AU Member States Should Walk Their Talk on AMISOM
Once again the African Union (AU) Heads of State and Government Summit concluded last week in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, with the call to member states of the AU to contribute more troops to Somalia. This has been a refrain heard after every Summit for the last three years.ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ
Xavier Ejoyi, Researcher, Training for Peace Programme, ISS Nairobi Office
Once again the African Union (AU) Heads of State and Government Summit concluded last week in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, with the call to member states of the AU to contribute more troops to Somalia. This has been a refrain heard after every Summit for the last three years.
Various resolutions were adopted and pronouncements made at the Summit, especially on issues of peace and security on the continent. Besides electing fifteen new members to the rotational Peace and Security Council, member states reaffirmed their support to the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) in Somalia and tried once again to strengthen commitment to the African Union Mission in Somalia (Amisom).
Amisom, the TFG’s only lifeline and the only way to secure humanitarian interventions has in the last three years of its existence been overwhelmed by logistical, financial and security challenges. A lot was therefore expected from this 14th ordinary session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the AU. It is clear that member states need to demonstrate commitment through practical implementation and go beyond the convenience of collective resolutions and pronouncements.
Amisom’s tenure in Somalia has been a mixed bag of fortunes as the insurgency and resistance by militant groups opposed to the TFG has constantly been mutating since 2007. The Al Shabaab radical Islamic group has taken centre stage in the Somali debacle, and remains a force to be reckoned with, especially in the wake of its recent suicide attacks on the Amisom bases. Despite the progress in training TFG security forces and providing access to humanitarian interventions, the increasing security risk to the Mission leaves many unanswered questions about the future of Amisom. Burundi and Uganda have already demonstrated commitment to Amisom despite more than fifty fatalities in their contingents. Delayed allowances are among their many challenges.
Other member states of the AU have an obligation to redeem the name of the AU, not through speeches, resolutions, but practical commitment to Amisom.
The question of funding the mission also needs to be addressed with the urgency that it deserves if any meaningful impact is to be realised. While the dilemma of funding a peacekeeping mission is not unique to Amison, the selective approach adopted by the international development partners is reflective of diverse strategic interests in the horn of Africa. In comparison with the presence of naval forces arraigned to fight piracy in the Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden, AU member states need to realise that Amisom is increasingly becoming an African burden.
Apathy must not be allowed to hold ground in stabilising Somalia. This is key not only to peace and security in the horn of Africa, but also internationally. No doubt that increased funding remains integral to the success of Amisom. However, member states of the AU also need to walk their talk and commit troops to realise the authorised strength of Amisom. Is it not embarrassing that at a time when the African Standby Force is taking shape that member states adopt a wait and see approach to one of the continents complex conflicts?
Meanwhile, the call by the AU Heads of States and Governments for more involvement of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in Somalia needs to be pursued further. First, the UNSC has the final mandate in matters of international peace and security. Although Chapter 8 of the UN Charter provides for collaboration with a regional organisation such as the AU to achieve peace and security, the UNSC should not relegate its obligations to the AU. Beyond the various resolutions on the situation in Somalia, the UN needs to directly adress the issue of peacekeeping in the country.
The notion that there is no peace to keep in Somalia does not hold much ground in light of peace agreements signed between the TFG and belligerents, under the UN tutelage. Once again, Africa’s non-permanent representatives to the UNSC are being challenged: Benin and particularly Uganda with troops in Amisom, should pursue the UN’s involvement in Somalia further.
Surely, three years down the line and increased complexities in the Somali conflict, member states of the AU cannot go on chorusing condemnation and concerns as if it is business as usual. It is unlikely that the challenges of insecurity, shortage of funding, and logistics, among others, facing Amisom are likely to disappear. At stake is not only the security of millions of Somalis and the Horn of Africa region, but also the reputation of the AU’s brainchild Amisom. Will member states of the AU finally rise above their reservations and commit troops to Amisom?
