This week’s G8 summit in Japan marks 6 years since the group of the world’s top industrial nations adopted a comprehensive action plan to support initiatives to spur the development of Africa. The G8 Africa Action Plan adopted at a summit in Kananaskis, Canada, in 2002 was seen as the biggest boost to Africa’s own home-grown development initiative, the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, NEPAD. The G8 Plan pledges to help Africa tackle the main obstacles to its development — from promoting peace and security, to boosting trade and implementing debt relief to expanding education, health facilities and fighting HIV/AIDS.

As a followup to the Action Plan, the G8 at its 2005 summit in Scotland agreed to double aid by 2010 to $50 billion, half of which would go to Africa. But as G8 leaders prepared  for this year’s summit in Japan, the Africa Progress Panel set up to monitor implementation of the 2005 commitments issued a gloomy report last month. It said under current spending the G8 would fall $40 billion short of its target. Other aid agency officials accused the G8 of backtracking on its pledges to Africa.

But some analysts argue that agreements reached at the 2005 summit were just a part of the G8 Africa Action Plan which offers a far more comprehensive framework for dealing with the continent’s problems. Britain under Prime Minister Tony Blair played a leading role in placing Africa’s problems at the top of the G8 agenda. The UK progress report details London’s implementation of the G8 Action Plan including its role as lead international partner in Sierra Leone after helping to end civil war in the former colony in 2002. US President George W. Bush has won praise in Africa for commiting more of the administrations’s resources to Africa’s war against HIV/AIDS.

But overall, has the G8 kept faith with Africa in the implementation of the Africa Action Plan? How have the decisions of the G8 helped your country or your personal life? Has NEPAD shown enough capacity to keep the G8 focused on its pledges? Is the G8 likely to switch its focus from Africa to more pressing global issues like soaring oil prices and the threat of inflation and recession in its own member countries? Have your say.

Can President Robert Mugabe be trusted to implement the resolution of the African Union summit calling for dialogue and a government of national unity to end Zimbabwe’s long-running crisis? According to Mugabe’s camp, he can. “The AU resolution is in conformity to what President Mugabe said at his inauguration, when he said we are prepared to talk in order to resolve our problems,” his Information Minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu told Reuters a day after the AU passed the resolution on July 1.

While opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai and his Movement for Demoratic Change (MDC) say they have kept the door open for negotiations, he says conditions are not yet right for talks. The MDC also makes clear its objective is a transitional arrangement leading to fresh elections rather than a unity government.  The crisis could conceivably be stuck on that difference.

The summit followed Mugabe’s controversial re-election in a run-off poll in which he was the sole candidate. Tsvangirai defeated Mugabe in the first round but pulled out of the run-off amid violence and intimidation directed at the MDC and blamed on Mugabe’s camp. The AU resolution expressed concern about the violence.

The AU resolution clearly calls for a Government of National Unity (GNU) as opposed to demands by the MDC and Western governments for a Transitional Government. Political analyst Cheryl Hendricks of Pretoria-based Institute for Security Studies makes a strong case for transitional government in Zimbabwe given the highly polarised situation in the country.

“We primarily have two polarised parties each asserting their legitimate right to rule without the prospect of settling the dispute amicably through elections in the near future,” Hendricks wrote in a paper posted on the ISS website on July 2. “The prospects of unity, given these conditions, are highly unlikley and a cobbled together GNU will be unstable.”

Here are further points to consider in relation to the AU’s resolution:

•  The resolution upholds the mediation effort of the regional bloc SADC led by South African President Thabo Mbeki. The SADC formally appointed Mbeki to this role in March 2007 but he has been mediating in the Zimbabwe crisis since the country’s  disputed 2002 presidential election. Mbeki has been widely condemned for his policy of quiet diplomacy with Mugabe.
• The resolution calls on the SADC to “establish a mechanism on the ground in order to seize the momentum for a negotiated solution” but it is not entirely clear what form this would take. In the case of the post-election mayhem in Kenya last December and January, the AU brought in former UN chief Kofi Annan to lead a high-powered mediation effort on the spot.
• The AU intervened more robustly in the Indian Ocean state of Comoros when it sent a military force to back the local army to expel renegade former gendarme Mohamed Bacar who seized power in 2001 and clung on after an illegal election last year. 
• The AU has been cool to planned further sanctions by Western governments against Zimbabwe. Many analysts believe Zimbabwe’s economic meltdown, blamed on Mugabe, and the threat of further sanctions are the most potent means to bring down his government.
• Mbeki has openly dismissed a call by the European Union that Tsvangirai should head any transitional government, and has not disguised his dislike for solutions to the Zimbabwe crisis hatched from outside the region.

Given all the above, is the Zimbabwe crisis indeeed back to square one after the AU summit? Or has the summit produced a framework more conducive to negotiations between Mugabe and his opponents?

<b>LATEST ANALYSIS: Rebuff to Mugabe is watershed for African Union</b>

Although Zimbabwe got all the headlines, the official theme of the African Union summit in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh was water.
That made it all the more surprising for thirsty delegates that there was none for them to drink.
Journalists covering the summit had other complaints.
Usually, these meetings are a glorious chance for reporters to grab quotes from normally elusive heads of state as they glide through the plush halls, flanked by aides and bodyguards.
But the Egyptians had other ideas at this summit. Maybe it was a sign of the sensitivity of the discussions, with Zimbabwe’s election crisis overshadowing all other topics. Or perhaps it was an indication of the immensely tight security around Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak — who escaped an assassination attempt at an African summit in Ethiopia in 1995.
Local security officials banned reporters from entering areas even two halls away from where the leaders were meeting.
A few news crews still got through, but some scuffled with President Robert Mugabe’s security men late on Sunday — the 84-year-old leader was himself knocked about. After that, security became even tighter, with journalists confined only to a smoky, overcrowded press centre.
Reporters like me and Reuters colleagues Opheera McDoom and Cynthia Johnston were banned from going to interview leaders even after their aides came to escort us to see them.
At least one official was advised not to enter the press room — to avoid provoking a crush. Egyptian security said they couldn’t guarantee the safety of officials.
Meanwhile, journalists were barricaded in one end of the building, with no food provided apart from two coffee breaks during the 12-hour days. Those offerings were devoured in seconds by a ravenous pack, depriving those who weren’t quick enough for even a dry piece of cake.
AU officials griped about the lack of hospitality too.
“This is the worst summit ever,” said one experienced AU official.

President Robert Mugabe’s re-election has sparked cries of outrage from Zimbabwean bloggers and demands for international intervention.

Mugabe’s victory in Friday’s one-candidate poll was condemned in the West and by all three African monitoring groups who said the vote was deeply flawed.

“Now we wait for the Old Man (Mugabe) to swear himself in to a power that he does not have. We wait for him to claim a throne that he stole one-dark-night-that-is-our-country. We wait for real international pressure and solidarity to force a transition,” Zimbabwean protest poet Samm Farai Monro, better known as Comrade Fatso, wrote.

Official results of the June 27 election, from which opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew a few days before the poll, showed Mugabe, 84, received 85.51 percent of the vote.

Many bloggers said the figure was rigged.

“They are cooked results and unfortunately or fortunately rather, they are not valid to the world and around us,” wrote one blogger who called himself Nice-Shona-Guy on www.newzimbabwe.com

Zimbabwe’s crisis has ruined a once prosperous country, saddling it with the world’s worst hyper-inflation and straining neighbouring nations, especially South Africa, with a flood of millions of economic refugees.

Inflation is officially 165,000 percent but analysts it is is closer to nine million percent.

One blogger linked the election results to inflation.

“Somehow, despite mass intimidation, gross violence, increasing poverty, murders, and hyper-inflation, Robert Mugabe’s popularity accelerated faster than our inflation figures — which is quite something”.

The majority of bloggers were against Mugabe although some of those posting comments questioned what right other African states had to criticise him.

“How can the African Union punish Mugabe they are guilty of worse things in their countries,” said Jon.

Human rights groups, monitors and witnesses have accused pro-Mugabe militias of forcing people to vote in some areas with beatings and intimidation.

The MDC said a state-backed campaign of violence had killed at least 90 of its supporters and injured thousands.

Bloggers also had tough words for South African President Thabo Mbeki, whose mediation attempts in Zimbabwe have so far failed.

“Zimbabweans let’s react by sending money to Zimbabwe for our relatives to move over to South Africa then Mbeki should realise his stupidity. Congratulations to (the) Mbeki and Mugabe marriage,” said Negondo on www.newzimbabwe.com

More than 60 people, including Zimbabweans, died last month in wave of brutal xenophobic attacks on African immigrants which shocked South Africa.

Some three million Zimbabweans have already fled to neighbouring South Africa to escape the economic collapse of their once-prosperous country.

Tsvangirai also came under fire for pulling out of the run-off.

“You (Tsvangirai) are slowly letting the people of Zimbabwe down. It seems you are desperate to be the one in office and the one to rule the people. You should not be the one under pressure, that is for Mugabe. But you are falling into his trap and playing his game,” a blogger who called himself Chinja commented.

Despite a crisis that has reduced many Zimbabweans to poverty, their sense of humour continued to show on blogs.

Bev Clark wrote that in the context of frequent water and electricity cuts and spiralling hyper-inflation which has led to a worthless currency, there are some things not to say to a Zimbabwean woman.

They are: “Can I run you a nice hot bath?”, “You look like a million dollars” and “Would you like a candlelit dinner tonight?”

A loaf of bread now costs 6 billion Zimbabwe dollars.

Morgan Tsvangirai’s decision to pull out of the presidential election on Friday leaves the road open for President Mugabe to win another term in power.

The decision has been met by a storm of international condemnation of the violence, with increasingly powerful voices speaking out from Africa. On Tuesday President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal and ANC leader Jacob Zuma joined the condemnation and called for the vote to be postponed.

But there is no sign that Mugabe and his supporters, including the powerful security chiefs, will budge. They are vowing to press ahead with the election despite suggestions Mugabe will have no legitimacy if he wins this vote.

Perhaps Tsvangirai had little choice. President Wade said he fled to the Dutch embassy on Sunday — where he is still seeking refuge — minutes before soldiers came to his home. Western powers have defended his decision.

But at the end of the day, will international pressure make any difference?. Mugabe has a long history of defying outside pressure, even though now his support within Africa is diminishing. Can he continue to ignore the pressure and battle on in Zimbabwe as the economy spirals even further into total chaos?

Did Tsvangirai misjudge his move? Has he let down all those who have suffered to support the MDC, some at the price of their lives? Or has he made a calculation that by pulling out of the vote he will show that Friday’s election is a sham and he will win in the end? What do you think?

Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai’s decision to abandon a controversial run-off ballot against Zimbabwe’s strongman President Robert Mugabe would surprise few. Western governments and aid agencies have for weeks voiced the same accusations of violence and intimidation against the Mugabe camp which Tsvangirai cited in concluding that a run-off election stood no chance of being free or fair.

Hours before Tsvangirai’s decision, his Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) reported that its rally in the capital Harare had been broken up by pro-Mugabe youth militia, something Mugabe’s ruling ZANU-PF party denied.

Tsvangirai had appeared to be in a dominant position to win a run-off poll after defeating Mugabe in the first round — but only if the vote was going to be fair. Agreeing to participate in the run-off was indeed a gamble the opposition leader took in the face of contrary arguments by even some of his supporters who felt it was naive to expect a fair vote in a terrain dominated by Mugabe and his associates.

What happens now after Tsvangirai’s decision to pull out of the June 27 second round ballot? How will African governments and the international community react? What should they do? What options are left for Tsvangirai and his MDC? Could there still be negotiations, and if so should these still be brokered by South African President Thabo Mbeki? What does all this mean for the people of Zimbabwe? Will this reinforce Mugabe’s position in power or hasten his demise? Have your say.

Eton-educated British mercenary Simon Mann has gone on trial in Equatorial Guinea for his role in a 2004 coup plot to overthrow President Teodoro Obiang Nguema.
 
The state prosecutor is seeking a jail term of nearly 32 years for Mann, who has admitted in a British TV interview this year that he plotted to topple Obiang.
 
Mann’s defence lawyer has argued that his client was a “mere instrument” in the plot, but not one of the main organisers. The prosecution has named Mark Thatcher, son of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, as one of the businessmen conspirators who invested in the coup plot. Mark Thatcher denies knowing about the coup and is not on trial in Malabo.
 
So, with Mann’s trial and the death of notorious French mercenary Bob Denard last year, is the era of the “dogs of war” over in Africa? Or will Equatorial Guinea’s huge oil riches soon tempt others to hire foreign guns for a violent takeover of power?
 
Is justice being done in the case of Mann, or should others be with him there in the dock?
 
The rule of President Obiang, who overthrew his dictatorial uncle Francisco Macias Nguema in a 1979 coup, has been sharply criticised by international human rights groups who accuse him of abuses and restricting political freedoms. Some might argue that a “regime change” such as the one plotted by Mann might have been good for Equatorial Guinea. What do you think?

Chad is in flames again, with rebels opposed to President Idriss Deby racing across its eastern borderlands to attack towns and isolated military garrisons with pick-up trucks bristling with mounted machine-guns and anti-aircraft cannon.
 
A thinly-stretched European Union military force (EUFOR) is deployed in eastern Chad with a U.N. mandate to protect nearly half a million Sudanese and Chadian civilian refugees who have fled violence in Darfur and in Chadian territory.
 
Yet despite the European military presence, the rebel attacks have continued and the U.N. refugee agency UNHCR has been forced to suspend its activities at its 12 camps in eastern Chad.
 
A furious President Deby, who had asked for the international community to send a protection force into violent eastern Chad, has accused EUFOR of “closing its eyes” to the killing of civilians by the rebels and of allowing them to steal vehicles, fuel and food.
 
Do you think EUFOR is doing its job in eastern Chad? Should it be engaging the advancing rebels or staying neutral and out of Chad’s domestic conflict?
 
Some say the the conflict in Darfur and Chad is a “proxy war” between the rulers in Khartoum and N’Djamena, fought by rebel groups on the ground. What do you think?
 
When the rebels last attacked the capital N’Djamena in February and besieged Deby in his palace, former colonial power France threw its political and military weight behind Deby to save him. Now French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner is saying France will not intervene militarily in Chad.
 
Should France be intervening in Africa to prop up chosen favoured rulers as it did in the past under the old “Francafrique” system? Do you believe French President Nicolas Sarkozy when he says that “Francafrique” is dead? Or do you think the French military still holds sway in countries like Chad and Central African Republic?

Nigerian President Umaru Yar’Adua moved quickly after taking office a year ago to try to  address the causes of unrest in the Niger Delta, where a violent campaign of sabotage against the oil industry has cut production and contributed to an unprecedented rise in world oil prices.

Yar’Adua announced plans for formal talks and freed two jailed militant leaders when he took office, but the peace process has made little real progress since then, with the rebel Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) continuing to blow up oil pipelines and kidnap foreign workers.
The government has called a summit for July meant to involve all stakeholders, but MEND and another group — the Ijaw Youth Council — have said they will not take part. Yar’Adua has said the summit aims to address the frustrations of the Niger Delta communities, who have seen their land and water polluted by oil production, but he has also said his government will not tolerate the presence of armed militants in the region.

What are the options for the government — at federal and state level — in tackling the problems of the Niger Delta? Should the government negotiate with armed militants? Are the militants anything more than common criminals, profiting from an illicit trade in stolen crude? What role should the foreign oil companies play in bringing peace to the region?

Rich countries look set to fall roughly $40 billion short of the amount they had pledged to give to Africa by 2010. So says a report released on Monday by the panel set up to monitor commitments made amid much fanfare at the Group of Eight summit in 2005.

The panel said G8 countries were not keeping their promises at the very moment rising food prices threaten to increase hunger and child mortality. The report also calls for a rethink of trade policies to help African countries and urges rich nations to spend more on renewable energy sources there.

But how important is aid for Africa?

Africa’s economies have been growing at their fastest in decades — the International Monetary Fund estimates African growth at well over 6 percent in 2007 and expects similar this year.

Not so long ago, net private capital flows to Africa were negligible or even negative.

But investment has soared, with China leading a rush to develop sources of raw materials. Globally, investors have been looking at Africa more seriously in the hope of potentially higher returns than in more developed markets that now face uncertainty.

Emergency aid has certainly helped to save lives during wars, famines and natural disasters, but has aid helped Africa overall? Has it held it back? Does Africa need aid now?

Have your say.