It had to be Ghana, didn’t it? Fifty years after that country won independence, and with it ushered in hopes for a united Africa, Accra played host this week to yet another debate about African unity. At least we can take heart that this latest confab focused on the form such unity should take, rather than whether it is necessary.
In South Africa this debate is mostly confined to academic and political circles; you would hardly think there’s a party that styles itself as pan-Africanist. And perhaps this is where our contribution to this debate starts to unravel: the conflation of pan-Africanism with the Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC).
This past weekend provided a case study. Instead of leading debate on the issue in Accra, the PAC made news the only way it seems to know how, with yet another internal crisis of the sort that has dominated the party since it was first banned in 1960. This is hardly a contribution to continental discourse.
Given its condition of permanent crisis, many commentators find it easy to call for the disbanding of the party founded by Robert Sobukwe and others disaffected with the political course of the ANC in the late 1950s. And no one can seriously argue that, if the PAC were to disappear, pan-Africanism would suffer a blow.
Those arguing for the withering away of the PAC point out that President Thabo Mbeki has proven himself more pan-Africanist than many in the party that takes this name. But they fail to mention that this is Mbeki’s rallying cry, not necessarily that of his party.
Yes, the president did mention, at the end of the ruling party’s policy conference, that the ANC had always been pan-Africanist in orientation. But continental unity has not always been high on its agenda. And institutions, if they are to be enduring, should not be tied to the life and whims of individuals or, as our contemporary history shows, to political parties.
South Africa, mostly because of our exaggerated sense of worth and sophistication in comparison to other Africans, has always lagged behind when it comes to capturing Africa’s pulse. The isolation of former president Nelson Mandela, after he had called for sanctions against Nigeria following the execution of activist Ken Saro-Wiwa, is perhaps the best-known example of how we can badly misread the continent.
When Mbeki became president he made efforts to engage us at the heart of Africa’s major debates. But Mbeki is only mortal, politically and literally. He is not going to be with us as president beyond 2009.
That is why continental unity should start taking its place alongside crime, Aids and Zimbabwe as the dinner table conversation of choice. It should be as normal for ordinary South Africans to hold a view about the matters being discussed in Ghana as it is for anyone to talk about the economy or the 2010 World Cup.
Dismissing pan-Africanism is not as easy as ridiculing PAC leaders. It is not going to go away. From its birth at the start of the 20th century pan-Africanism has proven itself the most enduring movement on the continent. The least we can do as citizens is to educate ourselves and sharpen our opinions so we can make an intelligent contribution to this debate.
Fikile-Ntsikelelo Moya is associate editor