The March to the United States of Africa

- A Need or a luxury Part 2 Kojo Tamakloe

I am at pains to bring out the past of Africa and its founding fathers as I want the younger ones to come aboard as to what some of us take for granted and to discounter certain wrong notions and perceptions

1960

By this year there were now a sizeable number of “ independent” African countries and so by May 1963 a group calling itself “The organization of African unity” was born . The ideals were lofty and noble but could they function?

Groups do not function smoothly just by chance but go through stages . Bruce Tuckman , identifies 4 stages namely Forming, storming, norming, and performing

Forming as a first stage establishes tasks and relations

Storming the second stage brings out the interpersonal conflicts which need to be resolved . The depth of these conflicts can prevent a forward motion . We see this in the American civil war and the long, period it took the Chinese under Chairman Mao to be victorious as nations . The same can be said of the new African nation states

Norming , the third stage occurs when the conflicts have been resolved and work patterns have been established

Performing , the final phase is when the roles and tasks have been established and they are being carried out . However these will have to be continually repeated due to changing circumstances

So what can we expect from out infant baby called OAU , a group of newly “ Independent” states ?

I cull from Wikipeadia below

Soon after achieving independence, a number of African states expressed a growing desire for more unity within the continent. Not everyone was agreed on how this unity could be achieved, however, and two opinionated groups emerged in this respect:

• The Casablanca bloc, led by Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, wanted a federation of all African countries. Aside from Ghana, it comprised also Algeria, Guinea, Morocco, Egypt, Mali and Libya. Founded in 1961, its members were described as "progressive states".

• The Monrovian bloc, led by Senghor of Senegal, felt that unity should be achieved gradually, through economic cooperation. It did not support the notion of a political federation. Its other members were Nigeria, Liberia, Ethiopia and most of the former French colonies

• Hence we had an organization that had so many differences that it failed to meet its aims and objectives

• Below we see some of its failings

The organisation was widely derided as a bureaucratic "talking shop" with little power. It struggled to enforce its decisions, and its lack of armed force made intervention exceedingly difficult. Civil wars in Nigeria and Angola continued unabated for years, and the OAU could do nothing to stop them.

The policy of non-interference in the affairs of member states also limited the effectiveness of the OAU. Thus, when human rights were violated, as in Uganda under Idi Amin in the 1970s, the OAU was powerless to stop them.

In its 39 years of existence, critics argue that the OAU did little to protect the rights and liberties of African citizens from their own political leaders, often dubbing it as a "Dictators' Club]or "Dictator's Trade Union"

The OAU was, however, successful in some respects. Many of its members were members of the UN, too, and they stood together within the latter organisation to safeguard African interests – especially in respect of lingering colonialism. Its pursuit of African unity, therefore, was in some ways successful.

Total unity was difficult to achieve, however, as the OAU was largely divided. The former French colonies, still dependent on France, had formed the Monrovia Group, and there was a further split between those that supported the USA and those that supported the USSR in the Cold War of ideologies. The pro-Socialist faction was led by Kwame Nkrumah, while Félix Houphouët-Boigny of the Ivory Coast led the pro-capitalists. Because of these divisions, it was difficult for the OAU to take action against states involved in internal conflicts because it could rarely reach an agreement on what was to be done.

The OAU did, however, play a pivotal role in eradicating colonialism and minority rule in Africa. It gave weapons, training and military bases to colonised nations fighting for independence or majority rule. Groups such as the ANC and PAC, fighting apartheid, and ZANU and ZAPU, fighting for the independence of Southern Rhodesia, were aided in their endeavours by the OAU. African harbours were closed to the South African government, and South African aircraft were prohibited from flying over the rest of the continent. The UN was convinced by the OAU to expel South Africa from bodies such as the World Health Organisation.

The OAU also worked with the UN to ease refugee problems. It set up the African Development Bank for economic projects intended to make Africa financially stronger. Although all African countries eventually won their independence, it remained difficult for them to become totally independent of their former colonisers. There was often continued reliance on the former colonial powers for economic aid, which often came with strings attached: loans had to be paid back at high interest-rates, and goods had to be sold to the aiders at low rates.

The USA and USSR intervened in post-colonial Africa in pursuit of their own objectives. Help was sometimes provided in the form of technology and aid-workers. While useful, such external assistance was often perceived?] as not necessarily in the best interests of the former colonies.

So as can be seen all was not doom and gloom . But like everything about Africa the world will emphazize on the failures and hide the victories

In the final phase I want us to use the past to chart a brighter future for Ghana and Africa

Author Kojo Tamakloe is a Pan Africanist and Nkrumaist who believes Africa’s under development is a result is its dis unity and could be solved by Nkrumaist ideology