Washington, DC — The launching of the African Union at the OAU's Lusaka Summit of the Heads of State and Government in July last year marks a major transition for Africa, an opportunity to move beyond the post-colonial rollercoaster of aspiration and disappointment.
The legislation that constituted the AU calls for economic and monetary union and the economic integration of the continent. For many, it's a chance to leave failed policies and over-powerful presidents behind and enter a new era of rational, evolutionary change led by competent professionals. Decades of leadership by self-interested leaders in the OAU could be replaced by an African parliament, a central bank, an African court of justice and other pan-continental institutions.
This year's African Development Forum - the annual conference hosted by the UN's Economic Commission for Africa in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa - is focused on the transition to the AU. AllAfrica asked John Githongo, executive director of Transparency International in Kenya, and a member of Transparency Internationals global board, to discuss the pros and cons of African integration. Excerpts:
Are people right to be sceptical about the integration of the continent as we move towards the African Union?
I think people have a right to be sceptical, considering the past history. I mean, if you go through all the OAUs different resolutions...(laugh) one could think theyve been done by a writer of fiction, I mean, because the OAU sits down and makes resolutions which dont amount to very much,
However, there have been fundamental developments. I mean, the very fact that African leaders these days dont sit back when a coup attempt takes place is a very major development. There are other positive things that have happened; like the whole tide of political pluralism that took place after the fall of the Berlin Wall which was really imposed on many [African] countries by outside donor pressure, Western countries who were excited by what had happened in Europe and saw that perhaps the wind of change could blow across Africa as well, which, to a certain extent, it did with imperfect results. Even though the Western governments were very key in pushing for that second wind of change in the early 1990s, their interest or initiative happened to coincide with the aspirations of a majority of the African population, so across the continent Africans supported this change.
Another source of scepticism is the fact that this whole thing is bankrolled, to a certain extent, by Gadaffi; but, number one, I think the idea of African integration resonates for the majority of African people; youd be hard-pressed to find an ordinary African who doesnt think that African unity is a good idea at a purely emotional level.
Number two, if one is pragmatic about it, Muammar Gadaffi, despite using his own sort of odd ideology, has nonetheless been the funder of a huge amount of destabilization and bloodshed on the African continent so its good, for a change, that Gadaffi is not funding all sorts of crack-pots on the continent to kill Africans. Hes pulling his weight. Hes putting his money and his mouth behind an initiative which meets the aspirations of a majority of African people.
But that is exactly why people are so skeptical. They're asking; "the same people who brought us war and misery all these years are now the people who are now going to deliver us into a unified, and economically prosperous continent?" People feel that there is a fundamental flaw in the thinking here, that this isnt a democratic process, this is something thats happening up there at the top; the leaders are just moving the furniture.
I dont think so. I think, purely by coincidence, this time theyre pushing something which Africans will like.
I dont think that the current crop of African leaders, especially the old-time leaders like Gadaffi, are going to be the ones to see this project through. I think its going to be seen through by a different generation. Gadaffi and company arent going to be there forever. A lot of multiparty elections have taken place across Africa. We have constitutional amendments, which were made in the 1990s which mean many of the old guard African leaders arent going to be around in five to 10 years time. History has moved beyond the Mugabes, and you have major change. Yes, its going to be temporarily very unstable and possibly quite bloody which is sad and unfortunate, but some of these changes are positive ones. I dont think its musical chairs.
I do think that some key African leaders, in my opinion, havent yet taken this initiative totally seriously; once Nigeria, South Africa and company take it on board properly, it will have very serious expression.
First, we are going to see the Nepad initiative, which is fronted by Obasanjo, Mbeki, and Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal, being integrated with the AU initiative.
The other thing youve got to realize, Africans are integrating a lot more rapidly than the politicians. The African Union and other integration initiatives are simply trying to catch up with the integration that is taking place across the continent, partially due to developments in information technology, but also because the borders have become a lot more porous as governments become less functional.
So what characterizes that integration?
What characterizes that integration is a country like Kenya, where 20 years ago, regional trade accounted for 10-15% of overall trade. Now its up to 40% and still rising. The same is true for many other African countries. Even Zimbabwe, which is having a rough time economically, is trading a lot more intensively within the region. Now this hasnt come about because of some grand plan by old-style leaders. Its come because of ordinary African business people having to face a very difficult international environment and responding to that by realizing that if theyre going to survive theyre going to have to take regional trade a lot more seriously.
What other signs are there that ordinary Africans are ahead of the politicians?
Well, take Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania; if you walk into any Kenyan bank now, you can take Tanzanian shillings, Ugandan shillings and change them. That wasnt possible as little as 10 years ago, so thats beginning to happen.
Then there is a lot of informal trade across borders. What is happening in the Congo is very unfortunate, with countries walking in there and fighting a war, trying to sort out their own internal political contradictions on Congolese soil; but in the long term, the whole process will have the effect of integrating the economies of the region in very profound ways. Whats happening now is quite unfortunate with a lot of profiteering and looting; but I think the effects will ultimately be beneficial. We have more progressive leaders like Joseph Kabila and company coming in, younger leaders, they will be able to take advantage of these developments in a more systematic manner.
So in practical terms, what do you now want to see? I mean, people talk about a Central Bank for Africa, they talk about currency unification and a number of other measures. But what, for you, are the three big things that have to happen to support this process?
I think the most important thing is the harmonization of trade regimes which is a hard process; it takes time, even the Europeans took very long, and they still havent sorted out issues with regard to agriculture, for example. Within Comesa, we are grappling with it; within the East African Community we are throwing significant intellectual resources at these issues and I think trade liberalization is a start - before you start talking about single currencies and single central banks.
The other thing thats needed is the rule of law. For example, in East Africa we now have an East African Court which will deal with issues of integration and trade issues between the countries; thats a very important, positive development because eventually it will mean we have increasingly stabilization of human rights. At the end of the day we want business to grow and people to live in peace and security; for that you need respect for the rule of law.
In states where you have great weaknesses in internal judicial systems, many of which have been 'captured' by ruling elites, perhaps having these regional structures that can act as agencies of final recourse for the citizens of African countries, one step removed from local politics, may be a step in the right direction.
So - trade harmonization and creating institutions of recourse for business people and ordinary Africans - both very important.
How worried are you that the lack of protection for African economies is just going to make it very easy for more powerful economic nations to benefit from this process, while Africa is damaged by it?
That is possibly true. But the fact of the matter is, thats a battle that our nations are currently fighting individually and they have very weak voices on the international stage; if they can fight them collectively, by first sorting out their own internal differences, they could be stronger. We have a little situation between Kenya and Uganda, for example, where we have different limits for axle loads where Ugandan trucks can carry x number of tons and Kenyan ones can carry x plus 20%; that is completely crazy when you try to harmonize tax regimes and that kind of thing. We have to sort things out at that bureaucratic level before we can have a strong voice for protecting our own internal industries at the international level. I think we will be able to do it.
Some people will say to you, look at an economy like South Africas where all the protections were removed: now what youre seeing is money haemorrhaging out of that country and a currency thats losing value at the rate of knots; and they're asking, is this really what we want to do to the rest of the continent?
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Yes and South Africa is in a difficult position because when South Africans tried to raise that argument, they faced great international pressure and were accused of returning to socialism and protectionist policies; but if South Africa was making those arguments in a collective way, in partnership with other African countries they would be able to act with more effectiveness. The key to effectiveness is solidarity. If Thabo Mbeki were not having to make all these arguments by himself then he would be able to implement measures that would not be met with such a huge international outcry because it would be part of a collective initiative.
If you look towards the management of this pan-continental economy, which institutions are going to make the rules and why should anyone have trust in them?
I think that the key thing is for African countries to develop collective mechanisms for guaranteeing the rule of law, for guaranteeing the protection of property and human life. Once you have that, then business has the ultimate ingredient for an enabling environment. They create an environment where single currencies would become manifestly logical to all the players involved and these initiatives would be trusted. But right now you have a situation in many countries where the rule of law doesnt apply and there are no agencies of final recourse for people who may feel that they have been hard done by, in the way of business or human rights abuses.
So are you anticipating that the dictatorial tendencies of individual African leaders will, in some way, be undermined by an regional approach to law-making and monitoring, as in the European Union where human rights lobbyists and various others have sought to use the European courts to force their own governments into more liberal positions than they would otherwise have taken?
Absolutely; and the key thing is that when you have issues like the harmonization of trade regimes and the moment you have national governments who begin to understand and respect the fact that a large part of their taxes are being paid thanks to trade, a situation develops where undermining the rule of law is committing suicide. Part of the reason European governments behave the way they do, even when they dont individually want to sometimes, is because everybody wants to be part of the EU. The most important thing about the European Union is, its good business, its good economics, it makes money, it keeps economies growing, so everyone wants to be part of it for that reason. [ADF3]
