Still why must diversity be a weakness yet give so much power to the US, the nation of immigrants? They had their civil wars and secessionism yes, but we can skip that madness by learning from them.
We can certainly learn from others. Are doing so or even trying or even planning to really start trying?
Ndemo and the Nigerian[?] author... they maybe right on the point but the AU Agenda 2063 does not have the postcolonial hangups they seemingly ascribe to it. It is a vibrant manifesto to look upon -- integration, cohesive policy, justice & equity -- exactly what the authors prescribe.
Yes, the
words. It's not all about "postcolonial hang-ups"; here is what the author sees as the problem:
This 50 year plan says nothing new as it restates many of the ideas that have been included in previous plans. It is vague and shows no concrete plan of implementation. One suspects that like other plans before it, Agenda 2063 will slowly fade into oblivion, to be replaced by another buzzword.
Go through the AU's archives, and you will find many grand plans, written in fancy words, full of "noble" intentions .... yet there is never the action to match the words.
For one I do not think AU should accept donations of budget, facilities, etc. It compromises our independence.
And how would they then survive? Let's do just the budget. Take a look at the 2016 one (which is typical):
http://www.saflii.org/au/AUDECISIONS/2015/19.html(a) Total of $416 million.
(b) Of that $247 million (60%) is to come from
donors development partners.
The real problem is evident when you take a look at the budget breakdown:
(c) $150 million is for the operating budget.
(d) $266 million is for programs, which is where the (b) goes. That makes (b) around 92%!!!
There is then another statement that reflects what happens every year: quite a few of the African countries never pay their dues (without a multi-year chase), and a few months to the end of the year, the place is out of money and it is necessary to hit the donors for a bit more. At such times and main-budget times, the "neo-colonial, anti-imperialist" rhetoric tends to be slowed down, because there is always quite a desperate plea to be sent out, especially at "supplementary budget" time. (Follow the AU proceedings at "budget" times, and you will see all sorts of embarrassing and humiliating "psycho-colonial" issues.)
Sukuma-wiki taken to "the next level":
3. AUTHORIZES the Commission to continue to solicit additional funds from Partners for Programs of the Union amounting to US$70,552,314 till the end of 2015 and to report back on the status to the PRC before the January 2016 Summit.
The "reluctant" folks are then urged in the sort of language that has now become standard:
4. EMPHASIZES the need for ownership of AU Programs by Member States through an effective demonstration of political will and by honouring their financial commitments to the organization, in particular the Flagship Projects featuring in the 10 Year Implementation Plan of Agenda 2063 and to minimize dependency on External Funding
Another thing that has recently come up in the news: Last year, it was agreed with the EU that the AU would put up 2% of AMISOM's budget (not otherwise included in budgetary discussions or figures) for this year.
7. APPROVES 2% of AMISOM budget for 2016 be supported by voluntary contributions from Member States;
Not a cent has been seen. So the EU has it will go ahead and reduce what it pays for salaries. There has been plenty of unhappiness over that.
Vision 2063: Where are the concrete plans? Where will the money come from?
A few days ago, I made an addition to the "Med Sea" thread. When there last was a big one, the EU came up with a proposal: "we'll put around $2 billion into a special fund to help Africa solve this problem, and we call on Africa countries to match that amount". Last I looked---much later---the EU appears to have done its bit, but African contribution had come to a halt at around $80 million.
The "African ICC"---or should we call it the CCC, for Continental Criminal Court---is another one. It will show that "Africans don't need neo-colonial imperialist courts to solve their own problems". Good stuff. But to actually get it beyond talk requires money. Apparently that is to come from the "donors". And those would be?
We need to move from big talk and grand plans to actually doing what we have to do to solve our own problems. (To my mind, money matching mouth would be a good start.) And we can do it, if we are minded to do so----whence (even) AU's urging on "political will" amongst its members. I rather like Ms Dlamini-Zuma, she has this glowy courage with sound realism. She has vocal on the success factors especially education, calling for more investment in science, technology and innovation faculties over humanities.
Lovely lady. Plenty of glow. But "investment" seems to suggest money ... And "factors" suggest Programs ... And ... (Concrete plans too would help.)
Topic: Rethinking Africa (Read 3806 times)