Brussels, 18/09/2001 (Agence Europe) - "Towards a coherent European policy for conflict-prevention in Africa: the challenges of the Belgian Presidency" is the subject of a conference that the European Parliament's Committee on Development and Development Cooperation (chair: Joachim Miranda GUE/NGL) hosted in Brussels on Monday. Organised by a group of NGOs members of the Eplo network (European Peacebuilding Liaison Office), in co-operation with Parliament and the Heinrich Boll Foundation, this conference also benefited from the backing of the Directorate General of the Belgian International Co-operation and the Swedish Foreign Ministry to move reflection forward on coherence between the Union's policies on the African Continent and using the Cotonou Agreement as conflict-prevention instrument in Africa.
Sandra Melone, Executive Director o the NGO European Centre for Common Ground (ECCG), set the tone of the conference by declaring, at the opening: "We are attempting to meet the shortcomings of international policy in Africa, still prey to violent conflicts. The European Union can help us prevent these conflicts thanks to the CFSP (Common foreign and Security Policy). Despite the current conflict-prevention mechanisms, conflicts continue to devastate Africa". The Belgian Presidency's intention of focusing on conflict-prevention by bolstering the existing mechanisms and considering creating others is a good omen for her. But, she pointed out, the ambitious goals of the Cfsp, are subject to scepticism. "Some consider that research into the origin of the conflicts should be further explored, others denounce the lack of political will to act". She then cited here several examples that seem to fuel this criticism such as the likely closure, next year, of the European Commission's "Conflict Prevention" unit, the lesser prestige that Parliament's "Development" Committee enjoys compared to the Foreign Affairs Committee, and the fact that the Cotonou Agreement is not mentioned in the conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Committee as conflict-prevention mechanism. "Our aim is to see how the Union can guarantee genuine work in Africa with civil society, how to help render programmes more accessible to the civilian populations, how to set up joint actions under the Cfsp". She then added: "We are far from a coherent Union policy. So far, national policies have prevailed, consisting in reacting, rather than preventing".
Pa'o H. Luteru, Under Secretary of the ACP group (Africa/Caribbean/Pacific), responsible for politics and human development, placed emphasis on the role of aid to development in conflict-prevention. "We, ACP countries, note that to succeed in eradicating poverty, peace and security must reign in our countries. Investing in conflict-prevention, is investing in sustainable development", he declared. Early-warning systems have a crucial role to play here, he considered, stressing that this question was the subject of an examination within the ACP/EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly whose members constitute "a first level of warning for any situation that could deteriorate". According to him, the essential question to ask oneself is: "When will we stop talking and act?". Recalling that in the Cotonou Agreement, linking the ACP to the Union, the conflict-prevention aspect plays an important role and provides for early exchange between countries in conflict or which risk being so, Mr. Leteru regretted that Article 8 (comprehensive political dialogue between the parties to the agreement) should not be further used before recourse is made to Article 96 (suspension clause with prior consultation). "Dialogue is indispensable for rhetoric to become reality in conflict resolution. 17 ACP countries are suffering sanctions or are in the consultation phase, and we would like this number to diminish as soon as possible", he declared, nevertheless stressing that "foremost responsibility is that of the country where the conflict is taking place", and that NGOs have as role to facilitate conflict resolution. Mr. Luteru also placed emphasis on the usefulness of making more of the link between conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance, which, according to him, would need further analysis of the motivations of countries providers of aid.
Bethuel Kiplagat (Kenya), member o the Africa for Peace Forum, who took part in the peace negotiations for Mozambique, welcomed the formal commitment to deal conflicts in Africa that the Cotonou Agreement constitutes. "To work out the real causes of conflicts, one has to look at their extent and nature", he stressed, recalling that 7 countries in the Horn of Africa have not had a single day of peace over the past 50 years, and that most conflicts on the continent (currently 17) are linked to the very nature of the State concerned. Whence the need, he said, to study the structure of governments in Africa. Welcoming the turning point that enabled the OAU to set up the principle of interference (1984 Cairo Declaration), he regretted the lack of an international mechanism allowing to go beyond case by case interventions, as was the case today. Whence the need to "take the Cotonou Instrument very seriously" and focus on legal instruments enabling the agreement to be carried out in the framework of conflict-prevention.
"The frontier between conflict prevention and resolution is a tenuous one", stressed Andreas Strub, diplomatic adviser for Africa with the CFSP High Representative, Javier Solana (Political Unit of the Council of Union). Considering it important that a maximum number of people should examine how conflicts work, he recalled that "the European Union, as such, is a conflict prevention mechanism, a regional organisation well placed to understand the problems linked to economic imbalance or ethnic difficulties". In his view, the challenges that must be raised to move towards an effective conflict prevention policy include fine-tuning diplomatic initiatives to set dialogue in place (as was the case between the Albanian minority and the Macedonian government), ensuring there is consistency between all the Union's external interventions (development aid, humanitarian aid, trade policy, CFSP) through a real knowledge of the problems on the ground, and improving the understanding of certain concepts (such as property in Africa or development aid responsibility).
These avenues of reflection, floated by the speakers, were taken up in greater detail by workshops devoted to the Horn of Africa, the Great Lakes and West Africa. The conclusions will be the subject of a report to be handed to the European institutions in October.