More bite?

Given this progression of the AU's continued efforts in Cote d'Ivoire, there seems to be all indications that patience is running out and the continental body has therefore amplified its efforts. This amplification however seems to be quickly sliding from just open diplomacy to the consideration for more muscle-flexing. The scenario is defining given how the AU may in future respond to electoral fraud and disagreements in future.

The AU's trajectory will also be determined by the body's earlier declared position in support of Quattara. It will therefore be faced with a great challenge to try and balance out the diplomacy focus meant to diffuse the potential military flare-up in Cote d'Ivoire with the declared support for Quattara. If the AU goes outright to try and enforce its position on the election winner, this will have latency for military abrasion. However if the AU steps away from its election-winner position, this has potential to destroy its reputation for democratic elections and the enforcement of its convictions.

The AU's moves will inevitably set a precedence for other elections in 2011 and thereafter. What could transpire is the transformation of the AU from the historical dormancy that has characterized its attempts at intervention in political trouble spots across the continent. Against the tirade of what is ensuring in Darfur, Cote d'Ivoire, Somalia, the Great Lakes region, Tunisia, Egypt, Zimbabwe and many others, there may now be more expression of clout and invigorated intention by the continental body. The days of an AU that was a "barking dog" may quickly be moving toward displacement by the days of an AU that has become the "biting dog." However in the AU's contention is the ever-increasing reliance by African politicians to rely on the military in quashing democratic processes outputs.

Lessons learned

There are many glaring factors and lessons that seem to protrude from the Cote d'Ivoire situation. From the 1960s to the 1990s the wave of the military's involvement in national governance in Africa was topical and intravenous. The 1990s seemed to create an impulse of the retirement of the military from governments and the drive toward democratic civilianization of the same. However the years from 2000 seem to have created "military-endorsed democracy." This era is marked by elections that must however be supported by military institutionalization. This is in contrast to the era of 1960 to 1990, which was marked by military domination without any contemplation of elections. 

Progressively, it will become difficult for the results of elections to be upheld in Africa if the military is not a part of the context. Elections will continue to be subservient to the military substance of an African society.

As the AU seeks resolution to Africa's governance matrix, we must step away from other models intimated, researched and imposed from outside the circumstance of the continent. We must take ownership of our reality and develop our contextual models to drive toward democracy. We must engage with all pertinent factors including the military, which has become the cornerstone of governance determination in the new shape of African elections.

Africa is in a unique situation and if we continue to rely on externally driven indices we will never solve the problems of the continent. As such the Cote d'Ivoire impasse is only a premonition of the eventual, as we will likely see more elections being determined not only through the ballot but also through the military context. As Africans we need to become proactive in the development of our own solution to this advent of "military-endorsed" democracy.

 (Reporting from Zimbabwe)

The author is Executive Director – The African Reform Institute (ARI), Zimbabwe. This story first appeared in the Financial Gazette.