By L. Muthoni Wanyeki
It is truly that difficult to make sense of the goings-on at the African Union. Perhaps it will always be that difficult.
Torn as Africa constantly is between being
self-referential. And being acutely aware of the external gaze When we
look in the mirror, do we see ourselves? Or do we see what others see?
Some of us admit to what we see — pimples, warts and all — at least in
private and on our own. Most of us, however, angrily, defensively, deny
and refute what we see.
Take what we do to ourselves. The Central African Republic. South Sudan. Both unnecessary. Both devastating.
The language of the AU discussions does not even
come close to describing that devastation. But even in the diplomatic,
let’s-put-our-best-foot-forward mode, the AU’s frustration was clear.
The AU Chair essentially begged our leaders to
start behaving. Yet she seemed defeated even as she began. By calling
attention not so much to causes as to responses: Like operationalising
the African Peace and Security Architecture. Barely concealing her
irritation at the fact that support is not forthcoming from us — it is
still external.
The external players, frankly, didn’t know how to
play it. They were present but kept mum. The Americans descended with a
larger and more high-level entourage than ever before. For CAR is on the
verge. And South Sudan is — or was — one of their babies.
The United Nations political bodies were smoothly
supportive. Its operational bodies were near apoplectic. Among the
latter, there is talk of all bets being off. Of mission renewal. Of
change. How could there not be change, they demand? These are atrocity
crimes after all.
But none of that showed publicly. The operational
bodies kept doing what they could to manage the unmanageable. The human
costs. The political bodies assuaged, murmured supportively.
The AU pretended not to notice its motives were
being questioned. And, on South Sudan at least, it proved it was serious
about accountability. It was made clear to all parties that
accountability will be on the table — but by an African-led process.
There would be no more talk of the International
Criminal Court. No, no, no. That was off the table. But accommodation
was found. The externals fell quietly into line. Queasy memories of
recent confrontations were laid to rest.
But then there was the banging on the table about the lack of neat accommodation on the Kenyan and Sudanese deferral requests.
Some AU member states were irritated at Kenya’s
continued last-minute tabling of requests they thought they’d already
dealt with. But there was no public dissent. Kenya’s strategy is now
clear.
An AU resolution on non-cooperation with the
Office of the Prosecutor specifically. Neatly timed with a domestic
“stakeholders” conference on the International Crimes Division. Let’s be
clear — stakeholder here only means relevant parts of the government of
Kenya. Not the public at large. The AU upheld this.
Consciously, unconsciously, Kenya is the empty
slate onto which all its anger and frustration at the external gaze is
being drawn. The paint is slathered on thick. The image strikes a
jarring note. Are we serious? Do Africans’ lives matter? Or do they not?
L. Muthoni Wanyeki is Amnesty International’s
new regional director for East Africa. This column is written in her
personal capacity
No comments :
Post a Comment