Did Senegal achieve its ambitious goals as AU chair?
Though some gains were made, the country fell short when addressing Africa’s peace and security issues.
The African Union (AU) chairship passed from Senegal to Comoros at the 36th AU summit in February, extending the practice of yearly tenures in line with Article 6(4) of the AU Constitutive Act.
AU chairship has garnered rising interest recently, with member states seeing it as projecting diplomatic relevance, contributing to continental goals and pursuing particular national interests. It has become the norm for chairs to outline their tenure priorities. While some experts contest the relevance of this in the context of existing AU focus areas, clear goals facilitate the assessment of a chair’s performance.
Senegal’s chairship
In his first speech as AU chair, President Macky Sall noted the challenging context. Although the organisation has much to be proud of, he said, it still grapples with pressing concerns about peace and security, environment protection, health and socio-economic development. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic had strained Africa’s economies and the rise in terrorism was impeding development.
He detailed two sets of priorities for Senegal’s chairship. The first was enhancing Africa's global positioning, particularly securing an AU seat at the G20, reforming the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and improving the outcomes of its partnerships. Senegal's focus on multilateral continental issues was driven by an appreciation of imbalances in global political, economic and financial governance. These marginalise African countries and diminish their role in global decision-making circles, despite Africa accounting for nearly 28% of United Nations (UN) membership.
Allied focuses included dealing with African states' foreign debt and recovering assets and artefacts stolen or diverted during colonisation. For the latter, Dakar was motivated by a strong desire to deconstruct stereotypes and Western determinism on African cultures and to establish an African identity more resilient to external influences. The country intended to deploy a robust diplomatic structure to raise these concerns in multilateral decision-making forums such as the UN, the G20 and Bretton Woods Institutions.
Senegal’s advocacy may have persuaded prominent G20 members to support Africa's enhanced representation
The second set of priorities focused on continental challenges, with Sall emphasising the need for more resilient economic and health security systems, fewer conflicts and empowered women and youth. He also stressed the importance of completing ongoing AU reforms to realise a better Africa.
Senegal sought to encourage African financial institutions to form a reflection task force and a pan-African notation agency to address the financial deficit by reallocating special drawing rights with African Development Bank (AfDB) assistance. This would involve facilitating infrastructure financing, modernising agriculture and achieving an equitable energy transition based on the continent’s Conference of the Parties 27 commitments.
Accomplishments
In pursuing these goals, Sall advocated for non-alignment in the Russia-Ukraine war, used his trip to Sochi to negotiate the export of Ukrainian grains and projected African solutions to challenges at the UN through his speech at the UN’s 77th Assembly in which he emphasised the need for renewed relationships with Africa’s partners.
Although discussions on UN reforms are complex and ongoing, Senegal's active advocacy has also sustained Africa’s position on UNSC representation. Building on the momentum, the AU Assembly urged the Committee of 10 to step up efforts to give Africa a UNSC seat.
Senegal also played a commendable role in efforts to secure a G20 seat for the AU. In policy circles, many believe the country's advocacy persuaded prominent G20 members – including the United States, Japan and France – to support Africa's request for enhanced representation at the forum. Sall has been praised by his peers for contributing to that drive.
Some say that Senegal was so preoccupied with global issues that it ignored most African concerns
Senegal also made gains in spearheading intra-African affairs through conference diplomacy. Its summit on food security developed country food and agriculture delivery compacts to accelerate the implementation of the AU’s Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme. At Dakar’s summit on financing African infrastructure, AU member states, the AfDB and partners committed to implementing the Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa's second action plan. The plan includes 69 projects totalling US$160 billion.
Despite these major advances, Senegal’s contribution to addressing Africa’s peace and security concerns remained minimal. Dakar’s actions to manage the escalating Rwanda-Democratic Republic of Congo crisis and Côte d'Ivoire-Mali tensions over detained Ivorian soldiers were limited despite some sporadic calls for dialogue, a joint communiqué with the AU Commission (AUC) chairperson calling for a ceasefire in DRC, and a short trip to Bamako. According to some observers, the chair was so preoccupied with global issues that it ignored most intra-African concerns.
Others argue that Sall's lack of experience in peace and security prevented him from deciding on complex and sensitive cases, instead foisting them into the background. Similarly, women and youth empowerment goals were not accelerated, nor development of an African pharmaceutical industry.
Gaps and challenges
Senegal chaired the AU amid global challenges that impacted delivery, including COVID-19 and the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Both significantly influenced global economies and shifted the focus of partners, creating partnerships to achieve set goals became difficult for the chair.
Chairs should narrow their priorities and set attainable, measurable goals to evaluate their actions
Furthermore, although the troika helps sustain institutional memory, it remains vulnerable to regional struggles. During Senegal’s chairship, the 2021 competition between Kenya and Comoros denied it the full benefit of a functioning bureau. This, with the ongoing contest between Algeria and Morocco, left the outgoing and current bureaus limping, which affected the support the chair received.
The two sets of priorities were also overloaded with ambitious goals. Given that, in the absence of an AU allocated budget, chairs rely on their means and Senegal could not deliver on its numerous priorities. Narrowing ambitions may enhance effectiveness.
Culture of priorities
There’s a commonly held belief that chairs should foster a culture of priorities. However, they acknowledge that this may fail given the imbalance between scope and means and a lack of coordination with the AUC.
Since the AU Assembly has recommended that the AUC focus its agenda on fewer priorities, chairs should follow suit. Chairs should narrow their priorities and set attainable and measurable goals to evaluate their actions. This will make chairs more effective in their meagre 12-month time limit. Selecting one or two issues from the AU’s 2021 to 2024 priorities and adopting the year's chosen theme would help to refocus the energies of chairs.
The AU Assembly bureau and the AUC should then work together to determine which matters chairs should promote. The efforts of Senegal and the AUC chairperson to establish convenient work relationships and coordinate bureau and AUC actions are commendable and could serve as a model for Comoros and future tenures.
Image: © REUTERS / Alamy Stock Photo
