Africa says no ? and means it

By Ignacio Ramonet

Translated by Barbara Wilson

The unimaginable has happened, to the displeasure of arrogant Europe.
Africa, thought to be so poor that it would agree to anything, has said
no in rebellious pride. No to the straitjacket of the Economic
Partnership Agreements (EPAs), no to the complete liberalisation of
trade, no to the latest manifestations of the colonial pact.

It happened in December at the second EU-Africa summit in Lisbon, where the
main objective was to force the African countries to sign new trade
agreements by 31 December 2007 in accordance with the Cotonou Convention of
2000 winding up the 1975 Lom? accords. Under these, goods from former
colonies in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific are imported into the
European Union more or less duty-free, except for products such as sugar,
meat and bananas that are a problem for European producers. The World Trade
Organisation has insisted that these preferential arrangements be dismantled
or replaced by trade agreements based on reciprocity, claiming that this is
the only way African countries can continue to enjoy different treatment.
The EU opted for completely free trade in the guise of EPAs. So the 27 were
asking African, Caribbean and Pacific countries to allow EU goods and
services to enter their markets duty-free (1).

The president of Senegal, Abdoulaye Wade, denounced these strong-arm
tactics, refused to sign and stormed out. South Africa?s Thabo Mbeki
immediately supported his stand and Namibia also decided not to sign
(bravely, since an increase in EU customs duties would make it impossible
for Namibia to export or continue to produce beef). Even French president
Nicolas Sarkozy, who made unfortunate remarks at Dakar in July 2007 (2),
supported the countries that were most strongly opposed to these agreements,
saying he was in favour of globalisation but not the despoliation of
countries that had nothing left (3).

The EPAs aroused wide public concern. Social movements and trade union
organisations south of the Sahara mobilised against them. And the revolt
against them bore fruit: the summit ended in failure. The president of the
European Commission, Jos? Manuel Barroso, was forced to back down and accept
the African countries? call for further discussions. He has promised to
resume negotiations in February.

This crucial victory is another sign that things are improving for Africa.
In the past few years, the bloodiest conflicts have been settled, leaving
only Darfur, Somalia and East Congo. Democratic progress has been
consolidated and local economies prosper under the guidance of a new
generation of leaders, despite social inequalities.

Africa has another asset in the form of massive Chinese investments.
China will overtake the EU as one of the continent?s principal
suppliers and could beat the United States to become its most important
client by 2010. The time when Europe could impose disastrous structural
adjustment programmes is long gone. Africa has had enough.

End Notes

(1) The Caribbean countries agreed to initial an EPA with the EU on 16
December 2007.

(2) In his speech at the University of Dakar on 26 July 2007 Sarkozy said
the tragedy of Africa was that Africans had not really entered history and
were not eager to embrace the future. See Anne-C?cile Robert, ?Fran?afrique
Sarkozy-style?, Le Monde diplomatique, English edition, September 2007.

(3) Le Monde, Paris, 15 December 2007.

=//=

@Black Lion

Sorry, just gonna cut and paste a bit of a response I made in your Zim thread. It's relevant though.

I’m not sure about the long term reality on the ground in some of these African countries which appeared to defy Europe especially on signing new trade deals. When I saw the coverage I thought, BLAM, but then lately I’ve been hearing things like I think it was Kenya which signed one of these hated EPA’s and Ghana (I think). I wonder if there will be a domino effect of other countries quietly signing up to continued EU trade domination. China cannot replace Europe overnight, can it?