Re-inventing a troubled ACP
The ACP Group is troubled. This regional organisation is in distress, so to speak, and needs to be rescued. The unanimous voice at the recently held meeting of ACP Council of Ministers and its recently launched Eminent Persons Group is that this regional group of 79 countries should be re-invented.
At the centre of the trouble bedevilling the ACP is the EU. The relationship between the ACP and European Union (EU) is a master-servant relationship – one which reminds us of the North-South dichotomy of old – one that makes the poor South tied to the apron string of the North for sustenance. The EU is a giver – of support – of fund – of grant: coming through the European Development Fund (EDF) and the European Investment Bank (EIB), the European Union’s non-profit long-term lending institution established in 1958, the ACP countries are the receivers.
EU and the world poor
Hitherto, the EU development policy has been expressing the commitment of Europeans to solidarity with the world’s most deprived peoples. The EU and its Member States together constitute the principal source of Official Development Assistance (ODA) for the benefit of all the countries of the South. They account for almost half of all aid received by developing countries. The ECU2.5 billion or so made available every year to the countries of Southern hemisphere, thus giving the EU as such, considerable weight in its development action. The EU financial aid managed by the European Commission represents around 5 percent of the total ODA and 15 percent of that of the 12 Member States.
This financial aid is implemented via the European Development Fund (EDF), which receives direct, yearly contributions from EU Member States. As far as trade is concerned, the ACP countries benefit from a very generous regime, since almost all their exports have free access to the European market without the condition of a reciprocal arrangement.
Products exported and exemptions
With regard to the origin of products exported by ACP countries to the EU, the Lome Convention authorises exemptions from the basic “10 percent foreign components rule:” products imported from an ACP country, of which components up to 45 percent come from the EU or another ACP country are considered to be ACP products, and benefit from privileged access to the Single European Market. For some important products – sugar, bananas, rum and beef – special, preferential measures were adopted. For ACP countries whose exports heavily depend on these products, these measures can be particularly significant in financial terms.
ACP’s fear
Sadly, this is now old story. The EU is not likely to continue with its old order. The reason is clear: EU now has its own problem. Its economic crisis is lingering. It is bail-out after bail-out. Charity, for EU, should begin at home. The point came out clearly in Brussels, Belgium, at the ACP House on Georges Henri Street.
The ACP Group made the point that global re-alignments and major shifts in EU policy orientations have given rise to concerns of possible downgrading of the importance of the ACP-EU Partnership. The ACP Council of Ministers have therefore decided to re-invent the ACP Group to adjust with the current world realities that suggest the European Union, its partner may not continue its current romance with ACP when its current agreement lapses in 2020.
According to Mohammed Ibn Chambas, ACP secretary general, “… the Lisbon Treaty came into force in 2009. The Treaty seeks a major overhaul of the European system and far-reaching restructuring of its key institutions. What has been troubling for the ACP is the fact that the Treaty makes no express reference to the long standing partnership between the EU and the ACP.
“It is also unclear whether the European Development Fund (EDF) will come under the Commission’s budget and if the ACP countries can feel better entitled to a predictable source of development assistance as has been the case hitherto.”
He argued that global re-alignments and major shifts in EU policy orientations had given rise to concerns of possible downgrading of the importance of the ACP-EU Partnership, saying “the EU’s neighbourhoods focus with regard to Eastern Europe and North Africa; and its rapprochement with Latin America and the general thrust of its development policy re-orientation has led to considerable anxiety among ACP members.”
ACP’s option B
It is therefore gladdening that ACP has an option B: It is looking on to the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, the nations generally referred to as the BRICS, which it considers, offer a new window of opportunity. Mohamed Ibn Chambas said: “The ACP feels it can leverage on its numerical strength and moral authority to promote its collective interests, while building new alliances with the emerging economies of Asia and Latin America. A collective strategy to tap these opportunities has been part of the overall future orientation of the ACP.”
Thinking out of the box
Olusegun Obasanjo, head of the Eminent Persons Group (EMG), a group launched on the first day of the Brussels meeting to help reform ACP, said: “We need to think out of the box. We have to look at changes that have taken place and look at the future that is ahead of us. With the calibre of the people you have put together, I am confident that we will succeed in doing the job. Since you have called us eminent people we must act eminently.”
Former President of the Dominican Republic, Leonel Fernandez Reyna, said: “Our challenge is to re-invent ourselves, find a new identity, a new space, and fight for progress for our people and democratic excellence. The EPG has a lot of challenges to deal with. We are dealing with an imbalance world; our task is to fix a world that has a balance.”
The former President of Guyana Bharat Jagdeo, said: “We have a partner that is unwilling (meaning EU); we have a limited space to operate; and ACP is thinking diversely. Therefore, like President Olusegun Obasanjo said, the way out for us is to think out of the box. I see an attempt to tinker on edges – what we are doing is not radical. When we were negotiating the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), Ghana was opposed to it. EU sets a limit for us and some of us start toeing their line, saying ‘EU will not agree with this.’ That got me mad. We need to clarify work done by working group and define the future.”
Beyond this ACP’s move, the question must be asked: ‘Mist we continue to hang on to the EU?’ As it is now, according to this writer’s findings in Brussels, EU underwrites flight expenses of delegates, pays hotel expenses and many more. ACP’s office is based in Brussels, Belgium a European country, because EU’s headquarters is in Brussels – ostensibly so that ACP can have easy access to its financier! Why? Agreed EU needs to give back from where it has fed from these years. But must we depend on EU’s funding in perpetuity? Can ACP commence looking inwards?
Eminent Persons Group
EPG does not want to be caught short footed by the EU. The Group frowns at the EU non-committal role regarding its relations with ACP Group. The EPG met shortly after its inauguration in Brussels Monday, and decided to swing into action starting with engaging in a consultation process with member countries with a view to gathering inputs from them.
Such inputs, according to former President of the Dominican Republic, Leonel Fernandez Reyna, who is one of the Group’s two vice chairmen, “will be raw materials for work which will be submitted by December 2014.” The other vice president is Bharrat Jagdeo, former president of Guyana. The Group has about two years to complete its work.
The EPG chairman, Olusegun Obasanjo said if things had worked satisfactorily, there wouldn’t have been any need for ACP’s re-invention. “If EU in its relations with ACP since 1975 to date, ACP is still crawling, then there is need to reform ACP.’
Leonel Fernandez Reyna is irritated about EU’s ambivalence. He argued: “There no clarity from EU about its future position with the ACP. We cannot be caught short footed. We want our partnership broadened. Re-invention is about what will happen in the future and EU is unwilling to have commitments. On the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), we are concerned Europe did this to frustrate ACP. We are aware that the Caribbeans who have concluded signing of the Agreement have misgivings about it.”
SIAKA MOMOH, Industry Editor