NAIROBI, 12 January 2006 — As if Africa did not have enough of an image problem, it now faces the prospect of one of its most vilified governments leading the body intended to guarantee peace and democracy across the continent. Having already notched a diplomatic coup to host the upcoming Jan. 23-24 African Union summit, Sudan would earn further prestige if it assumes the next rotating chairmanship of the 53-nation body as normal protocol dictates.
President Omar Bashir’s government could do with that to offset widespread foreign opprobrium over conflicts within and beyond its borders, particularly the war in Sudan’s western Darfur region. But the prospect of a Sudan AU chairmanship horrifies its many critics who see it as one of the worst possible ambassadors for Africa and fear it could sink the Darfur peace process. They hope the continent’s big diplomatic players — like South Africa and Nigeria — find a more suitable candidate. “If Sudan takes the AU leadership, it wins credibility, but to the detriment of the African Union,” Nairobi-based Sudan expert David Mozersky told Reuters. “The Sudan government has been one of the worst perpetrators of human rights abuses on the African continent for the last two years.”
Neighboring Chad — which accuses Sudan of backing rebels seeking to overthrow President Idriss Deby — is the only African nation openly campaigning against Khartoum. “An aggressive neighbor like Sudan is not capable of hosting the next AU summit, not to mention being the next chairman,” said Deby, who wants current AU chairman and Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo to stay on. Deby plans to boycott the meeting though an envoy from Chad would attend “if we cannot have the summit canceled” and “unless we break off relations”, Communications Minister Hourmadji Moussa Doumgor told Reuters.
Further stirring controversy, rebels fighting the Khartoum government in Darfur have threatened to pull out of AU-sponsored peace talks in Nigeria if Bashir takes over.
Rights groups are also outraged at the prospect. Khartoum is accused of backing militia known as “Janjaweed” in a campaign of rape, killing and marauding against Darfur civilians that Washington has termed genocide. “The African Union should not reward the sponsors of crimes against humanity,” said Peter Takirambudde, Africa director of US-based Human Rights Watch. “How can the African Union be seen as a credible mediator in Darfur if one of the warring parties hosts its summit and becomes the head of the organization as well? The AU has a 7,000-strong mission monitoring a shaky cease-fire in Darfur, so a Sudan chairmanship of the Pan-African body would put the government in a bizarre situation.
“It would be awkward, pretty much unprecedented,” said UK-based analyst Patrick Smith, of Africa Confidential newsletter. “He (Bashir) would want to keep the mission watered down and small, so he would be going head-to-head with (AU commission head Alpha Oumar) Konare who wants to beef it up.”
Diplomats say there is considerable disquiet around sub-Saharan Africa at the thought of a Sudan-led AU — with some countries talking among themselves about alternatives — though there is a bloc of support for Sudan in Muslim North Africa. Regional power house South Africa and current chairman Nigeria do not, however, want to be perceived as “big-footing” the rest. And while rumors abound in the run-up to the summit, no consensus over another candidate has yet emerged, they add. “It is going to be difficult for the AU heads of state and government not to allow Sudan to chair,” said Prince Mashele, of the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria. “African leaders are diplomatic in dealing with sensitive issues and will not raise Sudan’s rights or governance issues publicly.”
