Ghana to Pull out of the African Union (AU) – Part II

Ghana has been a member of the Organization of the African Unity (OAU) that has
metamorphosed into the African Union (AU) since its very inception. In fact, Ghana
was a founding member and the corner stone of the defunct OAU. Let us ask ourselves
what positive benefits have accrued to Ghana or any of the member States of the
African Union since its formation. In the case of Ghana, there may not be much if
any at all.

Why should Ghana then continue to be a member of an organization that has almost
failed its aims and lost its focus? "The OAU had other aims, too: 1) Ensure that all
Africans enjoyed human rights. 2) Raise the living standards of all Africans. 3)
Settle arguments and disputes between members – not through fighting but rather
peaceful and diplomatic negotiation". In some of the member States where
dictatorships are well entrenched, the citizens can hardly avail themselves of the
benefits of human rights. This is the reason for the recent uprisings in the part of
the African Arab world – Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. Their dictator-Presidents had
denied them the enjoyment of certain basic human rights paramount among which is the
freedom of speech. The living standards of most Africans have not improved much if
not deteriorated since gaining the much-hyped political independence. In some
countries, most of the citizens are even worse off. This is all
because their leaders are corrupt, selfish, greedy and not farsighted. What are the
AU's enforceable regulations and checks in place to guarantee every African their
human rights from the abusive dictators and the fake democrats? Most of their aims
are theoretically sound but practically unachievable as indicated.

The OAU, now the AU, failed from the word "go" when they enshrined in their charter
"non interference in member State's internal affairs" The AU would sit on her lap
twirling her fingers while a member State's dictator-President or fake democrat
treats his people with unimaginable oppression. When she attempts to intervene, she
fails because she would always be wearing a kid's glove. This gives the Whites the
excuse to intervene militarily, giving the oppressed some reprieve. They then
cleverly put in place a puppet government that will do their bidding hence, the
neo-colonization of Africa. Has the main purpose of the AU in liberating the entire
Continental Africa from the shackles of colonialism, psychological slavery, and
White supremacy not been defeated?

Granted the AU has been able to rid Africa of the Whiteman's colonialism, has it not
sat on the fence while certain African leaders brutalize and impose their total
wishes on their citizens? "The dictatorial decision by Mwai Kibaki and his cronies
to disregard voters' verdict on 12/27/07 was an overt message to all Kenyans that
Mwai Kibaki and elites behind him are acting like the supreme rulers of Kenyans".
The use of armed forces and Mungiki emphasized that they are prepared to crush the
citizens if they raise their voices or mount any protest against Mwai Kibaki's
decision". Mwai Kibaki was determined to cling to power even though he had lost to
Raila Odinga's ODM (Orange Democratic Movement)" "President Robert Mugabe ceded some
power in Zimbabwe for the first time in 28 years, signing a power-sharing deal with
opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai amid questions on how the fierce enemies will
work together to fix the collapsing economy".

Why should the AU sit with the arms folded around the chest when the dictators in
Kenya and Zimbabwe cunningly devised a power-sharing deal to continually remain in
office even though, they had lost the elections? Was this not a bad precedent for
Africa? The accepted power sharing in both countries was a fraudulent inducement for
all dictators in Africa to seek to stay in office at the expiration of their
mandated term of office. No wonder President Laurent Gbagbo of Ivory Coast had
stubbornly desired to entrench his rule although he had lost the elections. It took
the French soldiers to end the administration of Gbagbo after all persuasions had
failed. Why could the AU not agree to use force rather than to sit pending a
Whiteman's intervention militarily? The AU in my view is a dormant organization that
we need to disband if it were going to act deplorably as it does. It is in all
probabilities helping the Whiteman to regain a strong footing in Africa to determine
the direction Africa goes in line with their exploitative plans. Should Ghana
continue to associate with such a colossal but hollow in substance organization? No!
John Fosu