Both Malawi, AU right on Bashir issue
If one ever doubted the influence that just one person can have on the fate of an entire country, then Malawi’s new president Joyce Banda should reassure you that a single change in personnel at the very top can turn a struggling, declining nation into one of Africa’s brightest prospects.
Since taking over two months ago upon the death of her predecessor Bingu wa Mutharika, Banda has made a series of bold, difficult decisions that should give Malawi a new lease on life after years of stagnation. She devalued the currency to make exports more attractive; she’s selling the superfluous presidential jet, along with 60 presidential limousines; and she’s promised to repeal the notorious anti-homosexuality laws.
However, her boldest decision was to respect Malawi’s international commitments and declare that Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir would be arrested should he set foot on Malawian soil.
Bashir is wanted by the International Criminal Court to answer charges of committing genocide in Darfur; Malawi, as a signatory to the Rome Statute which created the court, is obligated to enforce the arrest warrant.
This brave, principled decision is not entirely without self-interest. Malawi is expecting some $500 million-plus in aid money as the likes of the International Monetary Fund and the Millennium Challenge Corporation queue up to help her, after aid was almost entirely suspended during Mutharika’s second term. A picture of Joyce Banda greeting an alleged war criminal on her own red carpet would have seriously jeopardised the resumption of support.
UNPOPULAR Banda
The financial incentive should not detract from what was still a courageous decision. The ICC has a bad reputation among most African leaders, who have consistently defied calls to arrest Bashir and dismissed his arrest warrant as just another example of the court’s anti-African bias. By taking the opposite view, Banda is openly defying the African consensus, something sure to make her unpopular among her counterparts.
That this issue came up at all was because the Sudanese president was due to travel to Lilongwe next month for the African Union summit. Once it became clear that he would not be welcomed Sudan complained long and loudly to whoever would listen.
This put the AU in a very tight spot. It has previously been vocal in its criticism of the ICC and Bashir’s indictment. So the AU wrote to Malawi, telling the Government it had better invite Bashir or the summit would be moved, summarily, to Addis Ababa.
Malawi, with one eye on the donors and trapped anyway by the strength of their strongly-stated convictions, wouldn’t relent, and on Friday Addis Ababa was officially confirmed as the summit’s host.
This decision is hardly going to improve the AU’s already battered reputation, especially as it comes in the midst of organisation’s inability to elect a commission chairperson. Critics will question the AU’s commitment to justice.
The reality is that the AU had little choice in the matter. For a start, it needed to abide by its own rules and regulations, which require all heads of member States to be invited to attend each summit. This is no mere diplomatic nicety: the whole point of a summit is to bring all the presidents together to thrash out issues facing the continent. To have it in a place where one president is persona non grata is deliberately exclusionary, and certain to encourage divisions rather than unity.
For Peace’s sake
Furthermore, the AU is not a signatory to the Rome Statute – it’s not a country, so it can’t be. And of its member States, only 33 of 54 have ratified the treaty, meaning there are 21 countries who have chosen not to do so. Sudan is one of them.
By refusing to welcome a wanted war criminal, Malawi will attract plenty of well-deserved praise, but so should AU, for taking the difficult decision to move summit elsewhere for peace and justice in Africa.
{DM, Via Email}
Business Beat
Crazy Monday
Home & Away
Eve Woman
Generation Next
Sunday Magazine
