Brussels, 10/06/2013 (Agence Europe) - On 7 June, two visions of the economic partnership agreements (EPAs) raised their heads again at the ACP-EU Council of Ministers. There's nothing very surprising in this as the EU considers that the ACP states have dithered long enough and the ACP deeply regret that the European Parliament - on the request of the European Commission - accepted that duty and quota-free access to the European Union market for certain ACP countries be withdrawn if they do not sign and ratify an EPA before 1 October 2014 (see EUROPE 10861). The statement of European Commissioner for Development Andris Piebalgs, according to which the deadline concerns only the signature of interim EPAs and not full EPAs (focusing on products and services, and including whole regions), may be seen as a sign of appeasement.
European Commissioner for Trade Karel De Gucht seems to have signalled to the ACP partners that the European Commission and the AU Commission could soon come to an agreement in Addis Ababa (headquarters of AU) on the date of a political compromise meeting “as soon as possible, perhaps in July”, at the highest political level, as all the technical issues have, in De Gucht's opinion, been settled. The request put by the heads of the ACP states at their last summit, in favour of a political compromise at the highest possible level, had hitherto always gone unheard by the EU, but what the ACP countries wanted was a troika bringing together three heads of ACP states and the EU troika. Phandu Skelemani, Botswana's Minister for Foreign Affairs and Co-president of the ACP-EU Council, said that it was necessary to be realistic. He said that they acknowledged that for the implementation, for those who ratified an EPA, things were not going as they had imagined. He said that both the EU and the ACP had a duty to ensure that, whatever the problem, a solution would be found. Governments have no other task than to work so that the implementation is to the benefit of their people, Skelemani told the press. Joe Costello, Ireland's Minister for Trade and Development and Co-president of the joint Council, said that they had been negotiating since 2000 and that it was time to finalise, being flexible if it was possible. These are not free-trade agreements but asymmetric and preferential agreements, and the time has come to conclude, he added.
During the debate, Skelemani underlined the concerns of the Cariforum countries - the only region to have signed an EPA - and other ACP states about the policy of differentiation which could lead to a reduction in funds for the countries having obtained better results in terms of development - which in the long term would affect their ability to implement the EPAs. “The region is urging the EC to step up engagement on the remaining aspects of the negotiations which include a development cooperation chapter.”
Skelemani also regretted the risk of division within the ACP regions between the less developed countries (LDCs) - recipients of free access to the EU market as part of the Everything But Arms Initiative - and the non-LDCs. He said that the two needed to move together and to negotiate with third parties together if they wanted successful regional integration. Piebalgs and De Gucht share the roles of the “goodie” and the “baddie” for these EPAs that are negotiated as part of the Cotonu Agreement and supposed to be trade agreements at the service of development, but what the ACP states fear are, above all, progressive trade liberalisation agreements between unequal partners in development. (AN/transl.fl)