President carries founding fathers’ aspirations on UN African status

Saul Gwakuba Ndlovu
THE current African campaign led by President Mugabe, that the continent should be given equal status on United Nations agencies and structures to that enjoyed or occupied by the five original member-states of that world body was started by the founding fathers of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) through a resolution passed by the OAU’s inaugural conference in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, on 22-25 May, 1963.

Headed “Africa and the United Nations”, a part of that resolution said Africa should be given what it described as an “equitable representation in the principal organs of the United Nations, particularly the Security Council and the Economic and the Social Council and its specialised agencies.”

The campaign was thereafter not given the attention it deserved because the OAU, now African Union, prioritised the decolonisation of the entire continent and its islands, a mission that was achieved with Namibia’s attainment of independence in 1990.

When the United Nations was launched after the Second World War, only Ethiopia and Liberia were independent. South Africa, an independent Commonwealth dominion but under a Boer settler minority regime, was without any semblance of democracy whatsoever.

Egypt was to all intents and purposes a British protectorate with a monarch as its sovereign head but with powers whittled by Britain. The two independent African states at that time, Ethiopia and Liberia, were former members of the League of Nations, a predecessor of the United Nations.

During the consultations that were carried out before the formation of the UN, that is during the final two or three years of the war, more importance was given to the Anglo-American allies that played a meaningful role in the war than to smaller states such as Ethiopia and Liberia.

Those allies were the Soviet Union (the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics — USSR) the fighting section of France headed by General Charles De Gaulle, Formosa also known as Taiwan, Britain and the United States of America.

These five nations were, in fact, responsible for crafting the UN Charter with some inputs by Canada, Australia and New Zealand. China was in the middle of its own revolution which culminated in victory under Mao Tse Tung in 1949, some four years after Adolf Hitler and his fascistic allies had been defeated by what were at times referred to as the United Nations, a name given to them before the actual universal body was officially launched.

The UN Charter gave the five creators of that organisation permanent status on its arm, the Security Council. Not only did they appoint themselves permanent members of the Security Council, they also gave themselves power to veto whatever they felt threatened their national security or their global economic interests.

However, practical policies and global economic considerations led to the replacement of Taiwan by China on the Security Council some three or so decades ago. Rationalism indicates that those who crafted the UN Charter were ruled by subjective more than by objective considerations. It is also likely that they thought that they had more at stake in the world more than those nations that were not represented in that small group.

Yet another possibility is that they did not think of or imagine that the world’s socio-political environment could one day be what it is it today, that is to say colonies of that time becoming independent sovereign states.

Whatever motivated the UN Charter authors, African leaders, among whom was Zimbabwe’s Joshua Nkomo, resolved at Addis Ababa on that historic four-day long occasion to call for a revision of that document.

Their resolution reads: “Believing that the United Nations is an important instrument for the maintenance of peace and security among nations and for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples; Reiterating its desire to strengthen and support the United Nations; Noting with regret that Africa as a region is not equitably represented in the principal organs of the United Nations; Convinced of the need for closer co-operation and co-ordination among the African States Members of the United Nations;

1. “Reaffirms its dedication to the purposes and the principles of the United Nations Charter and its acceptance of all obligations contained in the Charter, including financial obligations,

2. “Insists that Africa as a geographical region should have equitable representation in the principal organs of the United Nations, particularly the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council and its Specialised Agencies.

3. “Invites African Governments to instruct their representatives at the United Nations to take all possible steps to achieve a more equitable representation of the African regions;

4. “Further invites African Governments to instruct their representatives at the United Nations, without prejudice to their membership in and collaboration with the African-Asia Group, to constitute a more effective African Group, with a permanent secretariat to bring about closer co-operation and better co-ordination in matters of common concern.”

At the time the above resolution was passed in Addis Ababa, there were only about 33 independent African countries. Today there are 55, and their combined population forms a significant part of that of the whole world.

The existence of a global organisation such as the United Nations Organisation was extremely important for the creation and maintenance of world peace, especially at the time when a number of European countries owned colonies in various regions of the globe.

The possibility of international conflicts occurring over those colonies was high, but much higher was that of colonised people taking up arms against their colonial oppressors as was the case in Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Angola, Namibia, Algeria, South Africa, Kenya and Guinea-Bissau. The UN was involved in the decolonisation of all these territories.

Now that the world is free of the colonial scourge, its original importance is reduced except in social, educational and cultural issues. However, we should not lose sight, of course, of its numerous peace-keeping role in a quite large number of areas in the past two decades.

Today each continent or region has its own multi-national organisation: the Arab League for North Africa and the Middle East, the African Union, the European Union plus several others for other regions or continents. Whether or not those organisations are effective in maintaining peace in their respective regions is an important question. But the United Nations would not have been involved in the Central African Republics current civil war if the African Union were more focused, nor would the United States and Russia be in Syria Militarily today if the Arab League were better organised.

The UN’s social role is greatly felt in cases of disaster, where food, shelter and medical are needed as a matter of emergency.

The other regional organisations have not lived up to their various publics’ expectations if we take the Boko Haram atrocious operations in Nigeria as an example. We should not be surprised, however, if the UN will be required to step into the fray militarily as well as socially by taking care of refugees.

Meanwhile, African nations should remember that there are more advantages in practical unity than in individual eloquence.

If the African nations were one in practical terms, with one voice everywhere, its legitimate demand for equitable UN representation could have positive results sooner than later, and the continent’s call for equitable representation at the UN as has been repeatedly made by the AU’s current chairman, President Mugabe, could carry greater weight than at present.

There is greater power and effectiveness in unity than in division. The United States of America is a good example of how powerful unity and not division can be.