As a bastard of an otherwise genuine attempts to solve the problems wrought on peoples of African descent and the African continent, the OAU has been deep neck in a crisis of identity and mission. Pan Africanist thought were essentially not dialectical when they first emerged; even though the basis for the rise of Pan Africanist thoughts which later gave birth to the Organization of African Unity (OAU) are rooted in the slave trade, development of capitalism and its later developments such as colonialism and neo-colonialism. As already acknowledged, despite the weaknesses associated with thoughts such as unity of all Africans, they were progressive as at the time they emerged. If anything, they were more profound and sincere than what later emerged as the OAU.
The creation of the OAU therefore was a complete bastardization of Pan Africanist thoughts which were themselves not strong enough to explain the situation in which peoples of African descent both within the continent and in Diaspora found themselves. It can now be argued with the benefit of hindsight that had the ˜reactionary elements within the Pan African movement backed by imperialism not sabotaged the ˜struggle, the continent and peoples of Africa would not have been as bad.
Just as Nigeria, the Zikist Movement nationalists were stopped in their tracks by the Tafawa Balewas, Obafemi Awolowos and Nnamdi Azikiwes backed fully British colonialism, so too did the ˜conglomerate of colonial powers ensure that the Nkrumahs and those who even remotely seemed to be threatening their interest were stopped from making any impact and the OAU that came out, as shown in its charter was a complete negation of what African people needed. Worse of all, it did not emerge Pan-African.
But the greatest undoing of the OAU is the system bequeath on most African states by colonialism. Because it is essentially capitalist, it has subsisted on lacerating the will and determination of the people for progress and democracy. There is today virtually no African state (except for the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), Angola and Mozambique) where human rights are respected. Apart from the squalid poverty, prevalence of easily preventable and curable diseases, peoples of African, especially the working people namely peasants and workers are starving. High cost of food, social services and in fact high cost of surviving. What more in this sea of mass poverty are islands of scandalous affluence often stolen from the people. Government borrowings which have saddled the continent in an unpayable debt burden only enriched a few. Even in terms of nominally asserting the independence of Africa, it would be seen that the OAU is nothing but one “ through the activities of its members “ that has mortgaged even the nominal independence acquired a few years back. What with the huge debts and the fact that IMF, World Bank officials and a number of private financial institutions in the West are determining from African states what economic programmes they should implement.
Essentially, because the interest of the rulers of Africa are intertwined with, and can not fundamentally be excised from imperialism, the OAU has been itself not only an organization of the ruling class but one whose interest, at least so its members think, rhyme so sweetly with imperialism. After all, it is possible today to talk of imperialism being an outside force to Africa? All the washy washy hopes that the OAU could if given the resources and commitment of membership help the lot of Africa forget “ or choose to ignore the fact there cannot be an OAU without member states whose interest essentially contradict those of the larger African workers and peasants, who have no common destiny with their rulers. True, the OAU may have contributed to giving moral support to African states in their struggles for independence, and had during the Nigerian civil war attempted to mediate. Such mediations have taken place in several areas of conflicts. These and other saga of the OAU such as the Chad and SADR fiasco are necessarily systematic problems of the often contradictory allegiances which African states have. They show OAUs failures, not success.
What then do we do with the OAU? This is the burning question of the day. What actually is the OAU celebrating? Some say jubilee without silver. But for most Africans, the 25 years of the OAU “ as reflected in the dismal failure of the organisation in achieving its stated objectives and the hardship experienced in member states tell stories of woe and sorrow and certainly not anything worth celebrating. What are we celebrating? Failure? Rather the present situation in Africa calls for sober reflection and indeed question the need for the existence of the OAU, and calling into need the necessity for the working people to intensify the struggle against imperialism. As it is, though the OAU has shown its potentials of arresting peoples struggle, it is yet to be seen that it can stop the people from triumphing. The Chadian farce as sponsored by CIA, blessed and executed by the OAU will definitely not stop the day of judgment. The success of the SADR speaks eloquently for itself.
There is no lamenting the situation for the people. Lamentation does not stop any suffering. The people should study their situation well and know for themselves why things have continued to be so bad since the so called independence. This done, they should intensify their struggles at the home fronts fro liberation. In doing this, there is need to join up with other groups in fellow African countries who are similarly struggling for liberation to share experiences, resources and practice true patriotic and working people pan Africanism.
This is an effective anti-thesis of the OAU which has only shown itself to be an enemy of the working people “ in other words, an organization, and a weapon in the hands of the Mobutus, the Sgt Does and all who go by whatever name negates progress in Africa.
By Rima Shawulu
The Standard, Wednesday, May 25, 1988