Underskog

“No more, never again. Africans cannot…watch the tragedies developing in the continent and say it is the UN’S responsibility or somebody else’s responsibility. We have moved from the concept of non-interference to non-indifference. We cannot as Africans remain indifferent to the tragedy of our people.” - Ambassador Saïd Djinnit, African Union’s Commissioner of Peace and Security

2002 was the presumed beginning of a new dawn as the pillars of the African Union (AU) were raised on the rubble and remains of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). High expectations were placed on the OAU’s successor as its birth was rooted in the conviction among African leaders that the OAU had demonstrated an inability to promote peace and development on the continent. This new continental organisation placed renewed emphasis on building a continental security regime capable of preventing, managing and resolving conflicts in Africa. A fundamental circumscribing element in the AU’ security policy that considerably separates it from its predecessor, is that components of its peace and security agenda is modelled upon the framework of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) document, The Responsibility to Protect. This directive makes the African Union’s Constitutive Act the first international treaty to recognise the right on the part of an international organisation to intervene for human protection purposes.

The African Union is concomitantly a unique and ambitious venture that represents a strategic desire to pool resources in the interests of all. However, beyond its idealised and often, romanticised depiction as a pan-African ideology, its legitimacy is faltering, as member states find it difficult to relinquish power in the hands of the AU. In addition to this, the pool of resources rather resembles a puddle, as member states find giving for all, much easier said than done.

• Does the AU, for all its problems, have the potential to become a consolidated international organisation, protecting first and foremost Africa’s issues and concomitantly responding to the call of plight in other centres of the world?

The UN has called Darfur the world’s most pressing and alarming humanitarian crisis, a human rights catastrophe. The AU’s performance in Darfur has been descibed as the ‘litmus test’ of the AU’s capacity and willingness to serve as a regional force for peace and to implement its peace and security agenda. This debate shall look at the Union’s contribution to the situation in Darfur through its resonating security policies.

• Is Darfur a potentially representative example of the AU’s ability to effectively create “African Solutions to African Problems”?

Panelists:

• Karin Dokken, Associate Professor, Institute of Political Science, UiO
• Cyril Obi, Research Coordinator, Nordic Africa Institute
• Endre Stiansen, senior researcher, PRIO, has worked for the AU in Darfur
• Nosizwe Lise Baqwa, African Students’ Union (chair)

_Organizers: U-landsseminaret in co-operation with African Student Union and The Norwegian Council for Africa (Fellesrådet for Afrika)_