T'challa
Rookie
Africa is big. I'd prefer a regional start to such agreements before achieving a continental wide agreement. Perhaps I'm overly cautious.
I agree with your caution.
Speaking further about supranational bodies, in the final analysis I tend towards pulling out/scrapping AU/ECOWAS. Here's my line of thought when it the AU and ECOWAS.
I really cannot think about any future with them because they are completely useless and answer to money - AU to EU, ECOWAS to EU/Nigeria. My good guess is we will not be members of these since we have seen firsthand, their powerlessness in the Biafran cause. Also remember what OAU told us in 1968.
Also, the multi-layer bodies is a bureaucratic hindrance and the issue of jurisdiction is a nightmare .
I believe we will start a new supranational body. I don't think well want a proliferation (as it is currently) of these so I'm thinking we try to make it single as much as possible.
We start out as a 1 or 2 member body (Ambazonia in mind here), we need to be careful to get only members of similar ideals and drive to be the founding members. The nations that join hereafter are agreeing to the already existing laid down statutes and guides. We need to avoid this strange bed fellows thing like we have in the AU and ECOWAS now. For e.g. a dictatorship cannot be a member. Internal referendums for Berlin constructed states (more info here --> www.oeas.info).
As with any human organization there will be drivers and there'll be those that joined just to mark the register. The key is that such a body is shaped by such founding members.
I didn't go with region because I rather be in a body with some sensible nation like Botswana than one with La Republic de Cameroon or Nigeria (if it still exists).
Last edited: