In the face of routine United Nations inefficacy, the African Union is planning on stepping in to take an active role in the ongoing South Sudan conflict. Soldiers from five different African nations may join the Sudanese dogpile in a prime example of ‘more guns equal more freedom’ reasoning. While the United States may have popularised the idea of a firearms panacea, American devotion to the curative power of lead pales in comparison to the fervour displayed by many African factions. In light of this, it seems appropriate that the AU plan for peace is effectively an escalation of the Sudan conflict.

Sudan itself is opposed to the idea of an AU armed intervention, seemingly content to stick with the tried and true extracontinental intervention model. However, the African Union has scornfully dismissed the United Nations peacekeeping contingent in South Sudan, sensibly pointing out that they would be better off going someplace where there was a bit of peace to keep. After centuries of European intervention on the African continent, the AU plan comes as a breath of fresh air, showing that Africa is capable of meddling in its own affairs using equally dubious methods.


There is some question over whether the AU will follow through on its promise/threat of armed intervention, as it has planned similar operations in the past but then failed to put its guns where its mouth is. If the African Union does decide to add its troops to the perennial clusterfuck that is the South Sudan conflict, it will mark an important turning point for this troubled continent. This could be the beginning of an era in which Africa takes control of its own destiny, shunning foreign intervention in favour self-guidance and conflict resolution methods which may well prove to be just as successful as the landmark European colonisation attempts of the 19th century.