Africa Analysis | August 22, 2003
THE cynicism and anger, about the US and European Union, expressed by a number of African trade ministers in Mauritius in June (Africa Analysis , no.425), appears to have been justified. At the time, the ministers condemned what they saw as the hypocrisy of the EU and US, in particular, regarding free trade.
They pointed out that a series of deadlines for action to liberalise world trade had been set at the last World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations in Doha, in 2001. But several important deadlines have been missed and what liberalisation there has been has tended to benefit the developed countries.
The release in Geneva, last week, of the text of a draft EU-US framework agreement for the next round of WTO negotiations reveals that nothing has changed. Despite claims that the agreement opens the way to a fairer and more equitable trading regime, it does nothing of the sort.
Even Britain's leading business magazine, The Economist commented that the agreement was OEfull of fuzzy language, fussy jargon and fudged commitments'. It is the fudged commitments that are of particular concern to exporters of agricultural products.
Yet the draft is likely to come in for criticism from some EU member states for being too liberal, in terms of its vague promises, and may not be given a final stamp of EU approval.
Commenting on the draft in its present form, the British aid agency, ActionAid noted: OEWithout specific targets and timetables, the proposal is largely meaningless.'
And there are no specific targets or timetables, which caused the Cairns group which includes countries such as Australia, Brazil and Canada to describe the agreement as OEinadequate and vague'. India too has dismissed the deal, opening the way for a strong anti-subsidy united front at the WTO meeting in Cancun, Mexico, next month.
What has become very clear is that the targets set for 2005 at the last, and much hyped, Doha round will not be met. And Japan, which imposes some of the highest protective agricultural tariffs in the world, also made it clear last week that it had no intention of making any more than minimal adjustments to its regime.
There is, therefore, a strong prospect that Cancun may signal the death of the broad promises of Doha. This will open the way for further, and often overlapping, agreements by various trading partners which will complicate trade to the detriment, especially of the poorer producers in Africa.
GRIM NEWS FOR AFRICA
GENEVA. The figures released here last week, in the first World Trade Organisation (WTO) world trade report, made grim reading for Africa. Had they been more detailed, they would have been even grimmer.
According to the WTO, African exports grew 1% last year, after a calamitous 6% decline in 2001. A breakdown would have revealed that much of this value was in raw materials and a great deal of it from oil exporters and South Africa.
Imports also grew by 1% to $ 133bn or just 2% of the global total. Once again, a disproportionate amount of this went to a few countries, led by the continent's biggest economy, South Africa.
As the WTO reports admits, South Africa was the only economy on the continent to match the 2.5% growth in global trade. But this was at a heavy social cost in terms of on-going job losses in an environment with no social welfare net.Africa Analysis:
