UNASUR and the African Union have much in common, at least at the macro level. Both are intergovernmental organizations along the lines of the EU, aimed at integrating continents occupying the lower echelons of the global pecking-order. And both are in their infancy (the AU was established in 2002; UNASUR in 2008). In light of these similarities, the two organizations would do well to learn from each other, and perhaps engage in an informal partnership to ensure their mutual success. But in collaborating with the AU, UNASUR leaders should think twice before embracing the vision of Muammar el-Qaddafi, the AU’s new chairman.
Qaddafi, de facto leader of Libya since the 1969 coup, was named chairman on Monday. According to a New York Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/03/world/africa/03africa.html?_r=1&ref=world) Qaddafi plans to push for a dramatic transformation of the AU–from loose collection of independent nations to a massive, pan-continental state with a single army, currency, and passport. UNASUR leaders may be tempted to follow this path, but it could destroy the organization before it even gets going. Western powers will undoubtedly see Qaddafi’s plan as radical and even threatening. And for all the benefits a “United States of Africa” or “United States of South America” might confer–a greater role in world political and economic affairs chief among them–the risks are just too great. UNASUR’s first challenge is gaining legitimacy, which includes recognition by the West. Moving too quickly towards too large (or radical) a goal will make that even tougher. Even if UNASUR likes the sound of Qadaffi’s plan, it should play the conservative–watch and learn.
-N. Fromherz
