Brussels, 12/03/2008 (Agence Europe) - On the evening of Monday 10 March, Algeria and the EU met for their 3rd Association Council, where they drew up a positive balance sheet for their cooperation, despite the need to increase efforts to correct existing shortfalls. They highlighted the need for a more adapted cooperation framework and decisive support for reforms, a “strategic partnership” in energy, and a more equal dialogue on questions linked to the free movement of persons.
The Algerian government is clearly ill-at-ease in the more or less one-size fits all association agreements for Mediterranean countries, which have generally been adapted through “action plans”. Algeria refuses to commit itself to an approach it regards as incapable of bringing any “added value” at all, and the whole exercise is therefore on delicate ground. Algeria's foreign affairs minister, Mourad Medelci, believes that revising the agreement, as suggested in Commissioner Mandelson's declarations during his visit to the country a month ago, is a bad idea. Algerian officials explain that the country prefers to concentrate on implementation of the existing agreement. The Algerian example appears to demonstrate that even without the European neighbourhood policy (ENP), new components can be elaborated, such as the implementation of thematic groups and sub-committees. The question of “political dialogue” is already part of the association agreements and the question was fully discussed during the session (state of emergency, disappearances, civil society etc).
Although it has not signed an “action plan”, it is actually a kind of action plan that Algeria has agreed with Brussels but without describing it as such. The minister called for a swift enactment of the cooperation component in the “trade logic”, a “broader partnership” and “assistance for preparations for a post oil Algeria”. He affirmed: “We are interested in the promotion of renewable energies”. The country has agreed to base short and medium term cooperation with the EU on “strategic axes”: energy, exchange programmes, and access to new technology and the knowledge economy. The first concern is about obtaining pro-active support for WTO accession. Mr Medelci affirmed that the dossier was moving forward and said that he hoped that negotiations would be concluded by the end of the year.
Algiers is counting on the EU to “diversify its economy and exports”. His country is also “responding positively” to European demands for “regional negotiations on trade in services”. In the energy arena, Algiers is putting a lot of emphasis on the need to be involved in further cooperation and points out that the country “took the risk of joining with Europe by linking up through four gas pipelines in what constitutes a real umbilical cord”. In exchange, Algeria would like the EU's concrete support for creating a “North African electricity market, financed by the European Commission and guided by Algeria”. Another aim is to contain the terrorist threat and cooperate with the EU in this struggle in a way that is both “global and intelligent”. The minister affirmed that “we appreciate the EU being able to contribute” to drying up any ground terrorism may have benefited from, through its economic development contribution and by “again tightening the links” between the anti-terrorist services. The minister also affirmed that on the thorny question of visas, a solution ought to be found that is dignified and within a reasonable time limit. He said that there had been developments in the dossier but that these had been insufficient.
Asked about the Union for the Mediterranean (UFM), as proposed by France, the minister gave a mitigated response: this Union still has no “operational shape” and is an “open proposal”, which Algeria should support while being obliged to point out that “there is still no content to it”. However, he did say that he saw some added value in it, insofar as the UFM would introduce a global dimension, while the Barcelona process, was (in his point of view) a bilateral approach. According to APS, the Barcelona process is responsible for managing bilateral agreements, while the Union for the Mediterranean project will “give more weight to joint projects in several countries at once” on both sides of the Mediterranean. The UFM should also be able to mobilise resources from beyond the Community budget or EIB donations. The volume of project funding under the UFM will be greater and not necessarily through European funding but rather through private sector support, the banks, international finance sector and investment. The minister considers that “things will become clearer” by the time of the July summit. (F.B.)