Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung für die Freiheit - From Object to Subject. Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe’s External Relations [Druckversion]
From Object to Subject. Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe’s External Relations
A Joint International Conference in Berlin November 5-6th, 2007, organized by the Friedrich Naumann Stiftung (FNSt) and Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP)
The forthcoming European-African Summit in Lisbon December 8-9th 2007 - the first one since the Cairo Summit in 2000 – is proof that Africa is not excluded from the rest of the world. In fact, Africa is part and parcel of international politics and the world economy. Against this background this international conference “From Object to Subject. Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe’s External Relations” took place at an appropriate time and offered a unique opportunity for Africans, Europeans and Americans to critically discuss and review the difficult and sometimes delicate relationship between the European Union (EU), African Union (AU) and its Sub-Saharan member states.
Africa is back on track and on the move, indicated by the fact that the economic outlook in Africa is improving after a decade of growth of more than 5%. In Europe, in the US and in Asia, the big players of world politics are increasingly interested in African politics and its impact beyond the continent. The forthcoming European-African Summit in Lisbon December 8-9th 2007 - the first one since the Cairo Summit in 2000 – is proof that Africa is not excluded from the rest of the world. In fact, Africa is part and parcel of international politics and the world economy. Against this background this international conference “From Object to Subject. Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe’s External Relations” took place at an appropriate time and offered a unique opportunity for Africans, Europeans and Americans to critically discuss and review the difficult and sometimes delicate relationship between the European Union (EU), African Union (AU) and its Sub-Saharan member states. A wide range of politicians, businessmen, experts and scholars from Sub-Saharan Africa, the EU and the US were challenged to deal with four topics:
• African and European Relations: African Views • African and European Relations: European Views • Trade • Security The guiding questions concerning the first two topics focused on:
• How do European and African nations and political organisations perceive each other, their respective role in the world and their policy towards each other? • Is Europe/EU and Africa/AU seen as units or do their member states dominate the perception? • Is the dominant role of the EU and AU in the respective area widely accepted, and are they seen as legitimate of European and Africa interests? • Do Europe and Africa share major interests in international affairs? • Which policy areas are best suited for co-operation between Europe and Africa, and is there a congruence of policies?
The guiding questions concerning the third topic focused on: • What are the major trade challenges, and is trade a policy area which Europe and Africa share major interests? • What is the future of European-African Trade relations beyond Economic Partnership Agreements? • Will the significance of Europe as trading partner in Africa decline and that of Africa in European trade increase? • Will Europe pursue a policy towards Africa, which is dominated by the interest of getting access to strategic resources? • Will China be the preferred trading partner for Africa?
The guiding questions concerning the fourth topic focused on: • Which are the major security challenges, and do Europe and Africa share major interests as far as security issues are concerned? • Does an institutionalisation of European-African security co-operation make sense, and if yes, in which way? • Who are the most accepted security providers in Africa, and is the deployment of European troops in Africa to overcome security problems widely excepted by Europeans?
Mair, Gerhard, Georg Boomgaarden (Secretary of State, Foreign Office)
Wolfgang Gerhardt, chairman of FNSt, and Stefan Mair, director of Studies of SWP, welcomed all participants on behalf of the organisers and pointed out the fact that this international conference had been deliberately planned by taking into account the forthcoming summit in Lisbon, which is aiming at renewing and strengthening European-African relations. In addition, this joint conference was the first co-operation of the German think tank “Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik” and the German political foundation “Friedrich Naumann Stiftung FÜR DIE FREIHEIT”.
State Secretaty Boomgaarden speaks on African-European Summit in Lisbon, 8. /9. December, 2007
Boomgaarden
“The EU and Africa are about to embark for the first time on a really joint venture, namely the Joint EU-Africa Strategy and a first Action Plan”. This statement was made by State Secretary Georg Boomgaarden from the Foreign Office, when he gave the lead speech at an international conference “From Object to Subject. Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe’s External Relations”, jointly organized by Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung für die Freiheit and Stiftung für Wissenschaft und Politik. He outlined the new dimension of cooperation, which “…is that of a partnership amongst equals, ‘on an equal footing’, as the expression goes, trying to the extent possible to move away from the traditional donor-recipient to a more cooperative and business like relationship.”
African and European Views on African-European Relations
Seepe, Amanuel, Hecke
As far as the Africans views are concerned, Ambassador Hiruy Amanuel of the AU, in charge of IGAD Capacity Building Programme Against Terrorism, highlighted the fact that Africans and Europeans may speak of partnership. But what is real is that the relation between Europeans and Africans is an unequal relation between affluent people on the one hand, and people living in poverty on the other. And this condition marks all aspects of relations, and he quoted one European who described partnership in peacekeeping and conflict prevention in Africa in the following way: “America orders, Europe pays, Africa implements”. However, Hiruy Amanuel did not see any reason why Africa cannot benefit from the experiences of cooperation and integration that Europe had so remarkably accomplished. According to him, it would be hard to currently imagine Africa replicating the EU model taking into account the inadequate political, economic and infrastructural links. Nevertheless, even under these conditions, the EU model could be seen as a goal to work towards, to be achieved in stages, starting with cooperation at the regional and sub-regional level. Most African states are moving in this direction with a varying decree of success. But there can be no doubt that there will be no transformation by simply continuing with business as usual. However, as an important African voice, Hiruy Amanuel firmly believes that enlightened self interest will drive Europe closer to Africa and vice versa, for mutual benefit. But Africa has to get its house in order, and it is doing so, but only gradually. And he made a point, maintaining that “Africa does not have the luxury of time. Africa would need time to get its policies right and then to implement them with dogged determination, taking all the shortcuts available in the process”.
While Hiruy Amanuel reminded Africa to get its house in order, Cyril Obi, a Nigerian scholar in the Nordic Africa Institute in Uppsala, Sweden, challenged the African leadership by demanding that the African people must represent Africa. He argued that the African people deserve the support of the international community beyond having elections that only serve the elite, i.e. strengthening the critical constituencies among the African people, strengthening the information capacity and an economy policy that does not hurt the poor. In addition, there must be a democratic redistribution of wealth. According to Cyril Obi, the EU should have various political engagements, which focus on civil society, political parties and education, and the EU should pursue economic policies that support the people. China’s engagement in Africa is not the real issue to him, because the real challenges are democracy, development and empowerment of societies. And if Europe is willing to change its attitude and see Africa not just as a market and security area, then a real partnership can emerge.
Germany is a big player in European policy. But there is no distinct German policy towards Africa, as Denis Tull, a senior researcher of the SWP pointed out. Nevertheless, in general terms German interest in Africa has significantly increased over the last couple of years. This is in accordance with the broader parameters of German foreign policy, which has gained a more global outlook. Against this background, Africa has acquired a little more attention, namely energy, security, migration and environment. According to Denis Tull, the hyperbole about China’s growing involvement has also added to a renewed interest in Africa, and the German Chancellor Angela Merkel had been quite explicit, arguing that if the Chinese had a Sino-Africa summit, the EU should have one too with Africa. In fact, the EU has become a channel through which African issues make their way on the agenda in Germany, and Germany has to take a stance, whether it likes it or not. But it remains true that German policies towards Africa are firmly rooted in the multilateral framework of the EU as well as the UN. The prime example of this has been the EU military intervention in the DR Congo in late 2006, which was eventually led by Germany. This mission ushered in a heated and sometimes quite emotional debate at the German home front, and it focused on one question: does Germany have interest in the DR Congo? To many, the answer was simply, No! However, as Denis Tull pointed out, the European Union Force (EUFOR) has triggered the long overdue debate about Africa and German interests in Africa. But this has not led to a conclusive result yet, but from his point of view it is quite encouraging that discussions about Africa are no longer monopolized by those working in the development cooperation.
Within the EU, Britain is a very significant place as far as migrants from former colonies are concerned. This was highlighted by Alex Vines, Head of Africa Programme Chatham House in the UK. He outlined that Britain’s policy towards Africa has changed significantly during the Blair years. Despite the fact that some diplomatic missions had been closed in Africa (Swaziland, Lesotho, Cameroon), and only two had been opened (Liberia, Guinea), Africa has become a major issue in foreign and domestic politics, underlined by the long lasting diplomatic row with Zimbabwe. Currently, Britain is even the major donor in the DR Congo, Mozambique and Ethiopia. And this increasing interest is not connected to 9/11, but a result of the humanitarian intervention in Sierra Leone in 2001 and the growing political influence of Africans living in Britain, the vast majority in London. Some constituencies already rely on these voters, and several local councils are dominated by Africans. This is proof that many within the Africans Diaspora are on the move, lead by Nigerians. Almost all of them have a legal status. The Nigerians represent the biggest group and the most successful migrants from developing countries in terms of career and integration. They even successfully compete with migrants from the US. However, according to recent studies, close to one million Africans live in Britain, more than 50% illegally. And within the new hierarchy among migrants, the Somalis are at the lower end of the bottom half of society. The migrants however, often reflect the political situation in some parts of Africa, and more and more clashes within the Diaspora occur, causing problems that the state is not yet capable to solve. Nevertheless, in Alex Vines’ view the migrants significantly contribute to the growth of the national economy. At the same time, the remittances to Africa have an enormous impact on the life and well-being of Africans in Africa.
Although Zimbabwe did not feature high on the agenda at the conference in Berlin, the issue was nevertheless present, because it somehow overshadowed the forthcoming summit in Lisbon. Britain’s Prime Minister will definitely not take part in the Africa-EU summit, a decision that might have far-reaching implications for Britain’s policy towards Zimbabwe and the southern African sub-region and for the EU Africa policy at large. Whether Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe will show up in Lisbon remains to be seen. But he has been invited because the other major African and European leaders did not want to repeat the mistakes that caused the cancellation of the African-European summit in 2003. Even the organised political opposition in Zimbabwe wants Robert Mugabe to attend the summit in Lisbon, as Welshman Ncube, MP and Secretary-General of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), Zimbabwe, pointed out. But he put a lot of emphasis on the fact that the opposition expects the EU to speak with one voice on African-EU relations and on how to deal with Zimbabwe in the foreseeable future.
In political and media circles within Europe and the US it is widely believed that at the end China’s engagement in Africa has triggered the recent interest in Europe and the United States on African affairs and politics. Jennifer Cooke, Center for Strategic Studies and International Studies, Washington, did not agree with that opinion, rejecting it as an ill-defined fear. Instead, in her opinion, a more pragmatic analyst would accept China’s engagement in Africa as a healthy competition, saying that even China is interested in stability and development, at least in the long run. Even the US military presence in the Gulf of Guinea would only reflect a convergence of interests, since Africans are seriously concerned with illegal maritime fishing, arms trafficking, oil theft, just to mention some areas. And asked whether the US-Africa Command (AFRICOM) would increase tensions in the region, Jennifer Cooke maintained that there had been made so many mistakes in explaining what AFRICOM is all about, which raised all kinds of suspicion that it might be difficult to properly establish itself in an atmosphere of fear and ambiguity.
African and European Relations: Trade and Security
Heribert Dieter, senior research fellow of SWP, presented a diverse and complicated set-up as far as trade is concerned. In his opinion, Africa and Europe have diverging interests in trade, but both share an interest in a functioning multilateral regime. While Europe has been turning bilateral, especially towards Korea, India and potentially MERCOSUR, African countries depend on the WTO. Since there is only limited convergence of interests in trade, Europe’s importance as a trading partner will decline, i.e. China’s and India’s rise will almost automatically raise trade with Africa. For example, China brings Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), develops infrastructure and grants lucrative credit lines. He quoted the Angolan case, in which the Angolan leadership expected help from the West, as soon as the civil war came to an end. But the West only offered IMF conditionality, and China opened the first line of credit ($ 2.4 bn in 2005 and another $ 2 bn in 2006). The rise of China and India definitely increases options for African countries in trade and finance. But this development will also provide pressure on African economies. Therefore, according to Heribert Dieter, Africa must soon turn the continent into three or four regional Custom Unions, which could be merged into one by 2020.
Contributing to peace and reconciliation is at the very heart of South Africa’s foreign policy agenda, according to Minister George Henry Johannes from the South African Embassy in Berlin. He pointed out that European countries have an important contribution to make in the struggle for peace and democracy. And he quoted the German Chancellor Angela Merkel who, after the G8 summit in Heiligendamm, said “We can certainly not impose anything on Africa on the basis of our European experience”. However, a world divided between the rich and the poor zones of a metaphorical global village needs security policies, many of which are not easy to achieve. But a global partnership for development is impossible in the absence of a pact of mutual responsibility when the rich unilaterally demand the right to set the agenda and conditions for the implementation of commonly agreed programmes. The dominant cannot continue to be the decision makers on global forums. The skewed distribution of power in the world through political, economic, military, technological and social means must not be allowed to the disadvantage of the majority of the poor of the world.
Marina Schuster, Member of Parliament (Deutscher Bundestag) and member of the liberal party FDP, maintained that regardless of all the positive developments to be observed and the cooperation, which exists between the EU and the AU, Sub-Saharan Africa will continue to be scared by violent conflicts. Even from 2010 or 2012 onwards, the African Standby Force which is a major element of the African security architecture – will not be in a position to completely replace UN or EU missions. The establishment of a joint EU-AU Peace Facility Fund is one concrete project, already pointing in the right direction and making an important contribution to capacity building. However, in her opinion police missions such as EUPOL in the DR Congo are also an essential part of security policy. Unfortunately, institutional cooperation is currently being hindered by the fact that there are too many players involved on both sides and more coordination at top level is urgently needed.
Africa and Europe on the Way Forward to a Political Business Partnership? The past four or five decades might have been dominated by a love-hate relationship, which had caused widespread frustration and set backs on both sides. This was the view of Stefan Mair who pointed to emotional and sentimental projections, which did not contribute much to development and stability on the African continent. However, a partnership, which is defined by a more business-like approach, could be the way forward to a true partnership, in which both sides would benefit concerning security, trade, development and stability.
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)