For most people who have a little knowledge of OAU, Dr. Salim’s achievement consists of the fact that he stayed as Secretary-General for three consecutive terms – the only Secretary-General of  OAU to do so.  In itself this is of course an achievement in that the OAU Heads of State and Government felt that they needed Dr. Salim to run the Secretariat for that length of time. This, needless to say, is a superficial assessment of Dr. Salim’s term as Secretary-General of  OAU. One must look at the context and what was actually done during the period in which OAU traversed in order to understand why the African Heads of State and Government kept Dr. Salim as Secretary-General for this length of time.

It is important to recall two crucial characteristics of the period during Dr. Salim’s tenure as Secretary-General of OAU.

Firstly, until 1990, OAU had focussed  mainly on the decolonization of Africa and against apartheid.

Secondly, from roughly 1980 to the present, Africa has been going through very severe turbulence – deteriorating and collapsing economies, internal political conflicts and weakening states, and Africa’s marginalization within the global system, despite the fact that Africa is more integrated in the World economy than any other region of the world. To have steered OAU from what it was around the 1980s to what it is today – its transition towards becoming the Union of African States - is what is remarkable about Dr. Salim’s tenure as Secretary-General of OAU. Let me be explicit as to what this process of change has actually involved.

During Dr. Salim’s tenure, OAU has moved on four major fronts.   The first front was that of economic cooperation, integration and Common Market. The Abuja Treaty of 1991 creating the African Economic Community was the hallmark of this front. Since then OAU has paid particular attention to the evolution and progress of the subregional organizations. The East African, Southern African and West African subregional organizations in particular have made important progress. Regression, however, has taken place in Central Africa.

The second front was initiated through the Addis Ababa Declaration (July 1990) of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government on the Political and Socio-Economic situation in Africa and the Fundamental Changes Taking Place in the World, which clearly identified the two critical and pervasive conditions in Africa – its marginalization in the world system and the prevailing deteriorating economies and political instability. The Assembly identified the source of these conditions to be largely due to the negative impact of the unfavourable international environment.  In my view the Declaration was essentially refering to the intrusive policies of the Bretton Woods Institutions in Africa’s economies, the social sector and political system.

Consequently, and as a response to this situation, the Assembly introduced two new political principles which became part of the OAU mandate. It decided to extend the scope of OAU to include seeking solutions to the internal conflicts of member  States.  Secondly, it endorsed and advocated democracy as being the desirable political system in African countries. These two principles directly overturned earlier principles of non-interference in the sovereignty of member States and the “freedom” of countries to choose their political system – such as military rule, one party rule etc.

The third front was the move towards resolving internal conflicts and restoring political stability. This move was symbolized by the creation within OAU of the Mechanism for the Prevention, Management and Resolution of Conflicts, including the setting up of a Centre for Conflict Resolution and creating a Peace Fund.  Concomitant with this, were the OAU initiatives advocating democracy as the political system for African countries and the involvement of civil society as a major actor in this process. As a direct result of the Addis Ababa Declaration of 1990, OAU began to get involved in seeking solutions to internal conflicts of member States. The Arusha Peace process on Rwanda was the first and most important initiative in attempting to resolve an internal conflict of a member State. That process delved in great details in almost all aspects of Rwanda – political system, military structure, the refugee question, minority rights, the economy etc. The Arusha Peace process has since set the framework and approach of  OAU in dealing with other conflict situations – for example, in Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo.  Like in Rwanda, in these cases, negotiations extended on the details of most aspects of the internal sectors and institutions of the country.  And as a means of preventing conflict through strengthening democracy, the Heads of State and Government passed a resolution denouncing military coup d’état and rejecting change of governments brought through the barrel of the gun.

OAU also began to take more seriously the issue of involving civil society in the political arena of member States, which hitherto had been the exclusive arena of governments and OAU. It set up a Women’s Committee on Peace and Development; it established the International Panel of Eminent Personalities to Investigate the 1994 Rwanda genocide; and it started  observing and monitoring elections of member States. More recently, it organized an important conference with the major African NGOs and CSOs during which there was a serious and extensive disucssion on the role of Civil Society in the structure of the African Union.

The fourth and most important front was the move by OAU towards the political union of African States. Although the primary move towards the final creation of the Union of African States was initiated by political leaders, the pre-conditions for this had been carefully and systematically developed by the Secretariat and the Secretary-General since the Abuja Treaty of 1991.

Dr. Salim has worked very hard in all these areas, and although progress has been slow and often very frustrating, the fact of opening up these fronts and steering  OAU towards taking specific strategic decisions, is in my view a major and pioneering achievement.

Dr. Salim should be very proud that he is leaving  OAU in the state that it is in – in transition towards its most cherished dream – a Union of African States. It will of course be a long and difficult process as other similar experiences have shown. Nevertheless, I believe that Dr. Salim is young enough not only to observe further positive achievements in this process, but he is active enough to give a helping hand, as a Pan-Africanist, whenever he is commanded to do so. I am sure his successor will take over a solid foundation which will enable him to carry the torch of African unity further forward.

Back to Bulletin page