African+Union+fails+the+coup+test,+B+Day

Business Day, Johannesburg, 30 August 2005
=African Union fails the coup test=


 * Timothy Othieno**

On August 3, a group of military officers headed by Ely Ould Mohamed Vall staged a coup d’état in Mauritania. As expected, the coup was met with criticism from the international community, and more specifically the African Union (AU), which called for a return to democracy and the restoration of deposed leader Maaouya Ould Sid’Ahmed Taya.

The AU also took the procedural step of suspending Mauritania, in accordance with AU principles. What surprised many, however, was the subsequent response from the AU, which has placed the organisation in an ambiguous position, and which could have serious consequences for the future of Africa.

Following the coup, AU chairman Olusegun Obasanjo, the president of Nigeria, sent an AU delegation to Nouakchott with a mission to urge the Mauritanian junta to re-establish the rule of law and reinstate the deposed president. However, the AU’s principle of outlawing military coups against elected leaders, and unconstitutional changes of government, was compromised after the AU delegation’s visit.

The delegation, led by Nigerian Foreign Minister Oluyemi Adeniji, said it had been “reassured” by the military junta that democratic reforms would be undertaken within two years.

This assurance appears to have been prompted by the junta’s promises about undertaking constitutional reforms within 12 months, and holding parliamentary and presidential elections within 24 months, in which none of the junta members would participate. Further, the junta appointed a popular former prime minister as a transitional government leader and adopted a transitional charter committing the junta to honouring international law and agreements.

Acceptance of the new regime was also signalled by Rantobeng Mokou, a member of the AU delegation and SA’s envoy to Mauritania, who expressed the belief that it was up to Mauritanians to decide who they wanted in power and that the AU had nothing to say on that.

Although the announced plans of the military junta to ensure Mauritania’s return to democracy seem acceptable, the AU cannot use them as a criterion for recognising the new regime, even if only for two years. In the past, in the cases of Côte d’Ivoire, Madagascar and Togo, the AU has insisted that unconstitutional changes of government will not be allowed. Hence, the AU’s tolerance of the Mauritanian coup compromises the principles that bind AU member states.

It is likely, however, that the AU’s position might have been influenced by the changing position of the international community, especially the US. In view of the various US interests at stake in Mauritania, the US seemed reassured by the new regime that these would not be endangered. In addition to 2000 US special forces based in Mauritania as part of its war against terrorism, these interests include Mauritania’s recently discovered oil reserves in the Chinguetti and Tiouf fields, which hold an estimated billion barrels of oil and 30-billion cubic metres of natural gas. The commercial sale of these resources is scheduled for January next year. Soon after the coup, the US agreed to work with the junta to ensure that multiparty elections would be held.

The US attitude is not surprising, since Washington has adopted similar positions concerning unconstitutional African regime changes in the past. What is of concern, however, is that the AU went along with the US position.

This raises questions about the AU’s ability to keep members in line with its principles, among other things. Even in the face of potential sanctions from AU members, Mauritania could find and keep partners on other continents, especially due to its oil. Once Mauritania begins to export oil early next year — at the expected rate of 75000 barrels a day — it will have a potential income of $1,8bn a year at a price of $65 a barrel, and an even larger amount from natural gas.

Thus, by adopting punitive measures — such as sanctions on Mauritania’s future oil exports until the demand for the restoration of a legitimate government is met — the AU would probably not be successful, considering the expressed support of the US.

Mauritania is also a member of the League of Arab States, which has not condemned the coup.

After considering the situation, the AU resolved to take a softer approach by suspending Mauritania from the organisation but allowing the military junta to stay in power.

Mauritania sets a precedent for the AU as well as for future coup leaders. The message is that the AU will treat each country on a case-by-case basis and that the criteria used will be the availability of vital natural resources and US support. This is not acceptable, and if the AU is to be taken seriously, it has to demonstrate a firm stance when dealing with unconstitutional government changes and not compromise its principles.


 * Dr Othieno is a senior researcher at the Institute for Global Dialogue.


 * From: http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/opinion.aspx?ID=BD4A85943**