INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OF AFRICAN STATES ; POL 452.1


COURSE OUTLINE
– THE NATURE OF POSSESSIVE IMPERIALISM AND THE ORIGIN OF AFRICAN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS;
– THE NATURE OF AFRICAN COLONIAL STATES;
– THE EFFECTS OF COLONIALISM ON AFRICAN STATES;
(PART 2)
-THE STRUGGLE FOR SELF DETERMINATION
– PAN AFRICANISM AS AN IDEOLOGY;
– GARVEYISM AND AFRICAN UNITY
– DUBOISM AND AFRICAN UNITY
– NKRUMAHISM AND AFRICAN UNITY
-NEOCOLONIALISM AND AFRICAN UNITY;
– THE OAU AND FAILURE OF PAN AFRICANISM
– THE EFFECTS OF THE FAILURE OF PAN AFRICANISM
(PART 3): AFRICA AND THE UNITED NATIONS
– THE CONCEPT OF THIRD WORLDISM AND NON-ALIGNMENT
– AFRICAN RELATION WITH ASIA
– AFRICAN RELATION WITH LATIN AMERICA
– AFRICAN RELATION WITH AMAERICA AND EUROPE
-(PART 4): AFRICAN INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
-FROM OAU TO AU, THE FAILURE OF OAU AND AU PROSPECTS
-NEPAD, AFRICAN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS

-(PART 5): GLOBALISATION AND AFRICA
– THE THEORIES OF GLOBALISATION (DEMOCRATIZATION & LIBERALISATION)
– AFRICAN DEBT CRISIS AND ECONOMIC GLOBALISATION
-AFRICAN CONFLICT AND POLITICAL GLOBALISATION
– THE CONTRADICTIONS; NEO-COLONALISM AND GLOBALISATION
SUMMARY:
THE PRESENT AND FUTURE PROSPECTS OF AFRICAN STATES UNDER GLOBALISATION.

– THE NATURE OF POSSESSIVE IMPERIALISM AND THE ORIGIN OF AFRICAN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS;
– THE NATURE OF AFRICAN COLONIAL STATES;
– THE EFFECTS OF COLONIALISM ON AFRICAN STATES;
(PART 2)
-THE STRUGGLE FOR SELF DETERMINATION
– PAN AFRICANISM AS AN IDEOLOGY;
Pan-Africanism is a movement that seeks to unify African people or people living in Africa, into a “one African community”.Differing types of Pan-Africanism seek different levels of economic, racial, social, or political unity.

PAN AFRICAN FLAG

Origins
In the United States, the term is closely associated with Afrocentrism, an ideology of African American identity politics that emerged during the civil rights movement of the 1960s to 1970s. “Pan-African” unity is especially important in African American identity politics, because the African ancestry of Afro-American community cannot be derived from any identifiable African people. Therefore it has become necessary to minimize the differences between the various peoples of Africa in favour of a generalized “African” heritage. As a philosophy, Pan-Africanism represents the aggregation of the historical, cultural, spiritual, artistic, scientific and philosophical legacies of Africans from past times to the present. Pan-Africanism as an ethical system traces its origins from ancient times, and promotes values that are the product of the African civilization and the struggles against slavery, racism, colonialism, and neo-colonialism.[5]
Pan-Africanism can be seen as a product of the European slave trade. Enslaved Africans of diverse origins and their descendants found themselves embedded in a system of exploitation where their African origin became a sign of their servile status. Pan-Africanism set aside cultural differences, asserting the principality of these shared experiences to foster solidarity and resistance to exploitation.
Alongside a large number of slave insurrections, by the end of the eighteenth century a political movement developed across the Americas, Europe and Africa which sought to weld these disparate movements into a network of solidarity putting an end to this oppression. In London, the Sons of Africa was a political group addressed by Quobna Ottobah Cugoano in the 1791 edition of his book Thoughts and sentiments on the evil of slavery. The group addressed meetings and organised letter-writing campaigns, published campaigning material and visited parliament. They wrote to figures such as Granville Sharp, William Pitt and other members of the white abolition movement, as well as King George III and the Prince of Wales, the future George IV.
Modern Pan-Africanism began around the beginning of the twentieth century. The African Association, later renamed the Pan-African Association, was organized by Henry Sylvester-Williams around 1887, and their first conference was held in 1900.
Concept
As originally conceived by Henry Sylvester-Williams (note: some history books credit this idea to Edward Wilmot Blyden) pan-Africanism referred to the unity of all continental Africa.The concept soon expanded, however, to include the African diaspora.
During apartheid South Africa there was a Pan Africanist Congress that dealt with the oppression of South Africans under European apartheid rule. Other pan-Africanist organizations include Garvey’s Universal Negro Improvement Association-African Communities League, TransAfrica and the International People’s Democratic Uhuru Movement.
The goals of Pan-Africanism are diverse. Some may view pan-Africanism as an endeavour to provide revisionist histories of Africa that include and focus on the perspectives of Africans, rather than only Europeans or colonialists. Others may view Pan-Africanism as an endeavour to return to “traditional” African concepts about culture, society, and values. Examples of this include Léopold Sédar Senghor’s Négritude movement, and Mobutu Sese Seko’s view of Authenticité.
An important theme running through much pan-Africanist literature concerns the historical links between different countries on the continent, and the benefits of cooperation as a way of resisting imperialism and colonialism.
In the 21st century, this theme has developed in response to globalisation and the problems of environmental justice. For instance, at the conference “Pan-Africanism for a New Generation” held at the University of Oxford, June 2011, Ledum Mittee, the current president of the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) argues that environmental justice movements across the African continent should create horizontal linkages in order to better protect the interests of threatened peoples and the ecological systems in which they are embedded, and upon which their survival depends.
An important aspect is the argument that Egypt is an African country, and shares important historical and cultural continuities with other countries in the Nile valley. This is sometimes characterised by the term Nile Valley Civilizations or African civilizations that group Egypt with other civilisations of other parts of the continent.
Some universities have gone as far as creating “Departments of Pan-African Studies” in the late 1960s. This includes the California State University, where that department was founded in 1969 as a direct reaction to the civil rights movement, and is today dedicated to “teaching students about the African World Experience”, to “demonstrate to the campus and the community the richness, vibrance, diversity, and vitality of African, African American, and Caribbean cultures” and to “presenting students and the community with an Afrocentric analysis” of anti-black racism.[1] Syracuse University also offers a masters degree in “Pan African Studies”.

Key figures in Pan-Africanism

• Kwame Nkrumah was a Pan-African activist who became the first president of Ghana. Brain behind the Organisation of African Unity.
• Edward Wilmot Blyden- Pan-Africanist writer from Liberia
• W. E. B. Du Bois African-American Pan-Africanist writer. Du Bois hosted the highly influential 5th Pan-African Conference in Manchester, UK.
• Marcus Garvey, was a Jamaican born Pan-Africanist, stern advocate for the Back-to-Africa movement, and has also been labeled as a Father of Pan-Africanism. Garvey led the largest organization with Pan-African goals in history.
• Paul Robeson, the singer, actor and political radical, co-founded the Council on African Affairs(1937–1950) which became a leading voice of anti-colonialism and Pan-Africanism in the U.S. and internationally Robeson said as early as the 1930s that he wanted “to be African”, studied African language and culture and urged Americans to fight African imperialism. Robeson was close friends with Jomo Kenyatta, Kwame Nkrumah and W. E. B. Du Bois. Despite stereotypes endemic to the times, Robeson’s films such as Song of Freedom and Jericho/Dark Sands were the first to show African’s in a positive light. Robeson also wrote and spoke out against Apartheid, the need for African Independence and narrated an early film about the regime, My Song Goes Forth (also known as Africa Sings, Africa Looks Up, U.K., 1937).
• Jomo Kenyatta was a Pan-African activist who became the first president of Kenya.
• Bob Marley was a Jamaican born musician whose music reflected Pan Africanist thought, music and philosophy.
• Julius Kambarage Nyerere: Key figure for Pan Africanism and SADC.
• Ahmed Sékou Touré was a Pan-African activist, who became the first President of Guinea, West Africa, the first French sub-Saharan African colony to gain independence from France on October 2, 1958 following its rejection of the famous 1958 Referendum that was proposed by President Charles De Gaulle of France. President Toure, along with President William Tubman of neighboring Liberia and President Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, was the vanguard behind the creation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), which has been transformed into the African Union (AU), at a Special Head of States Meeting held in the northern Liberian city of Sanniquelle, Nimba County, which is often referred to as the “birth place” of the OAU (now the AU).
• Fela Anikulapo Kuti: The founder of Afrobeat music, and political/human rights activist. Promoted pan-africanism through his music.
• Gamal Abd El Nasser was a Pan-African activist and the president of Egypt. Alongside Nkrumah, he endorsed the African countries who were fighting for independence and placed Egyptian culture and civilisation within an African framework.
• Haile Selassie, emperor of Ethiopia, was a key figure in Pan-Africanism due to his call for greater unity among African Nations.
• Molefi Kete Asante strongly influenced by Kaiwada philosophy wrote his treatise on Afrocentricity. This greatly influenced Pan-Africanists in the late seventies and eighties. Another contemporary Afrocentric movement leader was Prof. Chinweizu Ibekwe (known simply as Chinweizu), a scholarly Nigerian anthropologist and a beacon of Africanism.
• Muammar al-Gaddafi, known as Colonel Gaddafi, was an active organizer of African unity and the proposed formation, based on Gamal Abd El Nasser and Kwame Nkrumah’s dream, of a United States of Africa.
• Robert Gabriel Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe who has ruled for more than 28 years.
• Malcolm X planned to link the Organization of Afro-American Unity through Pan-Africanism to internationalize the human struggle of African people.
• Robert Sobukwe was a South African political dissident, who founded the Pan Africanist Congress in opposition to the apartheid.
• Alhaji Alieu Ebrima Cham Joof was a Gambian historian, author, politician, Pan-Africanist and a nationalist during the colonial era. He attended the first and second Pan-African Youth Movement Conference held in Tunisia and Tanzania respectively.[11] In the first ever Organization of African Unity Conference, he delivered a speech to the Members, in which he told them to endeavour their utmost to erradicate colonialism and neo-colonialism, and not to listen to anybody else outside the African continent. He was also imprisoned by the British Administration for his political activities in 1959.

– GARVEYISM AND AFRICAN UNITY
– DUBOISM AND AFRICAN UNITY
– NKRUMAHISM AND AFRICAN UNITY
-NEOCOLONIALISM AND AFRICAN UNITY;
Neocolonialism is the practice of using capitalism, globalization, and cultural forces to control a country (usually former European colonies in Africa or Asia) in lieu of direct military or political control. Such control can be economic, cultural, or linguistic; by promoting one’s own culture, language or media in the colony, corporations embedded in that culture can then make greater headway in opening the markets in those countries. Thus, neocolonialism would be the result of business interests leading to deleterious cultural effects.
The term “neocolonialism” was first coined by Kwame Nkrumah, the first post-independence president of Ghana, and has been discussed by a number of twentieth century scholars and philosophers, including Jean-Paul Sartre and Noam Chomsky.
“Neocolonialism” is a term used by post-colonial critics of developed countries’ involvement in the developing world. Writings within the theoretical framework of neocolonialism argue that existing or past international economic arrangements created by former colonial powers were or are used to maintain control of their former colonies and dependencies after the colonial independence movements of the post–World War II period. The term neocolonialism can combine a critique of current actual colonialism (where some states continue administrating foreign territories and their populations in violation of United Nations resolutions[3]) and a critique of the involvement of modern capitalist businesses in nations which were former colonies. Critics adherent to neocolonialism contend that multinational corporations continue to exploit the resources of post-colonial states, and that this economic control inherent to neocolonialism is akin to the classical, European colonialism practiced from the 16th to the 20th centuries. In broader usage, neocolonialism may simply refer to the involvement of powerful countries in the affairs of less powerful countries; this is especially relevant in modern Latin America. In this sense, neocolonialism implies a form of contemporary “economic imperialism”: that powerful nations behave like colonial powers of imperialism, and that this behavior is likened to colonialism in a post-colonial world.
Origins of the term: charges against former colonial powers
“As long as imperialism exists it will, by definition, exert its domination over other countries. Today that domination is called neocolonialism.”
— Che Guevara, Marxist revolutionary, 1965

Kwame Nkrumah, first president of Ghana, and one of the coiners of the term “neocolonialism”, pictured on a Soviet stamp (1989).
The term neocolonialism first saw widespread use, particularly in reference to Africa, soon after the process of decolonization which followed a struggle by many national independence movements in the colonies following World War II. Upon gaining independence, some national leaders and opposition groups argued that their countries were being subjected to a new form of colonialism, waged by the former colonial powers and other developed nations. Kwame Nkrumah, who in 1957 became leader of newly independent Ghana, was one of the most notable figures to use the term. A classical definition of neocolonialism is given in his Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism (1965). The work is self-defined as an extension of Vladimir Lenin’s Imperialism, the Last Stage of Capitalism (1916), in which Lenin argues that 19th century imperialism is predicated upon the needs of the capitalist system. Nkrumah argues that “In place of colonialism as the main instrument of imperialism we have today neo-colonialism. […] Neo-colonialism, like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social conflicts of the capitalist countries.” He continues:
The result of neo-colonialism is that foreign capital is used for the exploitation rather than for the development of the less developed parts of the world. Investment under neo-colonialism increases rather than decreases the gap between the rich and the poor countries of the world. The struggle against neo-colonialism is not aimed at excluding the capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries. It is aimed at preventing the financial power of the developed countries being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed.
Pan-African and Non-Aligned movements
Initially the term was popularised largely through the activities of scholars and leaders from the newly independent states of Africa and the Pan-Africanist movement. Many of these leaders came together with those of other post colonial states at the Bandung Conference of 1955, leading to the formation of the Non-Aligned Movement. The All-African Peoples’ Conference (AAPC) meetings of the late 1950s and early 1960s spread this critique of makku- neocolonialism. Their Tunis conference of 1960 and Cairo conference of 1961 specified their opposition to what they labeled neocolonialism, singling out the French Community of independent states organised by the former colonial power. In its four page Resolution on Neocolonialism is cited as a landmark for having presented a collectively arrived at definition of neocolonialism and a description of its main features. Throughout the Cold War, the Non-Aligned Movement, and organisations like the Organization of Solidarity with the People of Asia, Africa and Latin America defined neocolonialism as a primary collective enemy of these independent states.
Denunciations of neocolonialism also became popular with some national independence movements while they were still waging anti-colonial armed struggle. During the 1970s, in the Portuguese colonies of Mozambique and Angola for example, the Marxist movements FRELIMO and MPLA, which were to eventually assume power upon those nations’ independence, denounced neocolonialism as well as colonialism.
Paternalistic neocolonialism
The term “paternalistic neocolonialism” involves the belief held by a neo-colonial power that their colonial subjects benefit from their occupation. Critics of neocolonialism, arguing that this is both exploitive and racist, contend this is merely a justification for continued political hegemony and economic exploitation of past colonies, and that such justifications are the modern reformulation of the civilizing mission concepts of the 19th century.

– THE OAU AND FAILURE OF PAN AFRICANISM
The Organization of African Unity (OAU) (French: Organisation de l’Unité Africaine (OUA)) was established on May 25, 1963 in Addis Ababa, under the signatory of 32 governments. It was disbanded on July 9, 2002 by its last chairperson, South African President Thabo Mbeki, and replaced by the African Union (AU).
Aims
The OAU had the following primary aims:
• To promote the unity and solidarity of the African states and act as a collective voice for the African continent. This was important to secure Africa’s long-term economic and political future.
• To co-ordinate and intensify the co-operation of African states in order to achieve a better life for the people of Africa.
• To defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of African states.
• The OAU was also dedicated to the eradication of all forms of colonialism, as, when it was established, there were several states that had not yet won their independence or were minority-ruled. South Africa and Angola were two such countries. The OAU proposed two ways of ridding the continent of colonialism. Firstly, it would defend the interests of independent countries and help to pursue those of still-colonised ones. Secondly, it would remain neutral in terms of world affairs, preventing its members from being controlled once more by outside powers.
A Liberation Committee was established to aid independence movements and look after the interests of already-liberated states. The OAU also aimed to stay neutral in terms of global politics, which would prevent them from being controlled once more by outside forces – an especial danger with the Cold War.
The OAU had other aims, too:
• Ensure that all Africans enjoyed human rights.
• Raise the living standards of all Africans.
• Settle arguments and disputes between members – not through fighting but rather peaceful and diplomatic negotiation.
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.
Some of the initial discussions took place at Sanniquellie, Liberia. The dispute was eventually resolved when Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie I invited the two groups to Addis Ababa, where the OAU and its headquarters were subsequently established. The Charter of the Organisation was signed by 32 independent African states.
At the time of the OAU’s disbanding, 53 out of the 54 African states were members; Morocco left on 12 November 1984 following the admission of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic as the government of Western Sahara in 1982.
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.
The Organisation was praised by Ghanaian former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan for bringing Africans together. Nevertheless, 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 colonizers. 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.
Autonomous specialized agencies, working under the auspices of the OAU, were:
• Pan-African Telecommunications Union (PATU)
• Pan-African Postal Union (PAPU)
• Pan-African News Agency (PANA)
• Union of African National Television and Radio Organizations (URTNA)
• Union of African Railways (UAR)
• Organisation of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU)
• Supreme Council for Sports in Africa
• African Civil Aviation Commission
– THE EFFECTS OF THE FAILURE OF PAN AFRICANISM

(PART 3): AFRICA AND THE UNITED NATIONS
The United Nations (UN) is an international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achievement of world peace. The UN was founded in 1945 after World War II to replace the League of Nations, to stop wars between countries, and to provide a platform for dialogue. It contains multiple subsidiary organizations to carry out its missions.
There are 193 member states, including every internationally recognised sovereign state in the world but Vatican City. From its offices around the world, the UN and its specialized agencies decide on substantive and administrative issues in regular meetings held throughout the year. The organization has six principal organs: the General Assembly (the main deliberative assembly); the Security Council (for deciding certain resolutions for peace and security); the Economic and Social Council (for assisting in promoting international economic and social cooperation and development); the Secretariat (for providing studies, information, and facilities needed by the UN); the International Court of Justice (the primary judicial organ); and the United Nations Trusteeship Council (which is currently inactive). Other prominent UN System agencies include the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Food Programme (WFP) and United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). The UN’s most prominent position is Secretary-General which has been held by Ban Ki-moon of South Korea since 2007.
The United Nations Headquarters resides in international territory in New York City, with further main offices at Geneva, Nairobi, and Vienna. The organization is financed from assessed and voluntary contributions from its member states, and has six official languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, and Spanish.
History
The League of Nations failed to prevent World War II (1939–1945). Because of the widespread recognition that humankind could not afford a third world war, the United Nations was established to replace the flawed League of Nations in 1945 in order to maintain international peace and promote cooperation in solving international economic, social and humanitarian problems. The earliest concrete plan for a new world organization was begun under the aegis of the U.S. State Department in 1939. Franklin D. Roosevelt first coined the term ‘United Nations’ as a term to describe the Allied countries. The term was first officially used on 1 January 1942, when 26 governments signed the Atlantic Charter, pledging to continue the war effort. On 25 April 1945, the UN Conference on International Organization began in San Francisco, attended by 50 governments and a number of non-governmental organizations involved in drafting the United Nations Charter. The UN officially came into existence on 24 October 1945 upon ratification of the Charter by the five then-permanent members of the Security Council—France, the Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States—and by a majority of the other 46 signatories. The first meetings of the General Assembly, with 51 nations represented, and the Security Council, took place in Westminster Central Hall in London in January 1946.
The organization was based at the Sperry Gyroscope Corporation’s facility in Lake Success, New York, from 1946–1952, before moving to the United Nations Headquarters building in Manhattan upon its completion.
Since its creation, there has been controversy and criticism of the United Nations. In the United States, an early opponent of the UN was the John Birch Society, which began a “get US out of the UN” campaign in 1959, charging that the UN’s aim was to establish a “One World Government.” After the Second World War, the French Committee of National Liberation was late to be recognized by the US as the government of France, and so the country was initially excluded from the conferences that aimed at creating the new organization. Charles de Gaulle criticized the UN, famously calling it le machin (“the thing”), and was not convinced that a global security alliance would help maintain world peace, preferring direct defense treaties between countries.

– THE CONCEPT OF THIRD WORLDISM AND NON-ALIGNMENT
Third-worldism is a tendency within left-wing political thought to regard the division between developed countries, and developing countries or “Third World” nations against the background of primary political importance. Third-worldism tends to offer support to Third World nations and national liberation movements against Western nations or their proxies. Key figures in the Third Worldist movement include Michel Aflaq, Salah al-Din al-Bitar, Frantz Fanon, Ahmed Ben Bella, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Jawaharlal Nehru, Ali Shariati, Andre Gunder Frank, Samir Amin and Simon Malley.
The Bandung Conference, which was held in 1955 in Indonesia, and the resultant formation of the Non-Aligned Movement represented a significant venue for Third World politics during the twentieth century. Third worldism is also closely connected with movements such as Ba’athism, Pan-Africanism, Pan-Arabism, Maoism, African socialism, Arab socialism and Communism.
The New Left led to an explosion of support for Third-worldism, especially after the failure of revolutionary movements in the First World, such as Paris 1968. Among the New Left groups and movements associated with Third Worldism were Monthly Review and the New Communist Movement.
From the 1970s, National liberation movements such as the Palestine Liberation Organization, and African National Congress have been causes célèbres of the movement. More recently, Third-worldism has become a powerful force in the World Social Forum, (particularly since the Mumbai WSF in 2004) and in the Cairo Anti-War Conference.
The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is a group of states considering themselves not aligned formally with or against any major power bloc. As of 2011, the movement had 120 members and 17 observer countries.
The organization was founded in Belgrade in 1961, and was largely the brainchild of Yugoslavia’s President, Josip Broz Tito, India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, Egypt’s second President, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Ghana’s first president Kwame Nkrumah, and Indonesia’s first President, Sukarno. All five leaders were prominent advocates of a middle course for states in the Developing World between the Western and Eastern blocs in the Cold War. The phrase itself was first used to represent the doctrine by Indian diplomat and statesman V.K. Krishna Menon in 1953, at the United Nations.
The purpose of the organization as stated in the speech given by Fidel Castro during the Havana Declaration of 1979 is to ensure “the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries” in their “struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics.”The countries of the Non-Aligned Movement represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations’s members and contain 55% of the world population. Membership is particularly concentrated in countries considered to be developing or part of the Third World.
Members have, at various times, included: SFR Yugoslavia, Argentina, SWAPO, Cyprus, and Malta. Brazil has never been a formal member of the movement, but shares many of the aims of Non-Aligned Movement and frequently sends observers to the Non-Aligned Movement’s summits. While many of the Non-Aligned Movement’s members were actually quite closely aligned with one or another of the super powers, the movement still maintained surprising amounts of cohesion throughout the Cold War. Additionally, some members were involved in serious conflicts with other members (e.g., India and Pakistan, Iran and Iraq). The movement fractured from its own internal contradictions when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979. While the Soviet allies supported the invasion, other members of the movement (particularly predominantly Muslim states) condemned it.
Because the Non-Aligned Movement was formed as an attempt to thwart the Cold War, it has struggled to find relevance since the Cold War ended. After the breakup of Yugoslavia, a founding member, its membership was suspended in 1992 at the regular Ministerial Meeting of the Movement, held in New York during the regular yearly session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. The successor states of the SFR Yugoslavia have expressed little interest in membership, though some have observer status. In 2004, Malta and Cyprus ceased to be members and joined the European Union. Belarus remains the sole member of the Movement in Europe. Turkmenistan, Belarus and the Dominican Republic are the most recent entrants. The applications of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Costa Rica were rejected in 1995 and 1998.

– AFRICAN RELATION WITH ASIA
The first large-scale Asian–African or Afro–Asian Conference—also known as the Bandung Conference—was a meeting of Asian and African states, most of which were newly independent, which took place on April 18–24, 1955 in Bandung, Indonesia. The twenty nine countries, which participated at the Bandung Conference, represented nearly one fourth of the Earth’s land surface and a total population of 1.5 billion people. The conference was organized by Indonesia, Burma, Pakistan, Ceylon (Sri Lanka), and India and was coordinated by Ruslan Abdulgani, secretary general of the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The conference’s stated aims were to promote Afro-Asian economic and cultural cooperation and to oppose colonialism or neocolonialism by either the United States or the Soviet Union in the Cold War, or any other imperialistic nations. The conference was an important step toward the crystallization of the Non-Aligned Movement.
Background
The conference of Bandung was preceded by the Bogor Conference (1954) and was followed by the Afro-Asian People’s Solidarity Conference in Cairo in September (1957) and the Belgrade Conference (1961), which led to the establishment of the Non-Aligned Movement. In later years, conflicts between the nonaligned nations eroded the solidarity expressed at Bandung.
The conference reflected what the organisers regarded as a reluctance by the Western powers to consult with them on decisions affecting Asia in a setting of Cold War tensions; their concern over tension between the People’s Republic of China and the United States; their desire to lay firmer foundations for China’s peace relations with themselves and the West; their opposition to colonialism, especially French influence in North Africa and its colonial rule in Algeria; and Indonesia’s desire to promote its case in the dispute with the Netherlands over western New Guinea (Irian Barat).
Sukarno, the first president of the Republic of Indonesia, portrayed himself as the leader of this group of states, naming it NEFOS (Newly Emerging Forces).
Discussion
Major debate centered around the question of whether Soviet policies in Eastern Europe and Central Asia should be censured along with Western colonialism. A consensus was reached in which “colonialism in all of its manifestations” was condemned, implicitly censuring the Soviet Union, as well as the West. China played an important role in the conference and strengthened its relations with other Asian nations. Having survived an assassination attempt on the way to the conference, the Chinese premier, Zhou Enlai, displayed a moderate and conciliatory attitude that tended to quiet fears of some anticommunist delegates concerning China’s intentions.
Later in the conference, Zhou Enlai signed on to the article in the concluding declaration stating that overseas Chinese owed primary loyalty to their home nation, rather than to China – a highly sensitive issue for both his Indonesian hosts and for several other participating countries. Zhou also signed an agreement on dual nationality with Indonesian foreign minister Sunario.
Outcome
A 10-point “declaration on promotion of world peace and cooperation,” incorporating the principles of the United Nations Charter was adopted unanimously:
1. Respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and principles of the charter of the United Nations
2. Respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations
3. Recognition of the equality of all races and of the equality of all nations large and small
4. Abstention from intervention or interference in the internal affairs of another country
5. Respect for the right of each nation to defend itself, singly or collectively, in conformity with the charter of the United Nations
6. (a) Abstention from the use of arrangements of collective defence to serve any particular interests of the big powers
(b) Abstention by any country from exerting pressures on other countries
7. Refraining from acts or threats of aggression or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any country
8. Settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration or judicial settlement as well as other peaceful means of the parties own choice, in conformity with the charter of the United Nations
9. Promotion of mutual interests and cooperation
10. Respect for justice and international obligations.
The final Communique of the Conference underscored the need for developing countries to loosen their economic dependence on the leading industrialized nations by providing technical assistance to one another through the exchange of experts and technical assistance for developmental projects, as well as the exchange of technological know-how and the establishment of regional training and research institutes.
Controversy
The United States of America, through its Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, shunned the conference and was not officially represented. However, Representative Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. (D-N.Y.) attended the conference and spoke at some length in favor of American foreign policy there which assisted the United States’s standing with the Non-Aligned. When Powell returned to the United States to report on the conference, the House of Representatives honored him for his contributions.
Legacy
To mark the fiftieth anniversary of the Conference, Heads of State and Government of Asian-African countries attended a new Asian-African Summit from 20–24 April 2005 in Bandung and Jakarta. Some sessions of the new conference took place in Gedung Merdeka (Independence Building), the venue of the original conference. The conference concluded by establishing the New Asian-African Strategic Partnership (NAASP).
The 2005 Asian African Summit yielded, inter-alia, the Declaration on the New Asian African Strategic Partnership (NAASP), the Joint Ministerial Statement on the New Asian African Strategic Partnership Plan of Action, and the Joint Asian African Leaders’ Statement on Tsunami, Earthquake and other Natural Disaster. The aforementioned declaration of NAASP is a manifestation of intra-regional bridge-building forming a new strategic partnership commitment between Asia and Africa, standing on three pillars, i.e. political solidarity, economic cooperation, and socio-cultural relations, within which governments, regional/sub-regional organizations, as well as peoples of Asian and African nations interact.
The 2005 Asian African Summit was attended by 106 countries, comprising 54 Asian countries and 52 African countries . The Summit concluded a follow-up mechanism for institutionalization process in the form of Summit concurrent with Business Summit every four years, Ministerial Meeting every two years, and Sectoral Ministerial as well as Technical Meeting if deemed necessary.
A fascinating literary account, which brings out some overlap between the internationalist aims of African-American politics in the period with Third-world movements can be found in Richard Wright’s The Color Curtain: A Report on the Bandung Conference.
Participants

Countries represented in the Asia-Africa Conference in Bandung, Indonesia in 1955. Twenty-nine independent countries were present, representing over half the world’s population. Vietnam is represented twice by both North and South Vietnam.

Member states of the Non-Aligned Movement (2007). Light blue states have observer status.
• Afghanistan
• Burma
• Cambodia
• Ceylon
• People’s Republic of China
• Cyprus 1
• Egypt
• Ethiopia
• India
• Indonesia
• Iran
• Iraq
• Japan
• Jordan
• Laos
• Lebanon
• Liberia
• Libya
• Nepal
• Pakistan
• Philippines
• Saudi Arabia
• Syria
• Sudan
• Thailand
• Turkey
• Democratic Republic of Vietnam
• State of Vietnam (Republic of Vietnam)
• Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen
A pre-independent colonial Cyprus was represented by [the] eventual first president, Makarios III.

– AFRICAN RELATION WITH LATIN AMERICA
An Afro-Latin American (also Afro-Latino in the United States) is a Latin American person of Black African ancestry; the term may also refer to historical or cultural elements in Latin America thought to emanate from this community. The term can refer to the mixing of African and other cultural elements found in Latin American society such as religion, music, language, the arts and social class.
The term Afro-Latin American, as used in this article refers specifically to black African ancestry and not to European colonial or Afro-Arab ancestry, such as white South African or Arab Moroccan ancestry.[5] The term is not widely used in Latin America outside of academic circles. Normally Afro Latin Americans are called “black” (in Spanish negro or, in the Caribbean, prieto, in Portuguese negro or preto). More commonly, when referring to cultural aspects of African origin within specific countries of Latin America, terms carry an Afro- prefix followed by the relevant nationality. Notable examples include Afro-Cuban (Spanish:Afro Cubano) and Afro-Brazilian; however, usage varies considerably from nation to nation.
The accuracy of statistics reporting on Afro-Latin Americans has been questioned, especially where they are derived from census reports in which the subjects choose their own designation, because in all countries the concept of black ancestry is viewed with differing attitudes.
Approximately 5% of the Latin American population self-identify, or are classified by census takers, as being primarily of black ancestry.
History
Many people of Black African origin arrived in the Americas with the Spanish and Portuguese in the 15th and 16th centuries. Pedro Alonso Niño, traditionally considered the first of many New World explorers of Black African descent was a navigator in the 1492 Columbus expedition. Those who were directly from West Africa mostly arrived in Latin America as part of the Atlantic slave trade, as agricultural, domestic, and menial laborers and as mineworkers. They were also employed in mapping and exploration (for example, Estevanico) and were even involved in conquest (for example, Juan Valiente). They were mostly brought from West Africa and Central Africa in what are now the nations of Nigeria, Ghana, Benin, Angola, and Congo, There are six major groups: the Yoruba, Igbo, Hausa, Ewe, Akan, and the Bantu (mostly Zulu). Most of the slaves were sent to Brazil, and the Caribbean, but lesser numbers went to Colombia and Venezuela. Countries with significant black, mulatto, or zambo populations today include Brazil (86 million, according to how censuses are applied nationwide, considering all the brown Brazilian population as being “Black”, which must signifies of African descent and makes caboclo identity lacks of space on racial classifications there), Colombia (10 million), Haiti (8.7 million), Dominican Republic (up to 8.1 million), Cuba (up to 4 million), and Puerto Rico (20%–46%). Recent genetic research in UPR Mayaguez has brought to light that 26.4% of Puerto Ricans have Black African heritage on the X chromosome and 20% on the Y chromosome, thus between 20%–46% of the Puerto Rican population has African heritage.[9] (For more on this see Demographics of Puerto Rico).
Traditional terms for Afro-Latin Americans with their own developed culture include Garífuna (in Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala and Belize), cafuzo (in Brazil), and zambo in the Andes and Central America. Marabou is a term of Haitian origin denoting a Haitian of multiracial ethnicity. The term describes the offspring of a Black African/European or mulatto and an Amerindian, specifically the native Taíno, born in Haiti (formerly Saint-Domingue). The heavy population of Africans on the island established by the French and Spanish diluted the generations of so-called “marabous” over the decades, and virtually all Haitians today of Amerindian descent are assumed to also possess Black African ancestry. Several other terms exist for the “marabou” racial mixture in other countries.
The mix of these African cultures with the Spanish, Portuguese, French, and indigenous cultures of Latin America has produced many unique forms of language (e.g., Palenquero, Garífuna and Creole), religions (e.g., Candomblé, Abakuá, Santería, Lucumi and Vodou), music (e.g., kompa, salsa, Bachata, Punta, Palo de Mayo, plena, samba, merengue, cumbia) martial arts (capoeira) and dance (rumba, merengue). Many of these cultural expressions have become pervasive in Latin America

– AFRICAN RELATION WITH AMERICA AND EUROPE
OVER THE LAST CENTURY, RELATIONS BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND Africa have undergone many changes. The relationship between these two geographic zones has been defined primarily by the slave trade and the Cold War. Although historians familiar with the details of the two zones could come up with a number of events that to some degree characterize the unique nature of this relationship, the fact remains that Africa and the United States of America have come to be associated in the minds of most people around the world only in terms of their black populations and their political and military connections during the Cold War. The presence of millions of people of African descent, and their growing power and self-assertiveness in the American political process, have combined to make US-Africa relations an issue of greater scholarly interest.
No one who is a student of Africa over the last century can deny the impact of European people on the face and history of this continent. If Africa was not a major theater during the First and Second World Wars, the Cold War and its ravages in Africa can still be seen after the Cold War’s conclusion in 1989. The presence of Cuban troops in Angola, the hazards of land mines in that country, the thousands of Africans who lost their lives in the ideologically charged civil wars in Ethiopia, and the large number of Africans who became refugees around the world, are all definite signs of the Cold War and its aftermath. What is being said here is that US-Africa relations, like all things within nature, are ongoing. There have been moments of conflict and moments of reconciliation.
The purpose of this brief essay is threefold. First, I intend to demonstrate that African opinions on and attitudes toward the United States are affected by the question of slavery, America’s support for colonialism, America’s attitudes toward the apartheid regime in South Africa, and America’s positions during the Cold War. The second objective of this paper is to identify the concept and movement of Pan-Africanism as a source of value for African opinions on and attitudes toward the United States. Here I will show how this idea and the movement that grew out of it have combined to define the view of America and the West held by black intellectuals who embraced such a position. The third objective is to offer a set of conclusions summarizing and emphasizing the points of convergence and divergence between the United States and the countries of Africa.
AFRICAN OPINIONS ON AND ATTITUDES TOWARD THE UNITED STATES
It needs to be made categorically clear that, although the slave trade is not the overriding fact in the minds of most Africans today, no African can enter the United States and ignore the black presence in this country. Second, even those Africans still living on the continent of Africa cannot deny that their people were captured and ferried over the Atlantic Ocean to serve as slaves in the Americas. This phenomenon–which I have described elsewhere as the Josephite and anti-Josephite tendencies in black history–is a painful remind to all blacks that the stigma associated with blackness among most white peoples of the world goes back to that original sin of betraying one’s brother. Just as in the biblical story of Joseph, here too the Africans have the same moral and psychological dilemma that captured the attention and imagination of his brothers as well as those of Moses and the ancient Hebrews in the land of pharaoh. This analogy is not lost to modern historians, for one of them has described Marcus Garvey, the Jamaican-born leader of a mass movement in the United States, in the early part of the twentieth century, as “Black Moses.” Garvey, it should be noted, was a fervent advocate of Pan-Africanism. Committed to the liberation of his people and determined to see it through by all means available to him then, he did everything within his power to ferry them back to their homeland. Unlike the ancient Hebrews going to a Promised Land, these blacks under the leadership of Garvey were pressing their claims to a land that was being rapidly taken over by rapacious European imperialists. The European powers, whose struggles for African land was described as the “Scramble for Africa” by many historians of the last century, were bent on remaking Africa and its children. These colonial and imperial ventures would not only affect the relationship between blacks and whites around the world, but would also add insult to injury. The resulting scarring of the African mind would be the subject of discourse by many black intellectuals, the most prominent among them Frantz Fanon. This man from Martinique in the French Caribbean would symbolize and embody the realities and the contradictions that are clearly associated with the colonial question among blacks around the world.
When Fanon wrote his book, Black Skin, White Mask, he described the colonial condition and its intended and unintended consequences for both France and its colonial subjects. The problem analyzed by Fanon is inextricably linked to the relationship between whites and blacks. The American experience cannot be discussed objectively without bringing in the race question. This is why in analyzing the relationship between the United States and Africa, the racial question becomes paramount. Time and space does not allow me to go into details about the question, but we can state briefly and in passing that the relationship between these two geographic zones will always revolve around the race question, which is an extension of the slave trade and its consequences for Americans and Africans. The writings of Fanon, W. E. B. Dubois, Marcus Garvey, Leon Damas, C. L. R. James and countless other blacks from the diaspora seem to articulate publicly what is felt privately by millions of people of African descent, whose lives and destinies have now been inextricably tied to the many states of North and South America.
The common thread that unites all these biographies is their fate as blacks in a white world still uncomfortable with the race question. Their intellectual and practical activities have created not only a corpus of literature that provides counterpoints to the vast literature of anti-black bigotry, but a tradition of resistance to any and all forms of black denigration. Scared or scarred by the slings and arrows of racism, and determined to carve a place for their people on this planet, these leaders of the black struggle for independence and justice have come to be seen as champions of freedom from the diaspora and they now enjoyed popular support and are widely celebrated for their activities on behalf of Africa and her peoples. Thus, in examining the relationship between Africa and the United States, one must remember that the slave trade and the Middle Passage have given African peoples many events to remember, many heroes and sheroes to celebrate, many moments to cry about, many places and locations to see as reference points for a historical defeat here and a historical victory there. It is in this context that one can reference the writings of the late Alex Hailey of Roots fame. Indeed, his works and the films that grew out them provide us with great insights to the slave trade, the Middle Passage, and the whole issue of African American identity.
With respect to the slave trade, one cannot forget the saga of Kunta Kinte, a Senegambian name that has now claimed its place in the annals of American history. If American Muslims were part of the footnotes to American history, through his literary efforts Alex Hailey, a descendant of an African-born slave, Kunta Kinte, has restored their honor and their historicity in the person of his great-grandparent. Hailey has also contributed to African-American history through his efforts as ghostwriter for Malcolm X (El Hajj Malik Shabazz), the national spokesman for the Nation of Islam before his defection and assassination in 1964.
In looking into the relationship between the United States and Africa, these episodes discussed earlier serve as markers if not milestones on the journey of mutual discovery. This argument is being made for three reasons. First, one can demonstrate that in the saga of this fictionalized African, the question of loss of African identity through slavery is too obvious to be denied. What Alex Hailey captured through his prose and literary skills is being now documented by historians such as Michael Gomez of New York University. The transition from African to African American is an interesting story that deserves our attention, and those who are seriously interested in documenting the relationship between the two geographic zones and peoples must pay attention. Gomez has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt how Africans were broken and subdued to be the objects of slave masters. His narrative also points to the psycho-cultural consequences with respect to the loss of religion. His book, Exchanging our Country Marks, is a good pointer to the many milestones that will forever define the nature of the relationship between the United States and the people of the African continent.
(PART 4): AFRICAN INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
-ECOWAS, SADC, prospects, failures and successes.
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is a regional group of fifteen West African countries. Founded on 28 May 1975, with the signing of the Treaty of Lagos, its mission is to promote economic integration across the region.
Considered one of the pillars of the African Economic Community, the organization was founded in order to achieve “collective self-sufficiency” for its member states by creating a single large trading bloc through an economic and trading union. It also serves as a peacekeeping force in the region. The organization operates officially in three co-equal languages—English, French, and Portuguese.
The ECOWAS consists of two institutions to implement policies, the ECOWAS Secretariat and the ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development, formerly known as the Fund for Cooperation until it was renamed in 2001.
A few members of the organization have come and gone over the years. In 1976 Cape Verde joined ECOWAS, and in December 2000 Mauritania withdrew, having announced its intention to do so in December 1999.
Current members
Benin
Burkina Faso
Cape Verde
Côte d’Ivoire
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Liberia
Mali
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) is an inter-governmental organization headquartered in Gaborone, Botswana. Its goal is to further socio-economic cooperation and integration as well as political and security cooperation among 15 southern African states. It complements the role of the African Union.
History
The origins of SADC lie in the 1960s and 1970s, when the leaders of majority-ruled countries and national liberation movements coordinated their political, diplomatic and military struggles to bring an end to colonial and white-minority rule in southern Africa. The immediate forerunner of the political and security cooperation leg of today’s SADC was the informal Frontline States (FLS) grouping. It was formed in 1980.
The Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC) was the forerunner of the socio-economic cooperation leg of today’s SADC. The adoption by nine majority-ruled southern African countries of the Lusaka declaration on 1 April 1980 paved the way for the formal establishment of SADCC in April 1980.
Membership of the FLS and SADCC sometimes differed.
SADCC was transformed into SADC on 17 August 1992, with the adoption by the founding members of SADCC and newly independent Namibia of the Windhoek declaration and treaty establishing SADC. The 1992 SADC provided for both socio-economic cooperation and political and security cooperation. In reality, the FLS was dissolved only in 1994, after South Africa’s first democratic elections. Subsequent efforts to place political and security cooperation on a firm institutional footing under SADC’s umbrella failed.
On 14 August 2001, the 1992 SADC treaty was amended. The amendment heralded the overhaul of the structures, policies and procedures of SADC, a process which is ongoing. One of the changes is that political and security cooperation is institutionalised in the Organ on Politics, Defence and Security (OPDS). One of the principal SADC bodies, it is subject to the oversight of the organisation’s supreme body, the Summit, which comprises the heads of state or government.
In 2008, the SADC agreed to establish a free trade zone with the East African Community (EAC) and the Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) including all members of each of the organizations.
Since 2000 began the formation of the SADC Free trade area with the participation of the SACU countries (South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, and Swaziland). Next to join were Mauritius, Zimbabwe, and Madagascar. In 2008 joined Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Zambia bringing the total number of SADC FTA members to 12. Angola, DR Congo and Seychelles are not yet participating.
Member states
SADC has 15 member states, one of whose membership is currently suspended:
• Angola
• Botswana
• Democratic Republic of the Congo – since 8 September 1997
• Lesotho
• Malawi
• Mauritius – since 28 August 1995
• Mozambique
• Namibia – since 31 March 1990 (since independence)
• Swaziland
• Tanzania
• Zambia
• Zimbabwe
• South Africa – since 30 August 1994
• Seychelles – also previously been a member of SADC from 8 September 1997 until 1 July 2004 then joined again in 2008.
Suspended
• Madagascar – Membership currently suspended after the coup d’état led by the former mayor of Antananarivo Andry Rajoelina.[1]

-FROM OAU TO AU, THE FAILURE OF OAU AND AU PROSPECTS
The African Union (abbreviated AU in English, and UA in its other official languages) is a union consisting of 54 African states. The only all-African state not in the AU is Morocco. Established on 9 July 2002, the AU was formed as a successor to the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). The most important decisions of the AU are made by the Assembly of the African Union, a semi-annual meeting of the heads of state and government of its member states. The AU’s secretariat, the African Union Commission, is based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Overview
Among the objectives of the AU’s leading institutions are:
• to accelerate the political and socio-economic integration of the continent;
• to promote and defend African common positions on issues of interest to the continent and its peoples;
• to achieve peace and security in Africa; and
• to promote democratic institutions, good governance and human rights.
The African Union is made up of both political and administrative bodies. The highest decision-making organ is the Assembly of the African Union, made up of all the heads of state or government of member states of the AU. The Assembly is chaired by Yayi Boni, president of Benin, elected at the 18thordinary meeting of the Assembly in January 2012. The AU also has a representative body, the Pan African Parliament, which consists of 265 members elected by the national parliaments of the AU member states. Its president is Idriss Ndele Moussa.
Other political institutions of the AU include
• the Executive Council, made up of foreign ministers, which prepares decisions for the Assembly;
• the Permanent Representatives Committee, made up of the ambassadors to Addis Ababa of AU member states; and
• the Economic, Social, and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC), a civil society consultative body.
The AU Commission, the secretariat to the political structures, is chaired by Jean Ping of Gabon.

The African Union’s new headquarters complex in Addis Ababa.
The main administrative capital of the African Union is in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, where the African Union Commission is headquartered. A new headquarters complex, the AU Conference Center and Office Complex (AUCC), was inaugurated on 28 January 2012, during the 18th AU summit.[The complex was built by China State Construction Engineering Corporation as a gift from the Chinese government, and accommodates, amongst other facilities, a 2,500-seat plenary hall and a 20-story office tower. The tower is 99.9 meters high to signify the date 9 September 1999, when the Organization of African Unity voted to become the African Union.
Other AU structures are hosted by different member states:
• the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights is based in Banjul, The Gambia; and
• the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and APRM Secretariats and the Pan-African Parliament are in Midrand, South Africa.
The AU covers the entire continent except for the Îles Éparses, Réunion, Mayotte, Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha, Madeira, Canary Islands, Spanish North Africa, and Morocco. Morocco is not a member because its government opposes the membership of Western Sahara as the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. However, Morocco has a special status within the AU and benefits from the services available to all AU states from the institutions of the AU, such as the African Development Bank. Moroccan delegates also participate at important AU functions, and negotiations continue to try to resolve the conflict with the Polisario Front in Tindouf, Algeria and the parts of Western Sahara.
The AU’s first military intervention in a member state was the May 2003 deployment of a peacekeeping force of soldiers from South Africa, Ethiopia, and Mozambique to Burundi to oversee the implementation of the various agreements. AU troops were also deployed in Sudan for peacekeeping in the Darfur conflict, before the mission was handed over to the United Nations on 1 January 2008 UNAMID. The AU has also sent a peacekeeping mission to Somalia, of which the peacekeeping troops are from Uganda and Burundi.
The AU has adopted a number of important new documents establishing norms at continental level, to supplement those already in force when it was created. These include the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (2003), the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (2007), the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and its associated Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance.
Treaties

Signed
In force
Document
1961
1961 1963
1963
OAU Charter 1991
N/A
Abuja Treaty
1999
2002
Sirte Declaration

Organisation of African Unity (OAU)
African Economic Community:

Community of Sahel-Saharan States (CEN-SAD)

Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)
East African Community (EAC)
Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS)
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)

Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)

Southern African Development Community (SADC)

Arab Maghreb Union (AMU)

Casablanca Group
African Union (AU)
Monrovia Group

• v
• t
• e

Membership
See also: List of African Union member states by political system, List of African Union member states by population, and Enlargement of the African Union

Map of the African Union with suspended states highlighted in light green.
Members
The following countries are members of the African Union:
Algeria
Angola
Benin
Botswana
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Central African Republic
Chad
Comoros
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Republic of the Congo
Côte d’Ivoire
Djibouti
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea-Bissau
Guinea
Kenya
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Malawi
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mozambique
Namibia
Niger
Nigeria
Rwanda
Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic
São Tomé and Príncipe
Senegal
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Somalia
South Africa
South Sudan[13]
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
Zambia
Zimbabwe

Suspended members
Madagascar – suspended after 2009 Malagasy political crisis.
Mali – suspended after 2012 Mali coup d’état.
Former members
Morocco – left the AU’s predecessor, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in 1984, when the majority of member countries supported the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (proclaimed by the Polisario Front in 1976 claiming the representation of the Western Sahara), resulting on SADR admission in the AU. Morocco’s ally, Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), similarly opposed the OAU’s admission of the Sahrawi Republic, and the Mobutu regime boycotted the organisation from 1984 to 1986. Some countries have since retracted their support for the Sahrawi Republic.
Organisations
The African Union has a number of official bodies:
Pan-African Parliament (PAP)
To become the highest legislative body of the African Union. The seat of the PAP is at Midrand, South Africa. The Parliament is composed of 265 elected representatives from all 54 AU states, and intended to provide popular and civil-society participation in the processes of democratic governance. Its president is the Hon. Idriss Ndele Moussa of Chad.
Assembly of the African Union
Composed of heads of state and heads of government of AU states, the Assembly is currently the supreme governing body of the African Union. It is gradually devolving some of its decision-making powers to the Pan African Parliament. It meets once a year and makes its decisions by consensus or by a two-thirds majority. The current chair of the AU is President Yayi Boni of Benin.
African Union Authority
The secretariat of the African Union, composed of ten commissioners and supporting staff and headquartered in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. In a similar fashion to its European counterpart, the European Commission, it is responsible for the administration and co-ordination of the AU’s activities and meetings.
African Court of Justice
The Constitutive Act provides for a Court of Justice to rule on disputes over interpretation of AU treaties. A protocol to set up the Court of Justice was adopted in 2003 and entered into force in 2009. It is likely to be superseded by a protocol creating a Court of Justice and Human Rights, which will incorporate the already established African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights (see below) and have two chambers—one for general legal matters and one for rulings on the human rights treaties.
Executive Council
Composed of ministers designated by the governments of member states. It decides on matters such as foreign trade, social security, food, agriculture and communications, is accountable to the Assembly, and prepares material for the Assembly to discuss and approve.
Permanent Representatives’ Committee
Consisting of nominated permanent representatives of member states, the Committee prepares the work for the Executive Council, similar the role of the Committee of Permanent Representatives in the European Union.
Peace and Security Council (PSC)
Proposed at the Lusaka Summit in 2001 and established in 2004 under a protocol to the Constitutive Act adopted by the AU Assembly in July 2002. The protocol defines the PSC as a collective security and early warning arrangement to facilitate timely and effective response to conflict and crisis situations in Africa. Other responsibilities conferred to the PSC by the protocol include prevention, management and resolution of conflicts, post-conflict peace building and developing common defence policies. The PSC has fifteen members elected on a regional basis by the Assembly. Similar in intent and operation to the United Nations Security Council.
Economic, Social and Cultural Council
An advisory organ composed of professional and civic representatives, similar to the European Economic and Social Committee. The chair of ECOSOCC, elected in 2008, is Cameroonian lawyer Akere Muna of the Pan-African Lawyers Union (PALU).
Specialised Technical Committees
Both the Abuja Treaty and the Constitutive Act provide for Specialised Technical Committees to be established made up of African ministers to advise the Assembly. In practice, they have never been set up. The ten proposed themes are: Rural Economy and Agricultural Matters; Monetary and Financial Affairs; Trade, Customs, and Immigration; Industry, Science and Technology; Energy, Natural Resources, and Environment; Transport, Communications, and Tourism; Health; Labour, and Social Affairs; Education, Culture, and Human Resources.
Financial institutions
• African Central Bank – Abuja, Nigeria
• African Investment Bank – Tripoli, Libya
• African Monetary Fund – Yaoundé, Cameroon.
These institutions have not yet been established, however, the Steering Committees working on their founding have been constituted. Eventually, the AU aims to have a single currency (the Afro).
Human rights
The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, in existence since 1986, is established under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the African Charter) rather than the Constitutive Act of the African Union. It is the premier African human rights body, with responsibility for monitoring and promoting compliance with the African Charter. The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights was established in 2006 to supplement the work of the Commission, following the entry into force of a protocol to the African Charter providing for its creation. It is planned that the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights will be merged with the African Court of Justice

-NEPAD, AFRICAN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS
The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) is an economic development program of the African Union. NEPAD was adopted at the 37th session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government in July 2001 in Lusaka, Zambia. NEPAD aims to provide an overarching vision and policy framework for accelerating economic co-operation and integration among African countries.
Origins and function
NEPAD is a merger of two plans for the economic regeneration of Africa: the Millennium Partnership for the African Recovery Programme (MAP), led by Former President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in conjunction with Former President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria and President Abdelaziz Bouteflika of Algeria; and the OMEGA Plan for Africa developed by President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal. At a summit in Sirte, Libya, March 2001, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) agreed that the MAP and OMEGA Plans should be merged.
The UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) developed a “Compact for Africa’s Recovery” based on both these plans and on resolutions on Africa adopted by the United Nations Millennium Summit in September 2000, and submitted a merged document to the Conference of African Ministers of Finance and Ministers of Development and Planning in Algiers, May 2001.
In July 2001, the OAU Assembly of Heads of State and Government meeting in Lusaka, Zambia, adopted this document under the name of the New African Initiative (NAI). The leaders of G8 countries endorsed the plan on July 20, 2001; and other international development partners, including the European Union, China, and Japan also made public statements indicating their support for the program. The Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee (HSGIC) for the project finalized the policy framework and named it the New Partnership for Africa’s Development on 23 October 2001. NEPAD is now a program of the African Union (AU) that has replaced the OAU in 2002, though it has its own secretariat based in South Africa to coordinate and implement its programmes.
NEPAD’s four primary objectives are: to eradicate poverty, promote sustainable growth and development, integrate Africa in the world economy, and accelerate the empowerment of women. It is based on underlying principles of a commitment to good governance, democracy, human rights and conflict resolution; and the recognition that maintenance of these standards is fundamental to the creation of an environment conducive to investment and long-term economic growth. NEPAD seeks to attract increased investment, capital flows and funding, providing an African-owned framework for development as the foundation for partnership at regional and international levels.
In July 2002, the Durban AU summit supplemented NEPAD with a Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance. According to the Declaration, states participating in NEPAD ‘believe in just, honest, transparent, accountable and participatory government and probity in public life’. Accordingly, they ‘undertake to work with renewed determination to enforce’, among other things, the rule of law; the equality of all citizens before the law; individual and collective freedoms; the right to participate in free, credible and democratic political processes; and adherence to the separation of powers, including protection for the independence of the judiciary and the effectiveness of parliaments.
The Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance also committed participating states to establish an African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) to promote adherence to and fulfilment of its commitments. The Durban summit adopted a document setting out the stages of peer review and the principles by which the APRM should operate; further core documents were adopted at a meeting in Abuja in March 2003, including a Memorandum of Understanding to be signed by governments wishing to undertake the peer review.
Current status
Ever since it was set up there has been some tension over the place of NEPAD within the AU programs, given its origins outside the framework of the AU, and the continuing dominant role of South Africa—symbolised by the location of the secretariat in South Africa.
Successive AU summits and meetings of the HSGIC have proposed the greater integration of NEPAD into the AU’s structures and processes. In March 2007 there was a ‘brainstorming session’ on NEPAD held in Algeria at which the future of NEPAD and its relationship with the AU was discussed by an ad hoc committee of heads of state. The committee again recommended the fuller integration of NEPAD with the AU.[3] In April 2008, a review summit of five heads of state—Presidents Mbeki of South Africa, Wade of Senegal, Bouteflika of Algeria, Mubarak of Egypt and Yar’Adua of Nigeria—met in Senegal with a mandate to consider the progress in implementing NEPAD and report to the next AU summit to be held in Egypt in July 2008.
Structure
The HSGIC to which the NEPAD secretariat reports comprises three states for each region of the African Union, with former President Obasanjo (Nigeria) as elected chair, and Presidents Bouteflika (Algeria) and Wade (Senegal) as deputy chairmen. The HSGIC meets several times a year and reports to the AU Assembly of Heads of State and Government.
There is also a steering committee, comprising 20 AU member states, to oversee projects and program development.
The NEPAD Secretariat is based in Midrand, South Africa. The first CEO was Wiseman Nkuhlu of South Africa (2001–2005), and the second Mozambican Firmino Mucavele (2005–2008). On April 1, 2009, Ibrahim Hassane Mayaki accepted the position as the 3rd CEO.
The NEPAD Secretariat is not responsible for the implementation of development programs itself, but works with the African Regional Economic Communities — the building blocks of the African Union.[6] The role of the NEPAD Secretariat is one of coordination and resource mobilisation.
Many individual African states have also established national NEPAD structures responsible for liaison with the continental initiatives on economic reform and development programs.
Partners
• UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA)
• African Development Bank
• Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA)
• Investment Climate Facility (ICF)
• African Capacity Building Foundation
• Office of the UN Under-Secretary-General and Special Adviser on Africa
• IDC (The Industrial Development Corporation) – Sponsor of NEPAD
Programs
The eight priority areas of NEPAD are: political, economic and corporate governance; agriculture; infrastructure; education; health; science and technology; market access and tourism; and environment.

(PART 5): GLOBALISATION AND AFRICA
– THE THEORIES OF GLOBALISATION (DEMOCRATIZATION & LIBERALISATION)
– AFRICAN DEBT CRISIS AND ECONOMIC GLOBALISATION
The African debt crisis is one among a wide range of problems that the continent is facing. The origin of the African debt crisis includes many factors and causes that will be highlighted in this section such as:

• the oil price shocks
• rising commodity prices
• the rise in public expenditure by African governments

THE OIL PRICE SHOCKS

Most countries in Africa can be considered Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC countries). Although only a small share of global GDP is accounted for by these HIPC countries and transition economies, many of them are among the most seriously affected by higher oil prices. The lack of access to private capital markets due to the absence of international assistance, will likely make the impact of higher oil prices on output relatively large. This is because it will have to be met primarily through a reduction in domestic demand. The following diagram shows the effects of an oil price increase on HIPC countries. Notice the negative millions of dollars that African countries have lost due to oil price shocks.

Selected HIPC and CIS Countries—Preliminary Estimates of First Round Effects of an Oil Price Increase and IMF Quotas
Source: INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND- The Impact of Higher Oil Prices on the Global Economy

RISING COMMODITY PRICES
Probably one of the financial market topics discussed so very frequently in recent years has been the remarkable and continued surge in commodity prices. This surge could be seen across a broad range of commodity groups; including precious and base metal prices, oil and energy prices, and lately agricultural produce prices (grains, softs and livestock). The oil shock and the inter-related surge in food prices are believed to unfavorably affect millions living on the tiny margin between subsistence and starvation in many African countries. Any benefits of these rising commodity prices have not reached citizens of these African countries who are suffering from AIDS, malnutrition, dehydration, infection, conflict and other preventable diseases.

A RISE IN PUBLIC EXPENDITURE BY AFRICAN GOVERNMENTS
Due to the demand for better health care, education and housing, African governments began intensely increasing their countries’ public expenditure annually. Although these expenditures greatly benefited the citizens, the government began paying huge sums of interest amounting to one billion dollars daily. The debt that Africa is in due to public expenditure has been soaring since the early 1970s, following the rising commodity prices. The public expenditure debt continues to ascend daily.

OTHER FACTS TO CONSIDER:
• Approximately 46 percent of Africa’s debt is owed by the North African Nations while the remaining 54 percent of the debt is owed by the Sub Saharan African Nations.
• Only ten to twelve countries account for seventy five percent of Africa’s total debt.
• Over 60 percent of Africa’s debt is owed to official creditors such as the World Bank, The IMF and world leaders.
• The high interest rates along side the cost to reschedule debt have forced Africa and other developing regions into a relapse of instability.

Although Africa does have an abundance of natural resources it is still the poorest continent in the world. The reason behind its poor standard of living and poor economy has a lot to do with the following issues.

Corruption in government
Since the Decolonization of Africa, Africa has had a history of corruption in the levels of government.
This map below shows the continents and its level of government corruption. As you can see Africa in most regions in African have an low control over corruption. As you may also see many corrupt regions also have a level of natural resource such as minerals or oil.

Decolonization of Africa
• Africa’s greatest relative wealth was found in the 1960’s before decolonization
• African countries with European leaders exported raw materials to increase wealth
• When Europe withdrew from Africa they left countries with no one educated enough to maintain the political structure that has been implemented.
• Africa have never been able to regain the wealth from the days of colonization
• Europe withdrew after raping the land of its natural resource that has arguably increased current economic problems.

External loans from World Bank and IMF

For Africa:
In 1970, it owed just under $11 billion in debt
By 2002, that debt grew to approximately $295 billion

• Everyday people in Africa die from curable disease, poverty and hunger. The government cannot put money into helping these people because it must pay 15 Billion dollars a year in debt repayment to places like the World Bank and IMF.
• African economic advances cannot be made when it must pay a shocking 1 billion dollars a day interest fee.
• These loans from organizations such as the World Bank are meant to aid the country during this economic crisis. These loans actually sabotage these African countries. Nigeria has borrowed 5 billion dollars from the World Bank. To date they have repaid 16 billion dollars. Shocking they still owe the bank 32 billion dollars in interest.

-AFRICAN CONFLICT AND POLITICAL GLOBALISATION
– THE CONTRADICTIONS; NEO-COLONALISM AND GLOBALISATION
SUMMARY:
THE PRESENT AND FUTURE PROSPECTS OF AFRICAN STATES UNDER GLOBALISATION.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

VALENTINE C. UWAKWE, is indeed a prolific writer who is widely acknowledge for his wisdom and knowledge in the academic
Field. A graduate of geography & environmental management,
University of portharcourt, he is the director of operations-
Hyattration System. This masterpiece was propel for a deep desire
for success in all academic students in the department of political science.
Exciting wide of topics and literatures to read free are deposited
In his internet back bites;
http://www.hyattractions.wordpress.com
http://www.onlinesoccer.wordpress.com
http://www.valentine202.goarticle.com
http://www.valentine202.ezinearticle.com
http://www.valentine202.factoidz.com
http://www.valentine202.blogradio.com

He can be contacted via +23408033559733, +447024073836
and through mail; valentine202@yahoo.com and hyattrations@yahoo.com

Advertisements

4 responses

  1. You actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I to find this matter to be actually something which I feel I might by no means understand. It kind of feels too complex and extremely vast for me. I am having a look forward in your next post, I will try to get the hold of it!

  2. wonderful piece of information, please you didn’t specify the various methods of studying International relations of African States, please I need it and it will aid my understanding thank you for the good work.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s