9 ms·

Hmm. "Although, the passport is currently exclusive to government heads and diplomats, it is here to stay, even though it will take a while before it circulate

• akerro 10y ago
  >So well see if it ever goes beyond diplomats. Hope not, they will start killing each others very immediately. Every wondered why some borders are straight lines?
  • fooker 10y ago
    Like the Canada-US border ?
    • akerro 10y ago
      If Canada and US are in Africa and their borders where set by Europeans based on shares of diamonds, coal, gas, silver, gold or oil which is now shared by Shell or BP and you don't share ethnic groups, religions, traditions and you have 100x more ethnic groups than countries... then no. Not like in Canada-US. Did you know that some of those borders where made by Stalin just to provoke them, let them kill each other, provide them weaponry, so they could easily use their natural resources?
      • shitgoose 10y ago
        Stalin drew borders in Africa??? Which ones?:)
        • finid 10y ago
          Probably the one between East Africa and Atlantis. OK, the guy was obviously referring to Europe, but just did a bad job of it.
          • shitgoose 10y ago
            still, mixing up Yalta agreement and colonial borders in Africa... besides, it is not natural resources that Stalin was after.
    • backtoyoujim 10y ago
      /angrily glares at plate of poutine
    • Sharlin 10y ago
      The Canada-US border is straight for the same reason many African borders are straight, actually. It was also drawn by foreign colonialists who neither lived in the area nor cared about the opinion of the people who did live there.
      • rayiner 10y ago
        The Canada-US border was not imposed by colonial Britain. It was a compromise between the US and Britain after the American Revolution and War of 1812.
        • Sharlin 10y ago
          In this context, the distinction between "the US" and "Britain" is entirely immaterial. People of European descent came, had some internal bickering, drew lines on maps, didn't care about the opinion of the people already living there.
          • rayiner 10y ago
            By the time the US/Canada border was drawn, the majority of people "already living there" (90%) were of European descent.
            • oblio 10y ago
              He does have a point. The border was straight because the people living there mostly (European descendants, the locals were already disenfranchised by that point) didn't give a crap about the border. I'm Romanian. Ask a Romanian what he'd think about straightening the border around Timisoara, thus giving it to Hungary. Many of those people would die rather than letting it happen. Those borders represent family possessions, cherished childhood memories, remnants of stories past that bond together people on either side of the border, etc. Normal, i.e. organic borders, are messy and rarely straight.
            • cossatot 10y ago
              Yes, because native populations had been decimated by disease.
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  • curiousgal 10y ago
    I've never wondered why some border are straight lines actually. Care to elaborate?
    • allendoerfer 10y ago
      Colonialism.
    • DougBTX 10y ago
      http://everything2.com/title/Never+Trust+a+Straight+Line+on+a+Map http://everything2.com/title/Never+Trust+a+Straight+Line+on+... tl;dr, straight lines on maps are drawn for the convenience of the map maker, not as a representation of culture on the ground. Africa may be better off ignoring straight lines drawn by colonialists.
      • deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      • umanwizard 10y ago
        Looking at the map linked from that page[1], practically none of the lines are straight (except for in the unpopulated desert in the north). Even countries that are specifically called out as examples in the text (like Nigeria) don't have straight-line borders. What am I missing? [1]: http://www.africaguide.com/images/africa_map.gif http://www.africaguide.com/images/africa_map.gif
    • quonn 10y ago
      They are straight, because 19th century colonialism created them.
  • jacalata 10y ago
    A straight line border is usually an indicator that it was artificially imposed by a group of people who had never been to the border being defined and did not give a shit about the existing cultural groupings that they were arbitrarily cutting into sections. Africa has a lot of them because it was colonised and split by European powers. Is that what you were looking for? And why on earth do you think that reducing the power of these artificial groupings would be a negative because of how artificial they are?
    • 13of40 10y ago
      Two things to bear in mind: First, most of the straight-line borders in Africa are in the north and cut through very sparsely inhabited desert [1]. Second, and perhaps more importantly, prior to the early 20th century, borders weren't typically controlled in the way they are now, so drawing a straight line though an inhabited area wouldn't affect much beyond taxes and other administrative issues. [1] http://www.catsg.org/cheetah/07_map-centre/7_1_entire-range/thematic-maps/human_density_africa_2000.png http://www.catsg.org/cheetah/07_map-centre/7_1_entire-range/...
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  • nxzero 10y ago
    Here's more analysis of the impact of Africa's existing borders: http://m.mgafrica.com/article/2015-01-09-africas-real-borders-are-not-where-you-think http://m.mgafrica.com/article/2015-01-09-africas-real-border...
  • finid 10y ago
    You mean like the way us Europeans have been killing ourselves for generations? We even fought two world wars over our differences. Give Africans a chance to catch up...
• Havoc 10y ago
  >Since the western media almost never reports anything on Africa, does anybody know how the AU is progressing? Slow progress, but progressing none the less. Seems to be poorly funded so their latest idea is to put an AU tax on all imports. The whole thing seems to lack direction beyond a vague desire to prove that Africa can be united like the "big boys" i.e. EU. The passport thing will take off I think. It'll take a while & cause serious security issues but I think they'll do it. >Are they pushing for a EU like model? They're copying some things, but don't seem to be doing the whole Brussels centralised power thing.
  • zorked 10y ago
    Europe is very homogenous and the EU is in a permanent state of crisis. If the AU tries anything like that they are dead the very same day.
    • Havoc 10y ago
      >If the AU tries anything like that they are dead the very same day. Don't think so. Things are much more resilient that side in the sense that working around things that don't work is just another normal day.
    • EGreg 10y ago
      Europe homogeneous? The USA is way more homogeneous. European countries have between them dozens of official languages and cultures.
      • smcl 10y ago
        That's the point. If the EU is more homogeneous and it has some serious issues, then a similar union in somewhere with even greater diversity may be prone to the same issues or worse (note: I'm just paraphrasing the poster for clarification - I'm not knowledgable enough on the AU to comment on whether this is true)
    • deskamess 10y ago
      It makes me wonder... would you be better off being heterogeneous group of states? That way you can accept your differences right away, and move on towards a common goal (economic union). When homogeneous its almost as if you have to look for some artificial differences (nit picking) to avoid admitting your similarities... "oh, no... we are not like them... we are different", and then subscribe to a union for the greater good (like an EU). And probably after getting a lot of unicorn concessions. I see the India model as being what Africa might end up getting. Many Indian states have their own distinct language, and often culture (food, etc). However India has a common currency. The easy part for India was that the states were defacto 'inherited into the union' at independence. For Africa it is going to be a 'subscribe into the economic union' with a lot of nationalistic arguments that are going to come into play. I am hoping a group of mostly stable countries band together and make it happen first. My founders list would be Namibia, Botswana, Angola, Zambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Kenya. A nice list stretching from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean. These are moderate names, not often in the news and stable for the most part. If South Africa would join that would be a big win... but I am hoping one of the smaller countries takes leadership initially.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• Animats 10y ago
  currently exclusive to government heads and diplomats This article in Smithsonian [1] says that the goal is to have it be available to ordinary citizens by 2020. It's not clear how this will work for Africa's 26 million refugees. [1] http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/common-africa-passport-to-allow-free-movement-across-continent-180959875/ http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/common-africa-passp...
  • daenney 10y ago
    According to the article: > Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma says that the body has agreed “to create the conditions for member states to issue the passport to their citizens, within their national policies, as and when they are ready.” In the article that the Smithsonian refers to: > That's only two years away, and lately the AU has been citing 2020 as the new start date for visa-free African travel. So far it's "they have cited 2020" which is quite a bit different from an actual statement that says that the goal is 2020 (I've yet to find that one). I've also not been able to find anything around members of the AU having committed to such or any date. Considering that in the speech mentioned in the article that was submitted they say "as and when they are ready." I would be surprised this would happen this quickly. It would be awesome if it did though.
    • prance 10y ago
      In 2014, it took 4 months for my wife's Kenyan passport to be renewed. Last year, she applied for a new ID card (to get her new family name on it), and she was able to collect it more than one year later. At least here in Kenya, I'm not going to hold my breath for the AU passport...
      • nojvek 10y ago
        Yeah I've had some bad experiences in Kenya too if you don't pay a bit "extra" to move things forward.
      • nsomaru 10y ago
        It used to be like this in South Africa, but they've implemented some new tech and you can get a passport in around a week. The new ID cards are even faster. I suspect this is not appreciated by many in and around the system because there was a whole industry that sprang up around the process (people to stand in lines for you, make the application, etc.) and now it's less likely that a bribe will be offered ;)
• finid 10y ago
  Following the EU model is a bad idea. Look at the mess that EU is right now. Why would any region want to go down that path? The ECOWAS model is much better.
  • astronautjones 10y ago
    What do you mean? The Schengen zone (what I think they meant by EU-model) is practically universally viewed as a good thing for tourism, travel, and business
    • sandstrom 10y ago
      This is an important point. You can be part of Schengen without being part of the European Union (and vice versa). Norway and Switzerland are part of Schengen, but not EU. Britain is part of the EU (for 1-2 years at least), but not part of Schengen. (Schengen is only about passport-less travel within the zone)
      • DasIch 10y ago
        Schengen is nice but not all that important. The single market is what is really important economically and that requires something like the EU.
        • sandstrom 10y ago
          Yes, I totally agree. Travelling to the UK (at least as a European citizen) isn't more than an extra ~15 minutes at the airport. With the automated passport-machines (face-recognition) it's really quick. Not requiring a Visa a big timesaver though, but that's already the case amongst many countries. Though I'd say you can have a single market without much of the current EU-bureaucracy. They currently legislate about (and meddle in) a ton of things which aren't tied to a single market for labour, goods and services.
          • patrickk 10y ago
• bogomipz 10y ago
  "Since the western media almost never reports anything on Africa, ..." This is untrue. Perhaps you should be more selective with your new sources. Read "The Economist", there is great and regularly reporting on Africa every week. The BBC also has great coverage of African current events. Lastly CNN also has the "Inside Africa" program, available on the web as well.
  • _nedR 10y ago
    Al-Jazeera English also has good coverage of Africa and other places in Asia, that popular international outlets give less attention to.
• tn13 10y ago
  Oh boy. I was like "how did I miss this big new" until your clarified this is some kind of privilege to the few powerful people. Nevertheless there will be system that will help people get this passport by paying the right price and eventually everyone will have it. Free movement of people is good thing if backed by free trade and lack of welfare else it will be bad people trying to live off other people's hard work.
• uyoakaoma 10y ago
  An EU like model is very scary.
  • andrepd 10y ago
    Why so?
• vixen99 10y ago
  BBC World in Europe provides a significant amount of air time everyday on African affairs.
• kriro 10y ago
  I have worked on the premises of the AU roughly 10 years ago (for a couple of month). I knew next to nothing about it before I worked there. They are pretty advanced from what I could tell. There's clear French and English blocks (+the Maghreb but they tend to side with the French block; +Angola which tends to side with the English block) and it's somewhat hilarious to see how these need to be balanced for most important issues but at the end of the day it's the same in the EU...I just never saw a system like that close up before. It was very notable that almost all people I spoke with were very passionate about the idea of a strong and united Africa. Having talked to some EU people there are a lot more bureaucrats and I get the feeling for some politicians it's the wasteland/failure if they get moved to an EU role instead of a national one. In the AU I got a very strong feeling that everyone was very happy to be there (and thought they could change things) and it was probably seen as more important than a role in the own government. Unfortunately that's the state of about 10 years ago. It's also notable that the difference between AU and surrounding country (there's also a UN complex in Addis which is similar to the AU) is rather strong. There's two amazing hotels in Addis (Sharaton and Hilton) and most of the city is fairly poor. The contrast is stark to say the least. The article also mentions a consultant from McKinsey...one of the things that I found very bothersome was that you basically had to work through consultants or local contacts to get anything done. I have met some rather shady characters and the big consultancies have carved out a nice little niche of "exclusive access".