|
Are Western Countries Attacking the
Sovereignty of African Nations?
Kwei Akuete
African leaders, Yoweri Museveni and
Uhuru Kenyatta, recently made comments concerning sovereignty,
noting ‘that [African] political and economic relations with
former colonial powers and others must be on equal footing.’
Kenya’s new president, Uhuru
Kenyatta, addressed fellow African leaders in his inaugural
speech stating, ‘… We join you in continuing to insist on
relating with all nations as equals - not juniors.’ This seems
to be reasonable statement.
The concern arises when leaders say that ‘Western countries are
foisting their ideologies upon us.’ Historically, this may have
been valid. Today, this claim holds less water as each nation
can chart its course. The perception also obscures the reality
of current economic and political considerations, particularly
in East Africa.
Before addressing this reality,
let’s explore three possible sources of this complaint.
Likely Suspects:
The sources of this complaint appear to be:
Participation of International Monitors in African Elections
International Trade Agreements
International Criminal Court Targeting of African Countries
Participation of International Monitors in African Elections
In efforts to establish democratic
governance, some African and Western leaders have sought to
improve governance structures in Africa. This exercise includes
strengthening the electoral process, such as ensuring proper
training of officials and volunteers and promoting clear voting
instructions for voters and to subject the process to
international monitoring.
As such, the United Nations and
others have been involved in monitoring elections in sub-Saharan
Africa since 1989 with the objective of ensuring free and fair
elections.
The impression given by Messrs. Museveni and Kenyatta is that
Western countries advocate monitoring in order to impose their
values and systems onto a sovereign African nation. However,
this is not the case as international monitors must be invited
by host leaders. These leaders fully recognize that the
declaration of ‘free and fair elections’ by outsiders
legitimizes ascension to power. Equally important, it affirms
the democratic principles of fair play, transparency, separation
of powers, and accountability, and justice – which,
incidentally, are not solely valued or promoted by the West.
In Kenya’s recent elections, the European Union (EU), the Carter
Center (CC) of the United States, the African Union (AU), and
the Commonwealth Observer Group (COG) participated:
• EU: 65 observers; 26 EU states
• CC: 14 observers; 11 states
• AU: 60 observers; 29 African states
• COG: 16 observers; nine (9) from separate African nations.
When separated into two camps - Western states (EU and CC) vs.
African states (AU and COG) – the number of states differs by
three in favor of the African states. Each organization - except
the EU - was led by a former African president, which further
weakens the assertion of undue Western influence.
International Trade Agreements
Do trade agreements favor the West? Very likely, but this is
also not a strong argument for two reasons.
Firstly, the US African Growth and
Opportunity Act (AGOA) and EU country specific pacts have
resulted in trade growth with African countries since 2000.
Though results are mixed, Kenya and Uganda have benefited
because of reduced import duties on agricultural and apparel
products. However, this does not necessarily equalize trade
terms as the West still uses subsidies to protect some
industries.
Secondly, if terms do favor the
West, African countries still have other willing buyers in
around the world to level the playing field such as China,
India, and Russia.
International Criminal Court Targeting of African Countries
Mr. Museveni, during his speech at Mr. Kenyatta’s inauguration,
blasted the International Criminal Court (ICC) implying it was
an instrument of the West. Could this be true?
Mr. Museveni is correct when he says, ‘100% of the ICC cases
focus on Africa.’ There are 18 current cases involving eight
countries including Uganda. However, for the ICC to consider a
situation, “Pursuant to the Rome Statute, the Prosecutor can
initiate an investigation on the basis of a referral from any
State Party or from the United Nations Security Council...or can
initiate investigations [on his own] on the basis of information
on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court...” Uganda, DRC,
and CAR are the only countries which have referred situations to
the court; Uganda leads the pack with four. Were his remarks
misleading? Well, they were definitely biased, but well-chosen
as indicated.
At the inauguration, Mr. Museveni was “in the house” of the man
who leads Africa’s second powerhouse - South Africa is No. 1 -
and Uganda’s primary trading partner after the EU. Kenya is
currently tapping into oil reserves which will yield billions of
Kenya shillings.
Secondly, Kenya will become the
avenue of goods and oil from South Sudan to the world. Finally,
Kenya – when not holding elections - is the preferred tourism
destination in East Africa, which spills into neighboring
countries.
Mr. Kenyatta may have serious concerns about the ICC given his
pending case, but the information suggests that Mr. Museveni
probably does not. Therefore, his speech was strategic as it
appealed to Pan-Africanists and encouraged a united front
against a perceived common enemy - the West. It is in his
interests and perhaps other neighboring leaders to be on the
‘same page politically’ with Kenya to facilitate closer economic
ties. It would have been impolitic for him to say otherwise.
Kwei Akuete, President, Vision 1 Consulting
June 10, 2013
|
