Strasbourg, 17/12/2007 (Agence Europe) - Two days after the end of the EU-Africa Lisbon summit (see EUROPE 9561), the European Parliament listened in plenary to the Council and Commission declarations and had an opportunity to express knee-jerk reactions to a meeting that is the first of its kind in Europe-Africa relations.
The Europe-Africa summit in Lisbon is a turning point in relations between these two entities, Council President Manuel Lobo Antunes said (in response to a number of criticisms expressed at the end of the debate, he nonetheless admitted that one could not speak of a “revolution”). Participants understood that mutual relations should be placed on another level, by developing cooperation with civil society and NGOs in Africa, who are called upon to play a greater role on the continent in the future.
“A strong and new message, a radical change”, said Louis Michel describing the Lisbon summit, a summit where Europeans told Zimbabwe that its behaviour with regard to human rights “is detrimental to other African countries' desire for reform”. Human rights is no long a taboo subject, the European development commissioner said, adding that, if African governments must make an effort in this field, it is “not to please Europeans” but in the interest of their own people. As far as the institutional mechanisms are concerned, Mr Michel considers that the EU foreign and development ministers should not hold the monopoly when it comes to looking at issues affecting Africa, but that it is necessary to institutionalise the principle of “regular joint ministerial meetings” with the participation of other ministers. Mr Michel also expressed the hope of one day seeing the European Development Fund (EDF) included in the budget.
On this point, the commissioner had full support from Thierry Cornillet (ALDE) of France, who stressed the importance of budgetary control not only on the part of the EP but also on the part of the African parliaments. Yes, admitted Maria Martens (EPP-ED, NL), one has moved on from “monologue to dialogue”. She regretted, however, the insufficient parliamentary participation at the meeting (something that was then strongly disputed by Mr Michel). Marie Anne Isler Béguin (Greens, France) is pleased to see the African continent organise itself and become emancipated. But, she asked the Commission, who said one should speak of the nuclear issue? Mr Michel said the Africans themselves had wanted to bring this subject up, while specifying that it was a question of principle (the possibility of discussing the nuclear option) rather than a question of substance (the possibility of nuclear development in Africa). Gerard Batten (ID, UK) criticised his prime minister, Gordon Brown, saying he should have gone to Lisbon to speak with Mr Mugabe in terms that were just as clear as those used by Angela Merkel.
After the debate, Mr Michel pointed out that the situation in Darfur was not a priority issue at the summit but the EU stated in clear terms the possibility of rapid deployment of the hybrid force. On the subject of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), Mr Michel said it was totally wrong to say (as some do, in particular Gabriele Zimmer, GUE/NGL, Germany) that their essential aim is to support the large European investors in Africa. EPAs have also been criticised by some African countries, the commissioner admitted, but he recalled that their main aim is to protect the weakest, through a whole series of measures (asymmetry, transition periods). Finally, Mr Michel says, economic integration is the most important aspect of development. Not much progress has been made on this point, he said, but work on this will continue throughout next year. (L.G.)