Sin-Sad leaders need to show more statesmanship than support for the Sudanese president, notes Gamal Nkrumah The usually sure-footed Chadian President Idris Deby, a close ally of Western powers such as the US and France, who vaunts his friendship with the militant anti-imperialist leaders of formerly designated pariah states such as Libya and Sudan, got into a pickle this weekend in his capital Ndjamena. One can sympathise with Deby that his hosting of a significant African summit this week was overshadowed by his warm welcome of Sudanese President Omar Hassan Al-Bashir. The heads of state and governments of the Sahel and Sahara met in the Chadian capital Ndjamena with the politically astute Deby playing host amid much pomp and ceremony. Even though the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi attended, it was Sudanese strongman Omar Hassan Al-Bashir who stole the show. International observers were expecting the Chadian authorities to arrest Al-Bashir and extradite him to The Hague to stand trial. But this didn't happen. The International Criminal Court (ICC) based in the Netherlands added the charge of genocide to the Sudanese president's long list of alleged crimes committed against the people of Darfur. Sudan's ruling National Congress Party (NCP) is not given to inviting public scrutiny of its leader's conduct. The Sudanese political establishment was furious about the prospects of Al-Bashir being brought to book on foreign soil. President Deby may have got himself into a muddle over Sudan, but the way forward for the Sahel and Saharan grouping, better known by its Arabic acronym Sin- Sad, is crystal clear. The economic grouping that straddles much of northern, central and western Africa -- one of African's largest and most dynamic economic communities that includes African political heavyweights such as Nigeria, Egypt and Libya -- is focussed on economic and environmental matters. Libya is widely regarded as the driving force behind the grouping. Libya sees mutual benefits from close economic and political relations with the countries of the sprawling Saharan and Sahelian region. Senegalese President Abdullah Wade, a staunch proponent of African unity, urged his counterparts in the Sin-Sad grouping to work tirelessly for the realisation of the United States of Africa. "We charged Chad's president to relay our message on behalf of our grouping to the heads of state and government assembled in Kampala [for the African Union Summit]," President Wade explained in Ndjamena. Wade and Gaddafi have been among the most vociferous African leaders in urging the creation of a United States of Africa. Other African leaders have been somewhat more lukewarm, preferring a step- by-step approach to African unity. No one expects the unity vision to be realised overnight. But proponents of African political unity are becoming increasingly impatient with the slothful approach adopted by a majority of African leaders. In Kampala, the question of a United States of Africa cropped up, but did not top the agenda. In sharp contrast, it was a key issue at the Ndjamena summit. Tension between the proponents of the two radically different approaches to African unity was obvious in Wade's carefully chosen words. "The creation of the United States of Africa," Wade and Gaddafi maintained, is the "key to getting Africa right." Libya's difficulty is that though it is on economically strong ground in supporting its less fortunate neighbours to its immediate south, it is on politically weak ground in that its track record on African politics is far from spotless. Tripoli has a history of meddling in the politics of its southern neighbours. There is considerable resentment by some African nations about what they regard as gross interference by Libyans in their internal affairs. However, several African nations applaud Libya's championing of the notion of a United States of Africa. This is, in part, political theatre. Gaddafi raised this question again in Ndjamena, much to the consternation of those who would rather have focussed on economic and environmental concerns. Gaddafi derided current half-baked attempts at African continental unity, calling for the formation of a continental government. At least the controversy he sparked has brought the debate forward. The Chadian leader downplayed the question, stressing instead his solidarity with the Sudanese president. Deby's stance was supported by the vast majority of African leaders, much to the chagrin of Western powers. The Sudanese president in turn expressed his gratitude to his Chadian counterpart. Observers, however, noted that much of the niceties at Ndjamena were tantamount to empty rhetoric. Like many Chadian strongmen who came to power since the country gained independence from France in 1960, President Deby has a curriculum vitae that at times is nebulous and at others decidedly disconcerting. It helps that the Chadian president is no ideologue, in sharp contrast to his newfound friends Gaddafi and Al-Bashir. Gaddafi's platform of revolutionary change at the Sin-Sad summit in Ndjamena was mostly rhetorical, offering business tweaks to his political motives to spur the move towards African continental unity. That, however, is easier said than done. When faced with a problem, Gaddafi's preferred strategy is to throw money at it. But to deliver real change it is statesmanship that is demanded of the Libyan leader, not business acumen. The apprehension in Ndjamena was that Sin-Sad had lost its capacity to inspire. It is crucial that the leaders assembled in Ndjamena enforce the right policies to speed up the development process in their largely impoverished and drought-stricken states. For the moment, they preferred to stress the sovereignty of Sudan. While this looks like a mature compromise, in reality it continues a disturbing pattern whereby Tripoli tries to wriggle out of current obligations arising out of litigation while steadfastly failing to create meaningful new ones through negotiations. From his tricky position the question of consolidating economic cooperation between the countries of the Sin-Sad is once again deferred. For many of his critics, Gaddafi like Al-Bashir has come to personify an era when African dictators who pulled the strings of power were above the law. The fact remains that even more liberal-leaning African leaders are reluctant to hand over Al-Bashir to the ICC. The moral of the story emanating from Ndjamena is that Gaddafi will not get very far with his agenda unless he reins in the power of opponents to the United States of Africa.
