ever going to know about what the AU does, and how people can help achieve their vision?

from: http://www.thebftonline.com/bft_subcat_linkdetails.cfm?prodcatID=6&tblNewsCatID=63&tblNewsID=9398

In 2009, in his capacity as a “Do More Talk Less Ambassador” of the 42^nd Generation—an NGO that promotes and discusses Pan-Africanism--Emmanuel gave a series of lectures on the role of ECOWAS and the AU in facilitating a Pan-African identity. Emmanuel owns "Critiquing Regionalism" (http://www.critiquing-regionalism.org). Established in 2004 as an initiative to respond to the dearth of knowledge on global regional integration initiatives worldwide, this non-profit blog features regional integration initiatives on MERCOSUR/EU/Africa/Asia and many others. You can reach him on ekbensah@ekbensah.net / Mobile: 0268.687.653.

Thanks to its Youth Citizens, Arab Maghreb Union--an AU-REC--Might be Saved!

In 2009, the Arab Maghreb Union turned 20 years. And Critiquing Regionalism blog was there to castigate it (http://regionswatch.blogspot.com/2009/06/ineffectual-rec-arab-maghreb-union.html)!

That's quite a long time fore any regional integration initiative to reflect on where it's going and to whom it must account. Before the so-called Arab Spring, there must have been many outside the Arab Maghreb Union region thinking that the AMU bears little relevance to the citizens and that it's time for it to go. I was certainly one of them. When I was interviewed by the BBC in March this year on a "Africa Have Your Say" programme on the role of regional economic communities in Africa, I stated clearly that "the biggest elephant in  the room" on Libya was not the African Union, but the Arab Maghreb Union. This was because there has been a paucity of analysis in the news about what that 5-member grouping was doing on Libya. Instead, the Arab League had effectively stolen its thunder and was carrying the can on what to do in Libya.

I still wonder how things could have been different had the AU-REC [African Union-recognised REC] AMU -- instead of the Arab League -- started issuing resolutions over Libya. Historians might speculate that this is one of the reasons why it's good to be a member of only one REC, if even and only to save oneself from prosecution! Had Libya not been a member of the Arab League, where would the no-fly zone had come from?

But back to the present: the news that the Arab Maghreb youth are taking charge of things is encouraging, because it seems that increasingly the youth are realising the future is in their hands.

To read that:

"The Arab Maghreb Union is obsolete and moribund," El Ouafoudi [group's Moroccan rep] said in explaining why the youth movement was founded. He said civil society took the initiative to push for a Maghreb Union after "official failure" serves as a reminder that the youth are one of the likely constituencies to kick-start any regional integration push, if ever it was needed.

The group could not have said it better when they said:

""Economic integration can only be achieved with the desire of the rulers, as well as open borders and abolition of the visa," Vall added. "There thus must be pressure on governments to respond to such demands."

Read the full article here: http://www.magharebia.com/cocoon/awi/xhtml1/en_GB/features/awi/features/2011/09/15/feature-04

PAPER: "Assessing Regional Diffusion from Brussels to Addis Ababa: The Limits of Modelling and Mentoring"

Read this surprisingly-refreshing piece entitled "Assessing Regional Diffusion from Brussels to Addis Ababa: The Limits of Modelling and Mentoring", which explores the "integration snobbery" theme of other regionalisms seeing the EU by hook or by crook as a model, but refracted through the prism of the African Union.

from: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/csgr/green/papers/workingpapers/haastrup_assessing_regional_diffusion.pdf

"Another challenge is the EU‟s „over-ambition‟ to promote regional integration (Börzel & Risse, 2009b). While the normative ideals being promoted by the EU might themselves be unproblematic, diffusion through the EU faces the potential criticism of being neo-colonial and arrogant. This is then problematic if the essence of EU-Africa relations, and indeed the cultivation of African integration is to give Africa a better seat at the table to represent its citizens. Further, the EU faces challenges to its own integration. A recent report in the Economist suggested that the difficulty the EU had in reaching a conclusion on the Greek bailout and the Eurozone crises endangers the integration project. Perhaps exaggerated, reports like these engender the negative perception of third parties, especially budding regional institutions like the AU, to the „EU as a Model‟ paradigm."

ENDs

Of 9th, 11th, and 21st September, or Unleashing the AUfrican Lion to the World

“The Accidental Ecowas & AU Citizen”:

Of 9^th, 11^th, and 21^st September, or Unleashing the AU-frican Lion to the World

By E.K.Bensah Jr

I am not surprised much of the Ghanaian media missed it; I could not have expected anything less. It was always going to be obvious that they would remember the much-publicised 10^th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the US and be totally oblivious to developments on the continent. If we had a media more sensitized to what was going on in Africa and its regional economic communities, we might have had more column inches on one major anniversary and a conference that ended on that all-important anniversary.

9^th September is “Sirte Declaration Day”…

The all-important anniversary is that of 9^th September. This day is ineluctably etched in African integration history as a day when the Sirte Declaration was mooted in Libya. The significance of this declaration has to do with the fact that it is the resolution adopted by the-then Organisation of African Unity on 9 September 1999, at the fourth Extraordinary Session of the OAU Assembly of African Heads of State and Government held at Sirte, Libya. Policy-makers and aficionados of African unity remember Sirte to be blazing the trail on where Africa needs to go. If we can remember the importance of the Abuja Treaty of 1991 setting the blueprint for continental integration, then we can accept Sirte to be the engine for that integration. With it, three major things happened.

First, it set the tone for the establishment of the African Union as we know it today; second,  it speeded up the implementation of the provisions of the Abuja Treaty, to create an African Economic Community, and its attendant Pan-African institutions of the Nigeria-based African Central Bank; Cameroon-based African Monetary Fund; the African Court of Justice; ( Libya-based African Investment Bank ) and Pan-African Parliament, with the Parliament to be established by 2000. Third, it prepared a Constitutive Act of the African Union that would be ratified by 31 December 2000 and become effective the following year in 2001. 

…and the “real” African Union day

Also unbeknownst to the Ghanaian media was the highly-important fifth edition of the Conference of African Ministers of Integration (COMAI V). Held in Kenya from 5-9 September, the objective of the meeting was three-fold: to consider the report of the “Status of Integration in Africa 2011”; and a report on the “implementation of Recommendations from COMAI IV”; and review a study on “the quantification of scenarios of rationalization of RECs”. 

Simply put, the rationalization of RECs refers to AU member states deciding to stick to one regional economic community – instead of the two or three some of them belong to. Policy-makers at the UNECA and AU Commission see this as pivotal to achieving the African Economic Community by 2034. Of equal importance, also, is the Continental Integration Fund for supporting the UNECA-sponsored “Minimum Integration Programme” that will help RECs deliver on harmonization of programmes consistent with the Abuja Treaty. On that, the African Development Bank is ready to support ways of resourcing this facility that will complement existing alternative financing mechanisms identified by the AU for unity.

Truth be told, if there is anything we can say about 9 September, it is that it is the veritable “African union” day. That the unfortunate events of  9/11 took place two days after one of the most important and significant events of African integration is perhaps a harbinger/metaphor of how African integration was doomed to run on the back of the so-called War on Terror.

Terrorism, 9/11, and 21 September

Not that this does not matter, but in Africa, the almost over-kill of September 11 is only as poignant as African countries choose to make it. Few can forget that East Africa experienced a spate of terrorist attacks during the “War on Terror” decade. It is also regrettable that the decade would “close” with attacks in West Africa with the bombing of the UN building in Abuja allegedly by Boko Haram. But can we honestly say that a 30-member “Global Counterterrorism Forum”—comprising the AU member countries of Nigeria; South Africa; Egypt; Algeria; and Mauritania – would be the solution to countering violent extremism in the problem of the Sahel; Horn of Africa; and South East Asia. To have Algeria in that group is encouraging as that country has given vent to what observers of the AU in some quarters call the “maghrebization of peace and security” of the AU. 

I take issue not so much with the fact that this is an initiative of the Obama administration, but that the UN, regional and sub-regional bodies “would be invited to participate in the appropriate working group and their activities”. As to why they are not a permanent feature remains unclear. In the long run, this forum will be inaugurated on 21 September on the sidelines of the UN general assembly in New York.

Conclusion

I have no illusions that most of what I write here will be read by a minority of Ghanaians at best, minority of Africans at worst, and inculcated in a way that will help them make viscerally-life-changing decisions about what they can do to help the AU and ECOWAS deliver for citizens. 

What I do know is that someone somewhere will take note and seek to educate themselves about the AU and ECOWAS –despite the absolutely egregious manner in which these two organizations project themselves to African citizens. 

What I also know is that until Ghanaians begin to lose themselves to the rhythm of the African integration march, they will consign their progeny to an inexcusable fate they could have avoided. African integration will not work without a concerted effort by all—citizens and especially media alike—holding the policy-makers of these groupings accountable. 

Much of the time, citizens are keen to work for them because of the good money that is offered, forgetting that the benefits and good salary are the bonus of hard work in helping make a contribution towards the betterment of generations unborn. 

As I write this in the aftermath of another successful GJA Media Awards, I cannot help but also bow my head down in shame on how despite the centrality of Ghana in African integration—thanks to Dr. Kwame Nkrumah—Ghanaian media practitioners seem to be waiting for some external actor to sponsor an AU reporting award before they start writing about the AU or ECOWAS! Where is civil society on this issue? Where, indeed, are the media practitioners who need to be asking why such an award is not part of the categories? 

Ghana is much more than the politicking of the NPP and NDC, and I daresay we do not have to wait for the CPP to emerge as a fully-fledged third force before we start talking, and taking seriously what the AU and ECOWAS do. The triple responsibility that Ghanaians bear of being citizens of Ghana, ECOWAS community citizens and AUfrican citizens ought to awaken them to the imperative and necessity of capitalizing on both the months of May and September to give vent to the AUfrican personality the continent so desperately needs.

 ekbensah AT critiquing-regionalism.org

In 2009, in his capacity as a “Do More Talk Less Ambassador” of the 42^nd Generation—an NGO that promotes and discusses Pan-Africanism--Emmanuel gave a series of lectures on the role of ECOWAS and the AU in facilitating a Pan-African identity. Emmanuel owns "Critiquing Regionalism" (http://www.critiquing-regionalism.org). Established in 2004 as an initiative to respond to the dearth of knowledge on global regional integration initiatives worldwide, this non-profit blog features regional integration initiatives on MERCOSUR/EU/Africa/Asia and many others. You can reach him on ekbensah@ekbensah.net / Mobile: 0268.687.653.

Over Libya, Pax Nigeriana has Failed ECOWAS

“The Accidental Ecowas & AU Citizen”:

Over Libya, Pax Nigeriana has Failed ECOWAS

By E.K.Bensah Jr

The inchoate crystallization of a Pax Nigeriana is in serious danger of foundering.

 In 2011, Nigeria has had and enjoyed the priviledge of sitting both on the UN Security and AU Peace and Security Council -- as well as heading the chair of ECOWAS. At the Pan-African and global level, its performance has been questionable.

Instead of using the opportunity to demonstrate leadership for sub-Saharan Africa, it has given into its solipsistic whims, exposing the country less as a leader and more of a filibusterer. This thoughtless itch to go it alone has probably endangered not just the Nigerian Diaspora but other West Africans worldwide. Here's why:

First, to many observers and neophytes of ECOWAS alike, Nigeria seems to be synonymous with Ecowas. During the crisis in Cote d’Ivoire, many Westerners reporting the crisis gave the impression it was led by ECOWAS, using tags like “Nigeria-led” ECOWAS. A piece by bloggers of the academic blog “The Westphalian Post” of 2 January, 2011[1] even went as far as writing this of ECOWAS:

“With France, Britain, the US and the EU preparing sanctions packages against Côte d’Ivoire and Nigeria led ECOWAS [sic] threatening to mobilise the ECOMOG against Yamoussoukro, the loyalty of the army and Gbagbo’s apparatchiks may not last longer. Add to this ECOWAS’s decision to stop printing money for Côte d’Ivoire and the regime has its days numbered.”

Never mind the impression created that ECOWAS is “led” by Nigeria, and that the defunct ECOMOG mission of the nineties exists, but to even confuse ECOWAS with UEMOA (which was really the regional economic union that ensured bank notes had been stopped) speaks of a breath-taking ignorance of ECOWAS and its mandate by much of the West. 

Second, at a continental level, Nigeria's recognition of rebels has both endangered the sub-region and unwittingly irked the AU. Although some African countries have recognized the rebels, the AU officially has not. In addition, despite the fact that Nigeria refused to attend the Paris conference “welcoming” the TNC to the international community, as it were, lending some credence to an independent stance, few can deny how much Nigeria's stance looks pro-Nato and pro-West.

Third, far be it for anyone to assume that from Ghana we know what is going on on Nigeria’s domestic front as far as security is concerned, but there’s no gainsaying that while Nigeria must be lauded for wanting to open communication channels with Boko Haram, the extent to which it was successful has been demonstrated with the bombing of the UN building on 24 August.

The very incisive journalists in the Nigerian media must have written many column inches about it; I wonder whether—in fact I can confirm—most of my Ghanaian compatriots did not countenance sufficient cogitation over the issue to warrant discussion in the press through feature articles, for example, over the usual politicking.

In my view, whether Boko Haram is a domestic Islamic sect or not, that they exist is one existence of a sect too many, and too close to Ghana—not to mention a significant and nettlesome hindrance to the peace and security efforts being promoted by ECOWAS since it revised its treaty in 1993—not to merit consideration and attention by media practitioners in the sub-region.

In this case, Ghana could have capitalized on what some ECOWAS neighbours believe to be Ghana’s “arrogance” of feeling it to be the beacon of stability in the sub-region to join hands with its bigger neighbor in Nigeria to reflect on the ramifications of Boko Haram on the peace and stability of the sub-region. No-one need be told that the sub-region is both volatile and explosive, what with an abundance of natural resources, including Black Gold, coupled with our ever-porous borders.

These sparks ought to have been sufficient for Nigeria to have read between the lines, reflected also on the 17 June bombing, considered the many meetings of the INTERPOL-supported West African Police Chiefs Committee Organisation (WAPCCO) between June and August, and decided to get serious on encouraging and lobbying fellow West African countries to ratify the 2005 protocol establishing  the Criminal Investigative Intelligence Bureau(CIIB).

That Guinea-Conakry is the only ECOWAS member state to have established one at the local level ought to have given Nigeria fodder to begin lobbying that francophone neighbor into offering best practices for a possible model for the sub-region.

Meanwhile, Ghana does not -- and ought not – to escape finger-pointing here, for it was the country that recommended at Abidjan in 2002[2] at what would have been a meeting of WAPCCO that ECOWAS should be endowed with an FBI/INTERPOL-like intelligence system for ECOWAS to deal with cross-border crime. Since 2005, when the proposal for it was included in an ECOWAS Political Declaration,  Ghana seems to have kept mute on the issue – as if it is neither important nor necessitates reflection on given our equally-porous border we share with Cote d’Ivoire and the attendant security issues we experience.

Fourth, what the Nigerian Daily Trust calls the country’s decision to “re-formulate [its] foreign policy to reflect current global realities” is suspicious at best, dangerous at worst. Even if we forget it only goes to reinforce views of Nigerian’s surprising and remarkable volte-face, it has given Nigeria unwanted attention in an era where “terrorism” can be formulated into a convenient answer to intractable problems.

The Daily Trust’s editorial of 2 September is not without bite. It criticizes Nigeria for thoughtlessness, arguing that “to play [a] leadership role effectively, Nigeria’s leaders must be ready to think things through before they take any action on behalf of its people and on behalf of the peoples and countries of Africa.”  Considering how countries in the sub-region are concerned about the spillover of the Libyan conflict, the point about how Nigeria’s thoughtless act somehow endangering the sub-region can therefore not be sneezed at.

In the final analysis, no matter what Nigeria tries to do to save face, history is likely to judge it harshly. The opportunity lost to show leadership at a historic time when that country sits on the Councils of what are arguably two of the most prestigious international gathering on peace and security alongside South Africa, and to have the latter steal the thunder of Nigeria by offering a principled stance by not recognizing the rebels of Libya could certainly be conceived of as the beginning of the breakdown of any assumption of a Pax Nigeriana—and all the attendant respect that comes with such a status.

ekbensah AT critiquing-regionalism.org

In 2009, in his capacity as a “Do More Talk Less Ambassador” of the 42^nd Generation—an NGO that promotes and discusses Pan-Africanism--Emmanuel gave a series of lectures on the role of ECOWAS and the AU in facilitating a Pan-African identity. Emmanuel owns "Critiquing Regionalism" (http://www.critiquing-regionalism.org). Established in 2004 as an initiative to respond to the dearth of knowledge on global regional integration initiatives worldwide, this non-profit blog features regional integration initiatives on MERCOSUR/EU/Africa/Asia and many others. You can reach him on ekbensah@ekbensah.net / Mobile: 0268.687.653.

---

[1] http://westphalianpost.wordpress.com/tag/ecowas/

[2] http://www.panapress.com/ECOWAS-monitoring-situation-in-Cote-d-ivoire--12-465302-33-lang1-index.html

Why “Africa” is Lost in the “Abuja Treaty” Translation

“The Accidental Ecowas & AU Citizen”:

Why “Africa” is Lost in the “Abuja Treaty” Translation 

By E.K.Bensah Jr

 There's a conspicuously delicious irony centred around Nigeria in African integration history: it's to do with the fact that despite that country's “gradualist” pretensions to African unity, it's capital city is an eponymous representation to what is perhaps the most ambitious project to unite Africa--the Abuja Treaty.

 

Signed in May 1991, it has been in operation since June 1994. But many Africans wouldn't know it, for despite efforts by the AU to operationalise it, it is perhaps the best-kept open secret in Africa--as perhaps are the regional economic communities(RECs)!

Abuja Treaty vs AEC and RECs

The Treaty establishing the African Economic Community(AEC) was signed in Abuja, Nigeria in 1991. The AEC offers a framework for continental integration. The RECS are mere building blocs towards the full realisation of the AEC.

 

As regards the AEC, it has set no less than SIX stages to be fully operational. Starting from 1994, it has allowed 34 years for FULL political and economic integration. That makes 2018/2019 an important year. So, if we're lucky, by 2020, the African Economic Community should be fully operational, with the eight AU-recognised RECs(AU-RECs) possibly subsumed under regions of North, Central, East, South and West African Economic Communities.

 

I believe the reality to be very different by 2020. As RECs gain prestige in their comparative advantages of peace/conflict management; infrastructure, etc, they are wont to maintain themselves as legal personalities in their own right, and not necessarily want to subsume their staff and competencies under one sub-regional economic community!

 

If what Ghanaian lawyer and academic Dr.Richard Frimpong Oppong says is anything to go by in his insightful March 2010 piece "The African Union, the African Economic Community and Africa's Regional Economic Communities", given that the African Economic Community does not have a legal personality--that is to say that it has rights, protections, privileges, responsibilities, and liabilities under law, just as natural persons (humans) do--it already makes the framework upon which the African Union operates rather shaky and tenuous.

 

This is because while there is a protocol establishing the relationship between the AEC and RECs, "to what extent are the RECs bound by decisions of the AEC? Since the RECs, which have their own legal personality, are not parties to the AEC Treaty, what is the legal basis for assuming that they will merge and form the African Economic Community?"[italics are that of Dr.Oppong in his piece on p.94]

 

In my opinion, this is the crux of his piece--and a very important one at that too. Even more important is "rationalising", if you will, the relationship between the AEC and RECs as they progress and advance in their development. This other important point ought not to be lost on as we cogitate over the future of African integration and where the AU is going.

 

In my view, Dr.Oppong has opened up a whole new can of worms around African integration, and one which, in the light of the challenges the AU has been going through this year with Libya, merits serious consideration.

Pax Nigeriana

The specific case of Africa being “lost in the Abuja Treaty translation” is two-fold: one is historical; and the other has to do with the kind of vilification Nigeria goes through every now and then over its governance.

History shows us that Nigeria’s vision of continental union was not always as progressive as it has been made out to be. Long before the then-OAU was established in May 1963, Nigeria was all too happy being part of the so-called 24-member “Monrovia” group, which were more conservative and gradualist about how Africa should be united. Comprising Nigeria, Liberia, Senegal, Ivory Coast, and Cameroon—among many other countries—they were opposed to the “big-bang” integration advocated by the more radical members of the six-member Casablanca group, which included Ghana; Guinea; Mali; Egypt and Morocco.

It is ironic therefore that both the abortive Lagos Plan of Action and the Abuja Treaty would all be done in the most populous Black African country.

Secondly, despite the fact that corruption and/or chaos have been by-words of that country, we cannot escape the fact that, like Brussels being synonymous with the European Union institutions, Abuja is also increasingly a by-word for West Africa’s regional grouping of ECOWAS and its institutions.

As we now know, it is even more: Abuja has not just played host to a number of important meetings on Africa, its governance, and its integration throughout the years, but also has an important document outlining continental integration named after the capital city. Additionally, even if it was the Treaty of Lagos that set up ECOWAS in 1975, it is now in Abuja that many diplomatic missions worldwide flock to get closer to what has been termed in some quarters as Africa’s most dynamic regional economic community this side of the Sahara. Add the fact that Abuja is set to host the third pillar of the Pan-African financial institution—the African Central Bank—and we have for ourselves an “African Brussels” to watch out for.

The extent to which we—as African Union community citizens—can accept the double-edged sword of Nigeria both as a great country that is flawed and tainted by corruption, but one that will inevitably play critical roles in the facilitation of continental union will largely depend on how truly committed we all are to seeing an Africa predicated on strong, sustainable, effective and credible institutions that are funded by Africans – for the benefit of the continent.

 ekbensah AT critiquing-regionalism.org

from: http://www.thebftonline.com/bft_subcat_linkdetails.cfm?prodcatID=6&tblNewsCatID=63&tblNewsID=9224

In 2009, in his capacity as a “Do More Talk Less Ambassador” of the 42^nd Generation—an NGO that promotes and discusses Pan-Africanism--Emmanuel gave a series of lectures on the role of ECOWAS and the AU in facilitating a Pan-African identity. Emmanuel owns "Critiquing Regionalism" (http://www.critiquing-regionalism.org). Established in 2004 as an initiative to respond to the dearth of knowledge on global regional integration initiatives worldwide, this non-profit blog features regional integration initiatives on MERCOSUR/EU/Africa/Asia and many others. You can reach him on ekbensah@ekbensah.net / Mobile: 0268.687.653.