The African Union

Continuing on my analysis of the Golden article from the Huffington Post, I have come to the role that the African Union should play in resolving the Sudan-South Sudan disputes.  When I started my research on this particular aspect, I wasn't that interested, but the more I found out the more intrigued I became.

This is a real good news/bad news situation, and if you've been following my posts you know that the optimist in me will start with the good news.

That good news is that the AU is really coming of age, and showing itself to be a real force in promoting the welfare of Africa.  To any skeptical readers I will only ask that they do some research of what the AU is doing now, and forget its past reputation as a weak, corrupt or compromised body.  The AU today shows signs of becoming what it should be, and although it is premature to hand out laurels, the progess of the AU is nearly miraculous since 2002, given the scope of the challenge in raising Africa to its proper place in the world.  Both Sudan and South Sudan are members, and the AU could be a real partner in the peace process.

The bad news is that the AU is not a neutral player.  Please remember that the goal is peace between Sudan and South Sudan.  You should also recall that Omar el-Bashir is notorious for his role in the Darfur crisis and the South Sudan civil war.  It is difficult to see el-Bashir as a peacemaker.  It is incumbent on the process, however, to not stigmatize him.  The AU has been a key partner in bringing the Darfur crisis to a level of stability, which, though far from peace, is far better than it was several years ago.  In the process, the AU was forced into a role of confrontational negotiations with el-Bashir.  Further, the AU may be perceived to have a sub-Saharan bias, hence favoring South Sudan, at least arguably.

The other regional group in the area is the Arab League.  In their case, Sudan is a member, while South Sudan is not.  Further, there is a much better argument that the Arab League has a bias in the conflict toward Sudan.  Nonetheless, they may have a role as a counterweight to the AU.  In fact, given the personal acrimony between el-Bashir and Kiir, both organiztions may be able to aid negotiations as proxies, although that may be asking too much, admittedly.

My conclusion is that the AU can be quite effective in supporting peace efforts, along with other regional players.  The situation is a good reminder that we should be very careful before villifying or labeling.  The fact that Sudan has been labelled as a state that has supported terrorism by the US, and that el-Bashir has ben accused of war crimes by the UN make the 'west' largely ineffective in the process, in addition to the old but festering wounds of imperialism.  Of course, you must realize by now that everyone needs to act as peacemakers, so the discredited western powers need to mend fences, and humbly apply themselves to the peace process in Sudan.  In that spirit of humility, we don't need to bow before evil, however you may think that evil manifests itself, as is so obviously has in East Africa, but stopping the shedding of blood must be a higher priority than preemptive justice.