Briefing on Sustainable financing of African Peace & Security Agenda under the UN Charter
Amani Africa
Date | 19 September, 2019
Tomorrow (19 September 2019) the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) is scheduled to hold a session to consider the draft UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution initiated in August 2019 on sustainable financing for African Peace and Security Agenda in the context of Chapter VIII of the UN Charter. It is expected that the Committee of Experts, a subsidiary body of the PSC, is expected to present the outcome of its review of the draft resolution to the Council.
In December 2018, the African three non‐permanent members of the UNSC (the A3) presented a draft resolution on financing of African Peace and Security Agenda for vote by the UNSC. The draft resolution initiated by Cote d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea & Ethiopia had gone through rigorous negotiation process with other members of the United Nations (UN) Security Council (SC). After negotiations were concluded, the draft was put in blue on 8 December by Cote d’Ivoire, the President of the UNSC for December 2018, on the request the A3 and voting was initially scheduled for 10 December.
In a press release of 14 December 2018, the PSC underlining that ‘the tabling of this resolution represents a watershed moment and an expression of the international community’s commitment to strengthening the global peace and security architecture and its capacity to address today’s complex security challenges’, endorsed it as ‘timely and balanced’. Following an apparent indication by the US to veto the draft if the vote went ahead as planned, the 10 December vote was postponed for a week after France requested to engage the US further to avoid the veto and bring the US to the consensus.
In the meantime, the A3 continued mobilizing support for the resolution. Following a briefing by the A3 on 18 December and taking into account the 14 December press release of the AU PSC, the African Group in New York after deliberation on the draft decided to put its full weight behind the A3 efforts and called on all members of the group to co‐sponsor the draft resolution. Beyond the Africa group, the draft also received support from other members of the UN with a total of 87 UN member states co‐sponsoring it.
The postponement of the 10 December vote and the engagement with the US did not yield the kind of compromise that the A3 deemed to be consistent with the core fundamentals of the draft resolution. Accordingly, a vote on the draft resolution was scheduled for 19 December. However, unofficial communications received from the AU advised that every effort be made to avoid the veto. In the meantime, a compromise text by France started to circulate. The result was that the A3 postponed the vote once again to 21 December. Two complicating factors also surfaced. First, an informal message from the AU advising to accept the so‐called compromise text emerged. It was followed by a note verbal from the AU Commission Chairperson holding that ‘the best course of action is to build on the compromise proposals in the past few days,’ hence opting for the compromise text by France instead of the original A3 draft. Second, the cohesion of the A3 suffered a blow when Cote d’Ivore requested the UN Secretariat to put the so‐called compromise proposal in blue for a vote.
In an email it sent out to the UN members co‐sponsored the original A3 text, the Office of the Permanente Representative of Ethiopia raised serious reservations on the ‘compromise text’. It observed that ‘the new text introduced significant amendments and new languages in its operative paragraphs (see OP9, OP16, OP 17, OP 18, OP 19, OP 26, OP 28 and OP 30) which is fundamentally different from the original A3 text’. It also pointed out that ‘[m]ost of the members of the Security Council had no knowledge of the new resolution. Neither did it pass through any negotiation process nor did it also go through the silence procedure’.
Following a meeting on 21 December at the level of Permanent Representatives, the A3 once again decided to postpone the vote on the draft resolution pending a clear guidance from the AUPSC, which mandated the A3 to champion the common African position on the financing issue. The Africa Group also met in an emergency session and endorsed the A3 decision. The report of the Africa Group meeting was communicated to the AUC.
On 24 December 2018, the PSC discussed the matter under ‘any other business’ and requested the AU Commission to submit to it a report. Although the report was planned to be presented to the Council in early 2019, this did not happen. Yet, at the level of the AU, the call on the UNSC for adopting the resolution has continued. In February 2019 the AU High Representative on Silencing the Guns by 2020 urged the ‘Security Council to respond positively to the African Union’s long‐standing and legitimate calls for the funding of African peace support operations through United Nations assessed contributions.’
In New York, another effort for following up the process for securing a resolution has been initiated under South Africa, which joined the A3 in January 2019 taking over from Ethiopia. After consultations with A3 members including Ethiopia, the two drafts that were put in blue in December 2018 were withdrawn. In August 2019, South Africa in consultation with the A3 introduced a new draft. While negotiations on this text has started, the draft was also submitted to the PSC for its guidance in anticipation of a consensus being achieved on this draft for its potential consideration for vote under South Africa’s presidency in October 2019.
It was against the background of the foregoing that tomorrow’s agenda was put in the program of work of the PSC for September. It was not for the first time that the PSC would discuss this tomorrow. On Monday 16 September, the PSC also discussed this agenda after receiving a briefing from the troika of the PSC (the previous, the current, and incoming chairs of the PSC) on their videoconference meeting that they had with the A3 the previous week. After the meeting, the PSC tasked the Committee of Experts to review the two draft resolutions that the A3 proposed in December 2018 and the latest one from August 2019 in order to make proposal to the PSC on the next steps.
The August 2019 draft reflected recent developments since the December 2018 Draft. For example, draft preambular paragraph 17 welcomed ‘the joint Declaration of the Secretary‐General of the United Nations and the Chairperson of the African Union Commission of 6th December 2018’ and preambular paragraph 19 and 20 welcoming work undertaken by the UN Secretariat and the AU in developing and adopting relevant compliance standards. In terms of the operative paragraphs, the August 2019 draft no longer contains the text from the compromise draft postponing the adoption of a framework resolution for another time. Yet, despite keeping the key paragraph ‘deciding in principle that United Nations assessed contributions can be provided, with decisions to be taken on a case‐by‐case basis … to support future African Union‐led peace support operations’, the August 2019 draft has carried much of the new text that was introduced in the compromise draft that France proposed and the A3 and the Africa Group rejected.
The Committee of Experts reviewed the two drafts during their 17th meeting held on 17 September. There is strong view in the PSC that the position of the PSC of 14 December 2018 endorsing the A3 draft needs to be maintained. In this respect, there are concerns that the August 2019 draft with the text from the compromise draft including that which reduced the role of the AU ‘to operational details’ would seriously undermine the mandate of the PSC as provided for in the PSC Protocol. In their report to the PSC tomorrow, the Committee of Experts would also highlight other aspects of the draft that are deemed to mark major departure from the December 2018 draft including the language ‘utilized’, the reporting arrangements and the formulation of the reference to AU’s decision committing to raise 25% of funds for peace and security.
It is therefore expected that the Committee of Experts would advise that the draft resolution should not be submitted to the UNSC for adoption in October 2019. The Committee is also expected to propose that further negotiations are held on the draft focusing on those aspects of the draft resolution that are feared to curtail the mandate of the PSC provided for in its Protocol and seriously limit the scope of flexibility and strategic level political role of the AU in general.
In terms of taking this process forward, there is a need for ensuring that the momentum is not lost. Central to keeping the momentum that has been achieved thus far is engaging the US not only with a view to avoid its use of veto but also importantly achieve, based on further negotiations on the draft, a new more balanced formulation. In this respect, consideration should be given to recalibrate the approach utilized thus far. There is in particular a need for elevating the engagement of the US administration not only at the level of the US Delegation in New York but also at the level of Congress, the State Department and the White House. The opportunity that the UN General Assembly (UNGA) presents for engaging the US administration particularly at most senior levels of the State Department and the White House by the AU PSC ministers and Heads of State and Government including South Africa’s President, as the incoming president of the UNSC leading on the negotiation in the UNSC on the draft resolution, is worth exploring. Similarly, as part of the preparation for the 13th Annual Consultative Meeting of the PSC and the UNSC scheduled for October, consideration should be given to engage, including based on proposed text jointly formulated by the AU Commission and the UN Office to the AU (UNOAU), the permanent five members of the UNSC in general and the US in particular for avoiding a stalemate in the negotiation process.
While no formal outcome is expected from tomorrow’s meeting, depending on the depth of the deliberations and the guidance that the PSC may wish to give on next steps, it may adopt a communique. Such a communique could envisage that the matter is discussed with the A3 both on the side‐lines of the UNGA and during the upcoming visit of the Committee of Experts to New York to discuss preparations for the Annual Consultative Meeting. In the light of the existence of major concerns over the current draft, it could also urge for further negotiations in the interest of keeping the momentum of the process with a more sustained and elevated engagement. It could also task as part of the negotiation process proposed texts for bridging the gap and achieving a more balanced draft are initiated in consultation with the A3.
Consideration and adoption of the conclusions of the Cairo Retreat of the PSC
Amani Africa
Date | 16 September, 2019
Tomorrow (16 September) the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) is expected to hold a session at 10am for the consideration and adoption of the conclusions of the Cairo Retreat of the PSC.
Previously, this agenda was included in the provisional program of works of the PSC for the months of February and April 2019. Tomorrow’s session could bring to a close this postponement in the adoption of the Cairo Retreat conclusions. The Secretariat of the PSC is expected to present the conclusions of the retreat.
It is to be recalled that the Cairo Retreat was held from 29 to 31 October 2018. The retreat was held in pursuit of the decision of the AU Assembly on the Reform of the AU, particularly the dimension of the reform that concerned the PSC. In this respect, the Assembly directed that ‘the Peace and Security Council (PSC) should be reformed to ensure that it meets the ambition foreseen in its Protocol, by strengthening its working methods and its role in conflict prevention and crisis management’. It was as a follow up of its meeting of 25 April 2018 during which the PSC deliberated on the issue of the reform that the PSC convened the Cairo retreat. During the April 2018 meeting, the PSC concluded that the specific details of the PSC reform are to be drawn from the conclusions of the various retreats of the PSC on its working methods held between 2007 to 2017 and the PSC related chapters of the APSA study that the PSD conducted – ‘Study on the Implementation of the African Peace and Security Architecture from 2002 to 2018’.
The draft conclusions drawn up based on the various presentations and the extensive deliberations during the retreat have four parts. The first part is the introduction highlighting brief background of the retreat and summarizing the inputs that served as basis for the deliberations. During the retreat in Cairo the PSC received presentations on ‘a) African Peace and Security Architecture, b) the African Governance Architecture, c) consolidation and enhancement of the working methods of the Peace and Security Council: Rationalization and streamlining, and d) reform of the PSC within the context of the implementation of the AU Assembly decision 635 (Assembly/AU/Dec.635 (XXVIII) on the AU Institutional Reforms’.
The second part of the conclusions present the ‘Achievements of the Peace and Security Council’ since its operationalization in 2004. In this regard, apart from noting its operationalization as well-organized and better prepared AU Organ, in terms of implementation of its mandate the PSC highlighted, among its achievements, the ‘deployment of the various peace support operations and missions in some areas of the Continent affected by conflicts… AMISOM, AMIS, AFISMA, MISCA, LRA, MNJTF,G5 Sahel’ and ‘Seizure and consideration of important thematic issues of relevance to the promotion of peace, security, and stability, as well as development, in Africa.’ In terms of organization of its work, the conclusions highlighted ‘[e]laboration of detailed and predictable provisional monthly programmes of work and the Indicative Annual Programme of Work of the PSC’, ‘[s]treamlining and strengthening the role and work of the African members of the UN Security Council’ and Mobilizing within the AU system for a predictable and sustainable budget for the activities of the PSC and its subsidiary bodies.’
The third part covers ‘[r]ecommendations on enhancing the effectiveness of the Peace and Security Council’. It is this part of the conclusions that identified the areas for the reform of the PSC. At a general level, it is important to note that the retreat ‘stressed the continued relevance of the PSC Protocol to address the evolving challenges and threats to peace and security in the Continent’ and rightly ‘agreed that there is no need to review the PSC Protocol, but to focus on strengthening the PSC in the areas of conflict prevention and crisis management, as well as enhancing its working methods’.
In terms of conflict prevention, the retreat conclusions identified thirteen (13) areas. The major areas for action include ‘[s]trengthening coordination between the PSC and all the supporting APSA and AGA pillars’, ‘[e]stablishing a trigger mechanism and indicators to facilitate the role of the PSC in assessing whether a given situation calls for an early action by the PSC. In this context, the Commission should elaborate the mechanism and indicators for consideration by the PSC. (within the context of operationalization of the CEWS)’ and the ‘need for regular meetings/briefings between the PSC and the Chairperson of the AU Commission and the Commissioner for Peace and Security on peace and security matters in Africa, in line with Article 10 of the PSC Protocol.’
On crisis management, eight (8) areas have been identified. Of these the ones that are of particular significance include, ‘full operationalization of the ASF and its Rapid Deployment Capability, ‘[a]ccelerating the establishment of the institutional and regulatory infrastructure of the AU Peace Fund’, and ‘[e]mpowering the PSC for it to be able to institute individual punitive measures against peace spoiler/obstructionist to realization/restoration of peace in conflict situations’ (i.e. to impose sanctions).
The conclusions identified 15 areas for improvement on its working methods. The major areas worth noting include the ‘imperative for PSC Members to deploy the adequate capacity in terms of Human Resources and equipment, to ensure full and effective participation in the work of the PSC’, ‘[i]mperative for provision for all necessary information on a given conflict/crisis to enable the PSC to take informed decision. To this effect, the PSC agreed to accord itself adequate time to discuss issues on its agenda’, the ‘[n]eed to mainstream voting in the decision-making of the PSC, where and when issues under consideration so necessitate,’ and to ensure that the ‘national interest of the Chairperson of the PSC of the month’ does not ‘interfere or undermine the collective work of the PSC’.
While some of the areas identified in the conclusions have been taken over by developments since the retreat most notably the convening of the PSC meeting with the RECs/RMs policy organs to discuss and agree on modalities for coordination of peace efforts and the elaboration of a manual on PSC working methods based on the outcome documents of the 10 retreats the PSC held since 2007, it would be of interest for PSC members how other aspects of the conclusions particularly those relating to conflict prevention and crisis management would be followed up. From the areas of reform on working methods identified during the Cairo retreat, those requiring further follow up include the decision-making approach of the PSC particularly the introduction of voting, the adoption of a framework for a sanctions regime and modalities for coordination between the PSC and UN Security Council (UNSC) including the African three non-permanent members of the UNSC (A3).
It is not expected that there would be a formal outcome document by way of a communique or press statement. The adoption of the conclusions of the retreat may however lead to the incorporation into the Manual on the Working Methods of the PSC that was finalized and adopted at the Rabat retreat of the PSC held on 24-26 June 2019.
Interaction between the Peace and Security Council and the African Union Commission
Amani Africa
Date | 16 September, 2019
Tomorrow (16 September) the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) is expected to hold an interaction with the AU Commission at 3pm. The Chairperson of the AU Commission, Commissioner for Peace and Security, the Commissioner for Political Affairs and the Commissioner for Rural Economy and Agriculture are expected to participate in the interactive discussion.
The various departments of the Commission have reported and briefed the Council in their respective areas of expertise. Tomorrow’s session aims at assessing the current methods of engagement and based on that to identify ways of enhancing and systematizing the relationship to ensure a more coordinated and regular collaboration between the PSC and AUC.
The issues expected to be discussed during tomorrow’s session include the level of effective execution by the AUC of its roles vis‐à‐vis the peace and security agenda of the AU and review of existing methods of interaction between the PSC and the AUC. In discussing these different issues, consideration is given to the various roles of the AUC.
The AUC as the secretariat of the Union has the responsibility of providing operational support to the PSC. In this respect, the roles of the AUC include preparing reports, briefing notes, other working documents of the PSC and keeping summary records of the meetings of the PSC, to enable the PSC and its subsidiary bodies to perform their functions effectively. Similarly, the PSC protocol recognizes the wide range of roles and responsibilities of the AUC under the leadership of the AUC Chairperson in terms of conflict prevention, agenda setting, and following up on the implementation of the PSC decisions.
In line with the roles and responsibilities identified in article 7 and 10 of the PSC protocol, it would be of interest for the PSC to hear the Chairperson in providing an assessment on how the Commission has discharged its responsibilities in these set standards and in providing operational support for the PSC’s mandate. Consideration is also to be had on strengthening the level and quality as well as predictability of interaction in all phases of conflict from prevention, management and post‐conflict reconstruction as appropriate through the AUC Chairperson, Commissioners, the AUC Departments or the special envoys or representatives of the AUC Chairperson.
Another area for discussion during tomorrow’s session is the role of the various departments of the AUC. In its retreat held in Swakopmund in 2015 the PSC highlighted the need to work closely with a number of actors in order to maintain peace and security in line African Peace and Security Architecture. Towards enhancing conflict prevention, the PSC stressed the need for the department of Political Affairs to ‘attend all PSC meetings and provide regular briefings including those focusing on early warning aspects to the PSC’. Similarly, the Council called on the AUC to ‘intensify its efforts in the area of PCRD, including submission of a report as decided by the Council, on the status of the AU PCRD architecture’. The Council has also tasked the Commission to regularly report on the operationalization of both African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) and African Governance Architecture (AGA).
Given the complementarity of the Departments of Peace and Security (PSD) and Political Affairs (DPA) and the decision within the framework of the reform of the AU to merge the two departments in 2021, tomorrow’s session is also expected to discuss the measures being taken towards smooth process of consolidating the two departments and managing the PSC’s interaction with both departments. The two departments may provide an update on the plans for the merger of the two departments and where the merger process stands.
Tomorrow’s session may also delve into addressing technical and operational issues. Although the various departments provide reports and briefing upon the request of the PSC, the interaction may also be critical in ensuring that the engagements are not ad‐hoc or reactive. In this regard, an issue for discussion is reviewing the working arrangements in terms of the relationship between the PSC and the AUC. These include the role of the AUC in terms of the drafting of the outcome documents of the PSC, in following up with the decisions of the PSC including timely delivery of briefings requested to be delivered within a set time frame, provision of updates on PSC decisions and the predictability in the timely submissions of the reports of the AUC Chairperson. Also significant is the availability of an effectively functioning process for sharing early warning analysis with the PSC and provision of updates on outcomes of PSC sessions requiring follow up.
In this context the PSC and the Commission may wish to agree on preparing calendar of activities on delivery of time specific briefings, updates on previous decisions and on submission of reports of the AUC Chairperson that could feature in the monthly work plan in addition to the other agenda items proposed by the rotating chairs. This will also be a critical step in ensuring the continuity of proper follow up of decisions and to prevent interruption when monthly chairs rotate. This exercise may enable the monthly chairs of the PSC to build on decisions and deliberation from previous month and contribute to their implementation and predictable working practice of the PSC.
The interaction will also offer the Council to map the in‐house capacity in the Commission and ways to adequately make use of the expertise and knowledge of staff in the Commission to ensure informed decision‐making process. This will also essential in addressing siloes and foster inter‐departmental coordination, information sharing and complementarity. It will also enable the PSC and Commission to utilize existing capacity and resources.
In addition to the responsibilities of the departments, the role of AU offices located in various African member states may also be discussed. The PSC may also stress the critical role of its Secretariat. The PSC Secretariat has a wide role in not only following up on the decisions of the Council but also in arranging the meetings of the PSC, preparing the working documents, and keeping records of PSC meetings. By tapping into the vast expertise in the Commission and various offices of the AU, the Secretariat also helps in enabling the PSC to receive the technical inputs that boost the decision‐making process. The Secretariat is in key position in bridging the information sharing and coordination mechanism between the Council with departments in the Commission including those participating in tomorrow’s session.
In this regard and recognizing the expanding role and responsibilities of its Secretariat, the PSC may wish to propose ways of enhancing its capacity. The secretariat has been coordinating the activities of the Council and the operationalization of the ambitious mandate of the Council with limited capacity.
The expected outcome is a communiqué. The PSC may commend the Commission for its efforts in supporting the mandate of the Council. It may call on the Commission to support continuous collaboration through reporting and regular briefing by departments. It may identify calendar of activities that will ensure predictable interaction, bring continuity in the work of the PSC and foster cooperative and more institutionalized interaction with the Commission. It may also highlight on the need to enhance the capacity of its secretariat. In the light of the impending merger of the PSD and DPA, the PSC could request the AUC to present to it a report on the plan and timelines for the merger. It is also expected to decide on having a regular interactive session with the Commission to follow up on tomorrow’s session and institutionalize the assessment of the working relationship between the two.
PEACE AND SECURITY COUNCIL 879TH MEETING
Amani Africa
Date | 11, September 2019
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
COMMUNIQUÉ
Adopted by the Peace and Security Council, under the Chairmanship of the Kingdom of Morocco, during its 879th meeting held on 11 September 2019 on acts of xenophobic violence against African migrants in South Africa.
The Peace and Security Council,
Noting the statement made by the Permanent Representative of the Republic of South Africa to the African Union, H.E. Ambassador Ndumiso Ntshinga, on the recent acts of xenophobic violence against other Africans in some of parts South Africa;
Recalling the previous decisions of the Council on xenophobic violence, in particular, the Press Statement PSC/PR/COMM.1 (DIII) adopted at its 503rd meeting held on 30 April 2015, in which the Council recommended the convening of a special session devoted to the issue of migration and its related challenges, with a view to enhancing African collective efforts to find comprehensive and lasting solutions to xenophobic violence;
Expressing sincere condolences to the families of those who have lost their lives as a result of the acts of xenophobic violence in some parts of South Africa, wishing quick recovery to those who have sustained injuries and expressing solidarity with the victims of recent acts of xenophobic violence in South Africa;
Reaffirming its commitment and readiness to continue supporting efforts by the Government of South Africa, in its resolved determination, to address this situation, through the promotion of African solutions to African problems, including the use of relevant AU principles;
Recalling all the relevant AU and international instruments, including the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, which guarantee their fundamental human rights, including freedom of movement;
Acting under Article 7 of its Protocol, the Peace and Security Council:
1. Condemns in the strongest terms possible the recent acts of xenophobic violence against foreign migrants living in South Africa, which cannot be justified under any circumstances; expresses total rejection of xenophobia in all its forms and manifestations across the Continent;
2. Also condemns in the strongest terms the reported cases of retaliatory violence against South African nationals and their properties in other countries within the Continent, and strongly appeals to the people and Governments of the countries concerned to exercise maximum restraint and avoid any action that could escalate the current situation;
3. Commends the Government of South Africa for its determination to prevent further escalation of the situation and urges the Government of South Africa, with all countries concerned, to take all necessary steps, in a collective manner, to holistically address the fundamental root causes of the acts of xenophobic violence; in this regard, underlines the fact that the recent events in South Africa, once again, stresses the urgency and need for the AU to take concrete steps in order to provide a collective and comprehensive response for durable solutions to address the issue of xenophobia at continental level, based on the need for enhanced coordination and cooperation,
4. Also commends all those Member States which are already working in close collaboration with the Government of South Africa in addressing the situation at hand and encourages all other Member States with nationals living in South Africa, to also engage and collaborate with the Government of South Africa.
5. In this regard, and in support to the on-going actions between the Governments of South Africa and concerned countries, underlines the necessity for all member States to support these actions and to contribute to preventing the escalation of the situation; and underlines also that social media should play a constructive role with a view to appeasing tensions in the communities;
6. Fully acknowledges the legitimate concerns of the people and Government of South Africa and the socio-economic challenges it faces, and the challenges faced in addressing the issue of undocumented migrants living in the country, urges the Government of South Africa and those countries concerned to provide protection for all foreign nationals and their properties from any form of attack, in conformity with AU and International instruments, notably the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families ;
7. Underscores the importance of holistically addressing the underlying fundamental root causes of xenophobia in Africa; and in this context, emphasizes the need for Member States to further enhance their national early warning and early response capacities, as well as to share experiences, lessons learnt and best practices in addressing xenophobia;
8. Stresses the need for enhanced coordination and cooperation, in particular between the countries of origin, transit countries and the host countries, in addressing the issue of irregular migration;
9. Requests the Chairperson of the AU Commission to fully engage the Government of South Africa on the recent acts of xenophobic violence, in order to assess the situation of African migrants in this country, including the measures taken by the Government of South Africa and urges the AU Commission to expedite the holding of a continental conference, in collaboration with all AU member States, that will serve as a platform for all AU Member States to thoroughly highlight the issue of xenophobia, including its root causes with a view to finding a collective continental approach on how best to prevent its recurrence on the continent; further requests AUC Chairperson to report on the conclusion of the Conference to the PSC and subsequently to the AU Assembly;
10. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.
Xenophobic Attacks Affecting Nationals of other African Countries in South Africa
Amani Africa
Date | 11 September, 2019
Tomorrow (11 September) the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) is scheduled to hold a session on xenophobic attacks affecting nationals of other African countries in South Africa. It is expected that the Ambassador of South Africa will address the PCS.
This session was initiated following the recent resurgence of attacks in South Africa against foreign nationals, particularly those coming from other African countries. According to reports, since the beginning of September, xenophobic attacks targeting businesses suspected of being owned by foreign nationals have been looted and vandalized in parts of Johannesburg, Pretoria and Cape Town. During the round of attacks that took place on 8 September, attackers moving in organized groups chanting ‘foreigners must go’ attacked a mosque and looted and burnt shops. Apart from the insecurity and disruption of the livelihood of non-nationals, the various rounds of attacks have thus far resulted in the death of 12 people. According to the government of South Africa, 10 out of the 12 people who lost their lives were South Africans.
The attacks in particular affected nationals from Nigeria, Somalia, Ethiopia, and Zambia, among others. This has led to diplomatic tensions between South Africa and African countries whose nationals have been affected. On 2 September Nigeria summoned South Africa’s envoy in Nigeria to express its protest of the attacks targeting Nigerians in South Africa. After meeting South African Ambassador in Addis Ababa at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ethiopia’s state minister for foreign affairs, condemning the recent attacks, urged South Africa to enhance protection for Ethiopians.
Zambian President Edgar Lungu reportedly went further urging the South African Development Community and the AU to intervene ‘before this xenophobia degenerates into full-scale genocide’. He also expressed fear that ‘this carnage has potential to destabilise African unity’.
This is not the first time that such attacks have been perpetrated against foreigners, particularly those from other African countries. Dozens of people were killed in anti-foreigner attacks in 2008 and 2015.
When attacks took place in 2015, the PSC held a session on the issue at its 503rd meeting on 30 April 2015. In the press statement it issued after the session, the PSC not only condemned the attacks but also ‘underlined the need for a comprehensive approach to these challenges, taking into account the constraints of Member States, the imperative to respect the rights of migrants and ensure their humane treatment, as well as the overall objective of achieving freedom of movement across the continent, as one of the main components of the integration agenda of the Union.’
Faki Mahamat, issued a statement. Condemning what he called ‘the incidents of violence against nationals of fellow African countries in South Africa, including the looting and destruction of their property,’ the Chairperson also called for ‘further immediate steps to protect the lives of people and their property, ensure that all perpetrators are brought to account for their acts, and that justice be done to those who suffered economic and other losses.’ On its part the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights also After the resurgence of the attacks since the start of the month, AU Commission Chairperson, Moussa issued a statement strongly condemning the resurgence of these xenophobic violent attacks as acts that not only constitute possible violations of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the African Charter) but are also contrary to the principles and ideals of African solidarity cherished in the African Charter.
While the reactions from some corners of South Africa was seen as extending support to the attacks, various officials of the Government of South Africa expressed their rejection of the attacks. President Cyril Ramaphosa in his response stated that “attacks on foreign nationals is something totally unacceptable, something that we cannot allow to happen in South Africa”. It was also reported that police arrested over 200 people for participating in the xenophobic attacks.
There are a number of concerns that some members in the PSC raise. The first relate to the threat that the incidents of attacks represent including in undermining peaceful coexistence. There are also concerns about the recurrence of the attacks and the risk of the attacks continuing, hence the need for interventions that properly address the conditions and drivers of the xenophobic attacks, affecting in particular nationals from other African countries. Concerns about the adequacy of the response of law enforcement agencies are also expressed.
There are PSC members who expect to know what South Africa plans to do differently to deal with the current resurgence of xenophobic attacks from previous incidents to avoid its recurrence, including carrying out investigations into what happened and the causes and drivers of the attacks. Of particular interest is the need for putting in place measure to deal with anti-foreign sentiments, directed particularly against nationals from other African Countries including and how South Africa can collaborate with other countries, among others, to use the values of African solidarity and Ubuntu for promoting peaceful coexistence.
Beyond condemnation of the attacks and expressing solidarity with victims, for the PSC and AU member states the need for promoting African solidarity including the promotion of free movement of people remains a key issue. Accordingly, building on its call from its 503rd session for pursuing the overall objective of achieving freedom of movement across the continent, as one of the main components of the integration agenda of the Union, this presents an opportunity for highlighting the imperative of ratifying the 2016 AU protocol on free movement of peoples.
The expected outcome of the session is a press statement. The statement is expected to welcome the statement of the AUC Chair and the measures being taken by the South African government to manage the situation. In terms of immediate actions, it may call on South Africa to initiate investigation to identify the cause and drivers of the violence with a view to put in place measures that prevent its recurrence. It may also reiterate its earlier call for a special session devoted to the issue of migration and its related challenges, with a view to agreeing to an enhanced African collective effort, on the basis of a report to be submitted by the Commission.
