African leaders met in Banjul to discuss political crises, even as the continent's chances of economic prosperity look surprisingly bright, writes Gamal Nkrumah Africa will never be the same again. Well, not quite, anyway. African leaders converged on the Gambian capital Banjul last weekend for a two- day summit -- the Seventh Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union (AU). Two non-African leaders also turned up in Banjul -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. They were the only non-African leaders invited to the AU summit -- that in itself was an unprecedented and highly symbolic development. The choice of these two particularly virulent anti-Americans raised eyebrows in Washington and other Western capitals, but for Africa it hardly caused tongues to wag. Characteristically, Chavez reserved his harshest criticism for the United States' "global hegemony", stressing that African governments were short-changed in contracts with giant American oil companies. African leaders were listening with eager ears to Chavez's conclusions, and were particularly attentive when he boastfully mentioned his tax hike on US oil companies. A growing number of African oil producers feel they are being fleeced by the giant oil multinationals. Iran's Ahmadinejad also made a powerful impression on African leaders assembled in Banjul. He ascribed "poverty, backwardness, regional conflicts, corruption and illicit drug-trafficking" to Western capitalist greed and consumerism. Iran took the opportunity to lobby African support for its nuclear policy. Again, African leaders were all ears. Neither Chavez nor Ahmedinejad came across as a dangerous tearaway. The especially- cultivated friendships between Africa, Iran and Venezuela was shown to good effect in Banjul. It was clear that the leaders of Africa were courting both Chavez and Ahmadinejad, and the two non- African leaders were, in turn, obviously making the most of a golden opportunity to network with their African counterparts. Still, it was hardly the African Union's finest moment, for the Banjul summit coincided with a dangerous setback for African democracy. As it happened, only days before African leaders flew to Banjul, they flatly turned down a democracy charter. The rejection sets a dangerous precedent. The main reason that the democracy charter was rejected was that a majority of African leaders refused to accept one of the clauses that makes it very difficult, or rather impossible, for leaders to change their national constitutions to permit an extension to a third term in office. African leaders must learn that the world does not stand still. Opposition groups across the continent bitterly complain that elections are rigged. African leaders are deluding themselves if they think they can ignore democratisation and political reform while simultaneously pretending to resolve the continent's numerous protracted crises. Interrupting the march of time is probably the most dangerous policy muddle in which African leaders find themselves. Many refuse to recant, even in the face of public protests and growing armed opposition. And if recent history is any guide, the more notorious of Africa's diehard power-clingers will refuse to budge. Given that the democracy charter initiative seems doomed, the continent's political heavyweights, such as South Africa and Nigeria -- two of Africa's staunchest supporters of radical democratic change -- seem unlikely to be able to pull a few strings and advance the cause of democracy. Having the moral upper hand doesn't give countries like South Africa and Nigeria much lee-way. The unsurprising reason for this is as simple as it is lethal: 15 of Africa's 53 leaders are former military rulers -- those with a military background account for no less than a third. The summit's host himself, Gambian President Alhaji Yahya Jammeh, who usurped power in a military coup d'état in 1994, ousted a democratically- elected leader, Sir Dawada Jawara, and ruled the country with an iron fist for two years before deciding to strengthen his democratic credentials and retiring from the army. Today, the Gambian strongman is technically a democratically- elected civilian president. Even so, Alhaji Jammeh is still commander-in-chief and secretary of state for defence. Another problem that cropped up in Banjul is how to deal with former dictators. No one could give a credible answer to why the former Liberian president Charles Taylor was singled out for retribution. Taylor is soon to stand trial in The Netherlands. Belgium, on the other hand, requested the extradition of former Chadian dictator Hissene Habre. Habre was ousted by the current Chadian President Idriss Deby in 1990 in a bloody military takeover. Habre is accused of masterminding 40,000 political killings and orchestrating the torture of some 200,000 Chadians. Belgium's request was turned down and the AU has decided to try Habre in Senegal where he has until now been living as a political exile. "The AU has dealt with this matter and decided that President Habre be judged in Senegal and that his trial must be fair, transparent and just," Congolese President Denis Sasssou-Nguesso, the current AU chairman told reporters in Banjul. But by addressing the huge problems obstructing the resolution of the many African crises, the continent's leaders are increasingly aware of the pitfalls ahead, if democracy is not taken more seriously and human rights respected more sincerely. So awkward was the haggling over the democracy charter that it exposed the sham democracies and fake democrats in Africa. "Many governments continue to suppress opposition parties and a free press," noted United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan in Banjul. "Many continue to practise or tolerate large-scale corruption," he added. There is force in that argument. Passions naturally ran high in Banjul. Others, dismayed by this sleight-of-hand, were visibly angry about Annan's admonishment. Their worries were unduly excessive, though, for there is little that Annan could do but chide. If the UN or the AU Commission are to be effective in Africa, they must be given more teeth. Against this uncompromising background, African leaders are expected to resolve the continent's most tenacious challenges -- Darfur and Somalia. "The conflicts in Darfur, Somalia, Ivory Coast and northern Uganda continue to outrun efforts for solution," Annan stressed. The AU Commission Chairman Alpha Oumar Konare, a former Malian president, concurred. "Today we are urgently and seriously called upon to address the situation in Darfur and Somalia," Konare warned. Before heading for Banjul, Sudanese President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir warned that deploying international troops in Darfur would be tantamount to foreign occupation. Annan called Al-Bashir's rejection of international troops "incomprehensible". Others were more diplomatic. "In politics, nothing is ever settled until it is settled," the African Union special representative for Darfur Babangida Kingibe noted philosophically. Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, the prime attraction at previous AU summits, was somewhat muted in Banjul. Admittedly, he was working hard behind the scenes to mend fences with former foes. He also brought together arch- enemies Sudanese President Al-Bashir and his Chadian counterpart Deby to a tête-à-tête on Saturday to ease tensions between the two countries and iron over differences. This was no small feat, as the personal animosity between the Chadian and Sudanese leaders has long threatened to poison relations between the two countries for good. The Darfur and Somali crises have put African leaders in a bind. While the main thrust of the Banjul summit was political, economics also featured prominently. Economically, circumstances in Africa could not be more propitious. There are omens that bode well for a stronger African economy. On the bright side, the gross national products of 27 African countries are expected to expand by some five per cent in 2006. Yet, more soberingly, the number of people living below the poverty line is increasing in spite of higher economic growth rates. That all sounds robust, but on a more sombre note, southern Africans are in no mood for rejoicing. An atmosphere of despair prevails in the region, where a Malawian President Bingu wa Mutharika appealed to the international community to dispatch humanitarian food aid. The UN appealed for $88 million, the World Bank pledged $30 million. It was clear in Banjul that African leaders must now turn to the tougher problems of sustainable development.
