Suldaanka Posted March 20, 2011 http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/africa/news/article_1627288.php/African-Union-fails-to-attend-Libya-summit-in-Paris Paris - An emergency summit of world leaders called to discuss the implementation of no-fly zone over Libya took place on Saturday without the African Union (AU), diplomatic sources said. According to French media reports the AU, which had been invited to the meeting in Paris, was preparing a last-minute mediation effort in the Mauritanian capital Nouakchott. Around two dozen world leaders including British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy have been debating how to implement the no-fly zone since midday. The UN Security Council gave the green light for the zone on Thursday Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thankful Posted March 20, 2011 The African Union has the courage to stay out of a war that is solely based on Oil (like always when it comes to Africa and the Middle East). Yet the secessionists are going to use it as a way to call them "irrelevant?" Just because they don't want foreign intervention to take place that can potentially destabilize the entire region, doesn't mean they are irrelevant. More importantly, just because the AU refuses to accept the illegal secessionist’s agenda in NW Somalia like every other country and international body does; doesn't mean you need to criticize them now. The AU seems to know that France and the rest of the West are just defending their oil interests and have absolutely no concerns of the civilians! The West wants a puppet and useless government in place - like Iraq - that they can exploit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Suldaanka Posted March 20, 2011 Thankful;703478 wrote: The African Union has the courage to stay out of a war that is solely based on Oil (like always when it comes to Africa and the Middle East). Yet the secessionists are going to use it as a way to call them "irrelevant?" Just because they don't want foreign intervention to take place that can potentially destabilize the entire region, doesn't mean they are irrelevant. More importantly, just because the AU refuses to accept the illegal secessionist’s agenda in NW Somalia like every other country and international body does; doesn't mean you need to criticize them now. The AU seems to know that France and the rest of the West are just defending their oil interests and have absolutely no concerns of the civilians! The West wants a puppet and useless government in place - like Iraq - that they can exploit. What does Somaliland got to do with this topic? On the contrary to your gibberish. The very reason why the AU is quiet about the change which is led by the people in North Africa is symoblised by the current leader who serves as the President of the African Union. Teodoro Mbasogo came to power in Equatorial Guinea about 31 years ago, he himself is a despot and a dictator by all difinitions of the word. He commands neither any credibility nor legetimacy whatsoever to challenge the Libyan dictator to listen to the people and leave office. Teodoro Mbasogo is scared to death that sparks of liberty and people power in North Africa will reach his home and he would do exactly the same tactics employed by Gaddaffi to quell and put down any challenge to his despotic rule. And because of this inept dictators who are at the helm of the organistion, the AU has been rendered toothless to address African issues, visionless to lead the continent and missionless to put a road map for the future of the continent. By all means, it is a coffee shop by dictator for dictators. It is just shameful that other organisations of other continents are standing up to the dictators, and African leaders are quiet. Just shameful. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Naxar Nugaaleed Posted March 20, 2011 LOL, sick minds indeed. so all those Libyans fighting to overthrow a dictator are fighting to supply people with oil? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Che -Guevara Posted March 20, 2011 ^They have point. You see the aspirations for the Libyan people and their fight for their basic human rights and they see the Western hypocrisy, only yesterday was Sarkozy asking Ben Ali if he needs help in quelling protesters while the French Foriegn Minister was vacating lavishly in the country at the courtesy of corrupt Ben Ali friend. You are telling their point is not valid? As for the AU, much like UN and Arab League, the organization is only as good as its members! Find me an African Government that wants to get involved in the Libyan civil war, only then we can criticize the AU. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Zack Posted March 20, 2011 A look at Africa's remaining 'Big Men,' leaders who refuse to surrender power AP Friday, March 18, 2011 The following is a list of Africa's remaining "Big Men" — the leaders who refuse to surrender power, and their sons. Teodoro Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea, 69 — Took power in a bloody coup in 1979. Jose Eduardo dos Santos of Angola, 68 — President since 1979. Promised elections from 2006 until last year, when a new constitution abolished presidential balloting. The leader of the party that wins most parliament seats becomes president. Denis Sassou-Nguesso of Republic of Congo, 67 — President from 1979 until a 1992 election defeat, seized power again in 1997 with help from Angolan troops. Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, 87 — Elected 1980 after a seven-year war for black rule. Refused to accept a 2008 election defeat and is pushing to end a shaky unity government coalition. Paul Biya of Cameroon, 77 — President since 1982. Has won questionable elections since 1992. Changed constitution so he can run again this year. Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, about 66 — President since 1986 when he took power as a rebel leader and ended a civil war. Refused to hold elections until 1996. Most recently reelected March 9 in elections opposition claims were rigged. King Mswati III of Swaziland, 42 — Succeeded his father in 1986. The last absolute monarch in the world. Blaise Compaore of Burkina Faso, 60 — Took power from his best friend, assassinated in the 1987 palace coup. Changed the constitution limiting presidential terms. Holds elections whose results are disputed by a fragmented msg opposition. Omar al-Bashir of Sudan, 67 — Led a bloodless coup in 1989. First sitting head of state indicted by the International Criminal Court, for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur. Idriss Deby of Chad, 59 or 60 — Seized power in a 1990 coup. Eliminated constitutional term limits to contest questionable elections. Faces voters in April. Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia, 55 — Part of a rebel group that ended a civil war in 1991. Elected in 1995. Has held questionable elections marred by riots and bloodshed. Isaias Afwerki of Eritrea, 65 — Led the Eritrean rebel movement that helped end Ethiopia's civil war in 1991 and ushered in Eritrea's independence, with him as president, in 1993. Says he expects to live another 40 to 50 years and Eritrea may hold elections in 30 or 40 years. Paul Kagame of Rwanda, 53 — Led rebels who ended Rwanda's genocide in 1994. Elected since 2000 in elections from which all meaningful opponents have been barred. Yahya Jammeh of Gambia, 45 — Took power in a 1994 coup and vows to never leave. Tribal chieftains are campaigning to make him king. Ismail Omar Guelleh of Djibouti, 67 — Elected 1999 to continue a 30-year family dynasty. Changed constitution so he can run for a third term in April. Faure Gnassingbe of Togo, 44 — Won disputed 2005 elections to succeed his father, who ruled for 38 years. Ali Bongo of Gabon, 52 — Won 2009 elections amid charges of vote-rigging and violent protests after the death of his father, who had ruled since 1967. Laurent Gbagbo of Ivory Coast, 65 — Assumed office in 2000 after elections barring leading opponents. Lost 2010 elections but refuses to step down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thankful Posted March 20, 2011 Naxar Nugaaleed;703491 wrote: LOL, sick minds indeed. so all those Libyans fighting to overthrow a dictator are fighting to supply people with oil? The Libyans are fighting for freedom and the hopes to get rid of Qadaffi, their struggle is legitimate! The West however is fighting only because of the importance of Libya's OIL wealth!!! Does your common sense really tell you that the West is truly concerned about the potential massacre that might take place? Do you have any Idea how much Oil Libya supplies to Europe and other American Allies? On the contrary to your gibberish. The very reason why the AU is quiet about the change which is led by the people in North Africa is symoblised by the current leader who serves as the President of the African Union. Teodoro Mbasogo came to power in Equatorial Guinea about 31 years ago, he himself is a despot and a dictator by all difinitions of the word. He commands neither any credibility nor legetimacy whatsoever to challenge the Libyan dictator to listen to the people and leave office. Teodoro Mbasogo is scared to death that sparks of liberty and people power in North Africa will reach his home and he would do exactly the same tactics employed by Gaddaffi to quell and put down any challenge to his despotic rule. What you think the AU is some kind of Dictatorship that is lead by him? That he has all the power and what he says is the final world?? The AU is a collection of African nations, regardless of what the leader chooses it is the majority that will decide!!! Europe has exploited African resources for centuries and this is just another example. You enclave has everything to do with why you posted the article. With your own personal title "The irrelevance of the African Union", why are they irrelevant? I think it's quite clear your grievance with them lies with the fact they refuse to allow your secessionist agenda! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jacaylbaro Posted March 20, 2011 Some people have nightmares ... and Somaliland in everything ....... AU should either be part of the coalition against Libya and support the intervention or declare their position if they are against it. Silence means nothing and only shows their weak position on this issue. Hypocrisy or not ... it is clear that the westerns are now defending the people of Libya from Qadafi. If Qadafi has any humanity left for his country he shouldn't let this happen and leave the power immediately. Now that he decided to kill his own people, then let the foreigners intervene and do something about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bashiir Posted March 20, 2011 (AFP) – 8 hours ago NOUAKCHOTT — The African Union's panel on Libya Sunday called for an "immediate stop" to all attacks after the United States, France and Britain launched military action against Moamer Kadhafi's forces. After a more than four-hour meeting in the Mauritanian capital, the body also asked Libyan authorities to ensure "humanitarian aid to those in need," as well as the "protection of foreigners, including African expatriates living in Libya." It underscored the need for "necessary political reforms to eliminate the causes of the present crisis" but at the same time called for "restraint" from the international community to avoid "serious humanitarian consequences." The panel also announced a meeting in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa on March 25, along with representatives from the Arab League, the Organisation of Islamic Conference, the European Union and the United Nations to "put in place a mechanism for consultation and concerted action" to resolve the Libyan crisis. The AU committee on Libya is composed of five African heads of state. But the Nouakchott meeting was only attended by the presidents of Mauritania, Mali and Congo. South Africa and Uganda were represented by ministers. The committee said it had been unable to get international permission to visit Tripoli on Sunday but did not elaborate. Libyan generosity and Moamer Kadhafi's role in the creation of the African Union could explain the continental cautious stand, experts said. The AU was born in the 1999 Sirte Declaration, named after a summit hosted by Kadhafi in his hometown on the Libyan coast. The declaration said its authors felt inspired by Kadhafi's "vision for a strong and united Africa." "The AU as an organisation has benefited significantly from Kadhafi's wealth," said Fred Golooba Mutebi of the Institute of Social Research at Kampala's Makerere University. The pan-African body has taken a firmer stance on three west African crises: most recently Ivory Coast and previously Guinea and Niger. Handouts aside, Libya has invested billions of dollars in sub-Saharan Africa. It has interests in more than two dozen African countries, while its petroleum refining and distribution unit Oil Libya has interests in at least as many. Libyan telecommunications unit LAP Green is present in five countries in the region and expanding rapidly. Copyright © 2011 AFP. All rights reserved. More » Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Som@li Posted March 20, 2011 The African Union is for sure teethless Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Naxar Nugaaleed Posted March 20, 2011 so let me get this right, lol, you all say the the rebels cause is just but, but helping them is opportunistic? seriously? what is it to you the objective of the helpers if you consider the cause of those being helped just? but then, some would tell me am just beating a dead horse so I will let go... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thankful Posted March 20, 2011 You're just arguing for arguments sake! My Objection??? Our best example is Iraq! The U.S using a multitude of excuses for justifying Saddam removal, from WMD's to liberating the people. Even though Saddam needed to go and the people had a right, the way it went down was not just! I think we know why they had their eyes set on Iraq for a long time. Also, the unknown hundreds of thousands that perished since the war began. Where now religious groups are being attacked i.e. the Christian population being almost cut in half as people have fled the county because of attacks and the fact that people can no longer live in diverse neighborhoods because of the same reason. The bottom line is that foreign intervention will destabilize the situation greatly, just like it did in Iraq. And despite that fact that you feel a certain group of Libyans want to see Qaddaffi's removal, does not mean it has to be done by any means necessary. The way you get the man out of power is critical to how the country will look after he is gone and allowing greedy foreign nations with their eyes on oil is almost a guaranteed recipe for future suffering. If Iraq is any indication, the AU is very wise not to immediately condone the plan of Western powers attacking Oil rich Libya. You should let it go... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ANWAR Posted March 20, 2011 Jacaylbaro;703521 wrote: Some people have nightmares ... and Somaliland in everything ....... :D;):D Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thankful Posted March 20, 2011 I missed our secessionist brothers response and I couldn't agree more! Somali land is everything!! Insha'Allah it will rise again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
