Rough days follow the Kampala summit

The summit in Uganda turned out to be the curtain-raiser to weeks of political upheaval in parts of Commonwealth Asia and Africa. On the eve of its opening on 23 November the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) of nine foreign ministers suspended Pakistan from the councils of the Commonwealth for a second time because President Pervez Musharraf had still not stepped down as army chief as he had three times promised the Commonwealth and the Secretary-General personally - he would do.

In fact, Musharraf did take off his uniform a few days later, but to retain its credibility the Commonwealth had to act when it did. In any case, the sacked and detained judges were not restored. The CMAG meeting proved difficult because Sri Lanka, and to a lesser extent Malaysia, was opposed to the re-suspension. Then, only days after the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) came first the assassination of Benazir Bhutto and then in December the tight elections in Kenya that led to a sudden and unexpected eruption of bloodshed there.

CHOGM itself passed off well, despite months of anxiety about the controversial venue. President Yoweri Museveni does not have an altogether clean human rights or democratic record. Nine opposition leaders had been held on treason charges during the last elections and remained so even while CHOGM was held.

In terms of results it was a useful, if not groundbreaking, meeting. It marked a changing of the guard with the election of Indian diplomat Kamalesh Sharma to succeed New Zealand politician Don McKinnon as Secretary-General on 1 April. And it was notable for the launch of two important reports.

The first, Civil Paths to Peace, came from the Commonwealth Commission on Respect and Understanding, which was chaired by Nobel laureate Amartya Sen. It is one of the best documents the Commonwealth has produced, dealing with the most pressing social problems of our day – group-based violence and its impact on communities – and looks at the cause of conflict and extremism.

The report recommends new forms of political participation, an emphasis on non-sectarian, non-parochial education that expands rather than reduces the reach of understanding, and greater support of young people – half the Commonwealth’s two billion citizens.

The last section sets out briefly and clearly the way in which the Commonwealth has been a major and influential international player over the last several decades – a role much underestimated in member countries and the wider world, partly because of the failure of its own public relations effort and the leaders’ reluctance and inability to articulate its achievements. This is a matter Sharma needs urgently to address when he takes over.

The second report deals with the future membership of the Commonwealth, which now stands at 53 countries with several more to knocking on the door to join. The criteria for membership had long needed further clarification.

Some countries aspiring to belong have no historical or constitutional connection with existing members. Most immediate is the application of Rwanda, once a German and then a Belgian colony.

The Committee, headed by former prime minister P.J. Patterson, favours only a moderate increase in membership and the CHOGM was even more conservative. In no way are the floodgates to be opened, which could lead to the development of a mini-UN. However, the report does provide for exceptions which “should be considered on a case-by-case basis.”

Applicant countries must be committed to, inter alia, democracy, free and fair elections, the rule of law and an independent judiciary, protection of human rights, freedom of expression and equality of opportunity.

Only Rwanda has an application actually on the table. Its President, Paul Kagame, was a so-called Special Guest in Kampala and host Museveni was hoping that Rwanda might be admitted on the nod, but that was not going to happen. Its qualifications will now have to be vetted and the next summit in Trinidad and Tobago in 2009 will decide. The UK for one is keen for Rwanda to join, but question marks are bound to arise over the quality of its democracy and human rights. A precedent was set in 1995 when former Portuguese colony Mozambique, a neighbour of Rwanda, was admitted as ‘a special case’ and it has to be said that it has proved an admirable Commonwealth member.

One recommendation made by the membership commission was that CHOGMs should revert to a full three days’ duration. The length of the summit has been whittled down over the years and apart from one executive session the whole two-and-a-half day meeting is now held in Retreat. However, from 2005 the summit is preceded by a two-day foreign ministers meeting, which saves the Heads time spent dealing with the more routine matters.

The Retreat is the great Commonwealth pioneering success story. It is at these informal meetings of Heads without officials in a secluded venue where the real business is done, with leaders getting to know each other on first-name terms and where the use of a single language comes into its own.

In these high pressure days international summits are inevitably short, but the Commonwealth now scores by the huge expansion and involvement of civil society and its meetings extending over more than two weeks. In Kampala 1,500 people and 600 organisations took part in 20 workshops. In addition, something like 10,000 Ugandans visited the so-called People’s Space where exhibitions and displays were held.

All this means that the total CHOGM happening is spread over nearly as long as its antecedents, the Commonwealth Prime Ministers Meetings. The first of these, in 1944, lasted 15 days, but only five leaders were then involved. The total CHOGM event in Uganda beginning with the Youth Forum on 14 November ran till 25 November. The question is arising again, however, whether the timing of this huge civil society effort is right. To make the maximum impact on governments should it be held alongside the biennial summit or should it take place in the year between? After all, the object of the exercise is to influence the leaders, but there is no way they can access them personally at that time and in any case it is much too late to affect any decisions they might take at the CHOGM. NGOs do now have a half-day session with the foreign ministers after the ministers own meeting, and that is developing into a useful encounter. But it cannot influence the Heads who by then are already in the middle of their summit.

Would it be more productive if civil society held its meetings in the summit venue a year beforehand, giving them ample time to feed their ideas to the Heads?

Such an occasion would also give the Commonwealth itself a separate focus for publicity within and beyond the country where the summit is to take place and well ahead of it. As it is, the huge civil society effort gets little attention outside the media of the host country because it is overshadowed by the immediate glamour and newsworthiness of the Heads’ meeting.