Commission orientations. The relaunch of the Euro-African dialogue with the objective of making the development dimension the priority (see this column in the last bulletin) will not be a simple matter. Peter Mandelson, logically enough, is remaining vigilant as to respect for the WTO rules (he is discussing them over the next few days with South Africa and other southern African countries) and Louis Michel is currently mainly concerned about re-establishing legitimate democracy in Chad, Kenya, Darfur and elsewhere. But defining future relations, after the divergences of the last year, remains essential.
According to the indications available, the European Commission's objective would appear to be to clarify with the African regional organisations the outlines of the economic partnership agreements (EPAs), which currently only exist in an incomplete and provisional form, by the end of the year or the beginning of next. Some general cooperation clauses have been drawn up, but the majority of the provisions concerning areas other than trade in goods remain to be discussed: services, investments, movements of capital, competition rules, public procurement. In the Commission's view, in order for the EPAs to be effective they should cover the majority of these areas. It stresses that the trade preferences mechanism (which is in any case contested at international level) has not obtained the desired results. Africa's share of EU imports has continued to decline and only covers a small number of products, and trade between African countries has remained largely insignificant even within regional groups, while trade in other developing countries has seen spectacular expansion. The Commission believes that EPAs, freeing up trade and also covering the other areas cited, could reverse the tendency, with the key starting point being the creation within Africa itself of enlarged economic areas and more extensive unified markets, which would be more likely to develop activity and attract investment.
We know that this raises two objections: a) African products cannot compete with European products as the levels of development are too different; b) customs revenues are essential to most African countries in financing their national budgets. The Commission's response is that opening up to European products will be a gradual and slow process (up to 20 years or even more), that it is vital for Africa to become competitive and above all that the EU will compensate for loss of customs revenues (€2 billion are already available under the current EDF). Elevated customs duties hurt economic development and consumers; lack of respect for intellectual property rules hampers technological progress and the production of high quality goods (which exist in Africa and should be increased on); these shortcomings encourage corruption. The changes will therefore be positive for Africa.
China, the USA, oil, raw materials… These arguments will not be enough to overcome the opposition and hesitations. The controversies of the last year have inflamed the debate and moved it onto political ground, whereas, according to the Commission, the analysis should be an essentially economic one; it is calling for a measure of equanimity. Some more outrageous positions, such as that adopted by the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), are inappropriate and do not help matters. In any case, nothing will be imposed on the countries of Africa; they will be free to make their own choices.
The result is not in the bag yet. There is a risk of negotiations being too theoretical, not taking sufficient account of the profound transformations which are turning Africa upside-down. Africa has become a key element in the global battle for oil and other raw materials which it possesses in great abundance; the presence of China and the USA is no longer hypothetical but a reality of impressive proportions. In the case of the Republic of the Congo, agreements with China are now more significant than relations with Europe. The conflicts in Sudan and Darfur cannot be understood and assessed without taking account of the Chinese presence, nor those in Kenya without looking at the concrete American interests in its oil and gas reserves. Europe could still play a key role as long as it takes account of the upheavals.
Some food for thought is available. I will return to the subject tomorrow. (F.R.)
Corrigendum: the three countries which did not sign the agreement and are therefore subject to the EU customs tariff are Gabon, Congo-Brazzaville and Nigeria (not Kenya as erroneously indicated on Saturday).