Dr Gerard McCann

Senior Lecturer

St Mary’s College

Queen’s University Belfast

THE LEGACY OF COLONIALISM AND THE EUROPEAN UNION

AIMS AND OUTCOMES• To understand the

relationship between the Member States and former colonies

• To look at the evolution of EU development policy

• To assess the pattern of change for Agreements since 1957

• To critically analyse the system of interaction between the EU and ACP states since

• To evaluate solutions and potentials for development policy

THE LEGACY

The political and economic relationship between the EU and developing countries has largely been informed by the historical ties between key states in the European Union and the developing world - particularly former colonies in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP). EU Development Policy has been shaped by these relationships.

DEVELOPMENT POLICY MARKERS

• Treaty of Rome 1958-63

• Yaoundé I 1964-69

• Yaoundé II 1969-75

• Lomé I 1975-80

• Lomé II 1980-85

• Lomé III 1985-90

• Lomé IV 1990-2000

• Cotonou 2000-2020

THE PRECEDENTS

• Article 110 of the Treaty of Rome stated that a central commercial aim of the Community was “to contribute, in the common interest, the harmonious development of world trade, the progressive abolition of restrictions on international trade, and the lowering of customs barriers”.

• By 1960, these new arrangements meant that 80 per cent of trade from the developing countries involved was with the six states of the European Community (EC), while 98 per cent of all aid contributions went to the ‘Convention of Association’ states - 18 African states, Madagascar and the EC.

THE SEMINAL PRINCIPLE OF PARTNERSHIP

• The 1968 Declaration by the Commission on ‘The Achievement of the Customs Union’, stated that: “Europe bears major international responsibilities… It is the leading importer of products from the countries of the third world. Today, in its present form, it already has major responsibilities to the developing countries – and these will be even more important tomorrow when Europe is a larger entity… it is Europe’s duty to organize cooperation and association with the other main groups in the world”.

THE LOMÉ CONVENTION AS A MODEL• The 1975 preamble to

the Lomé Convention crucially calls for: “… a new model for relations between developed and developing States, compatible with the aspirations of the international community towards a more just and more balanced economic order”.

EARLY SIGNS OF DISCONNECTION

• The Focke Report presented to the European Parliament in 1980 revealed the extent of the diverging policies at that stage. It stated that: “The structure of ACP-EEC trade reveals an acute imbalance… The rule of free trade is meaningless for countries which, at the present stage, because of their production structures, have practically nothing to export to the Community”.

FROM PARTNER TO COMPETITOR?

• Since the Single European Act (1986) and throughout the 1990s, the practice of protecting EC vested interests has been prioritised.

• This was reflected in the protectionist policies of EU states regarding the movement of people and products (particularly CAP) from developing countries to Europe.

• By 1995, when the review of Lomé IV was signed in Mauritius, the role of the EU in relation to ACP countries was one of benign competitor.

THE IMPACT OF IDEOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENT

• The introduction of priority market (neoliberal) policies across the globe has been disastrous for the least developed countries, and the reduction in aid commitments from the EU, from 0.33 per cent of donors’ GDP in 1988 to 0.23 per cent in 1998, has diminished the development process.

• Indeed, the ACP countries’ share of EU trade alone declined from 6.7 per cent in 1976 to 3 per cent in 1998, and the economic relationship also reached a point where 60 per cent of total exports from developing countries to the EU have been limited to only 10 commodities.

http://www.ecdpm.org/Web_ECDPM/Web/Content/Navigation.nsf/index.htm

THE COTONOU ARCHITECTURE• Article 19 of the Cotonou Agreement states that: “The central

objective of ACP-EC cooperation is poverty reduction and ultimately its eradication; sustainable development; and progressive integration of the ACP countries into the world economy” (Cotonou, 2000).

• The EC’s European Consensus on Development comments: “The Community development policy will have as its primary objective the eradication of poverty in the context of sustainable development, including the pursuit of the MDGs [Millennium Development Goals], as well as the promotion of democracy, good governance and respect for human rights” (EC, 2005a, para 42).

COTONOU’S SUBCLAUSES

• Cotonou states that: “Sustained economic growth, developing the private sector, increasing employment and improving access to productive resources shall all be part of this framework… Regional and sub-regional integration processes which foster the integration of the ACP countries into the world economy in terms of trade and private investment shall be encouraged and supported”.

• This is reiterated later on with the priority that: “Cooperation shall further support: a. the promotion of public-private sector dialogue and cooperation; b. the development of entrepreneurial skills and business culture; c. privatisation and enterprise reform”.

THE POLICY CHART

LisbonStrategy

acquis Communautaire (Lisbon Treaty)

BolkesteinDirective

EconomicPartnershipAgreements

CotonouPartnership

CommonAgricultural

Policy

EXTERNAL PRESSURES

• The ‘Washington Consensus’ on economic liberalisation, includes the central aspects of neo-liberal economic practice - fiscal discipline, a redirection of public expenditure priorities, interest rate liberalisation, attaining competitive exchange rates, trade liberalisation, liberalising inflows of foreign direct investment, privatisation of public assets, deregulation, and securing property rights.

• Security concerns – the Iraq War and international terrorism.

• Immigration – the inflow from former colonies.

FRUSTRATED POLICIES• Caritas Europa’s review and survey of changes to EU

Development policy in March 2007 noted that: “The EC has committed itself to coherence between the development objectives for its external assistance, and its other policies impacting developing countries. Reality shows a number of contradictions between aid and other policies, in particular trade policy or foreign policy… Civil society actors in several of the countries in our survey expressed their severe concerns regarding the incoherence between EU development and trade policies… EU economic interest mentioned in some countries (e.g. Cameroon) is the benefit to European companies” (Caritas, 2007, p.20).

• Crucially, there has been the shift of ACP trade administration from the offices of the Directorate General for Development to the Directorate General for Trade. This immediately changed the nature of Development Policy (Bretherton and Vogler, 2006, p.123; EC, 2005b, p.8).

THE LISBON TREATY AND DEVELOPMENT

• Article 3.5 of Lisbon introduces key development issues with the clause that, the EU: “…shall contribute to peace, security, the sustainable development of the Earth, solidarity and mutual respect among peoples, free and fair trade, eradication of poverty and the protection of human rights, in particular the rights of the child, as well as to the strict observance and the development of international law, including respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter”.

• Article 21.2 of the Treaty states that the EU will: “promote an international system based on stronger multilateral cooperation and good global governance”.

THE RAW BUDGET FOR DEVELOPMENT

• The current financial framework for the EU’s development cooperation programmes (2007-2013) total approximately €51 billion. This includes the financial resources available under: the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) (€ 16.9 billion); the European Neighbourhood Policy Instrument (ENPI) (€ 11.2 billion); and the European Development Fund (EDF) (€ 22.7 billion). (http://www.eurostep.org/wcm/dmdocuments/BP40_BudgetReview_080530.pdf)

• While the funding appears to be significant, it pales into insignificance when compared, for example, with the £600 billion that the British government provided in an emergency bailout to the banking sector; or the €360 billion the French government allocated to its banking sector in October 2008; or the €100 billion the Austrian government gave to its banks in emergency support; etc.

UNFULFILLED COMMITMENTS

• This lack of investment in development is reinforced by the fact that most EU states have failed to comply with their own international agreement to contribute 0.7% of Gross National Income to overseas aid. Indeed, in 2007 the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) noted that EU contributions had actually decreased from 0.41% to 0.38% and this is likely to go lower with the protectionism accompanying the recession.

• 2009, Annus horribilis for the developing world? Due to the crisis, 100 million more people fell in extreme poverty while 30 000 more children died in Sub-Saharan Africa. The average growth was divided by 4 in only 2 years. (EP 2005)

ALTERNATIVE FUTURES

Building a ‘common-purpose’ Development Policy within a EU strategy for globalisation would mean:

• An enhanced primary budget line for development policy, • A revision of the Lisbon Strategy to be pro-development, • Further aggressive CAP reform, • Integration of the Millennium Development Goals at operational level across EU

policy • And at the least (and as recommended by the Court of Auditors) a Development

Fund that would be appropriate to directly address global poverty.

However, confusion within the EU system, working under priorities driven by fears of economic recession, globalization and external competition, does not bode well for policy adaptation in the long term.

WEBSITES• EU Development Site http://www.eudevdays.eu/Public/Homepage.php?ID=518

http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/external/dev/acp/intro_en.htm

• One World NGO www.oneworld.org/ecdpm

• EC External Relations http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/

• ACP secretariat www.acpsec.org

• Development NGO www.twnside.org.sg/index

• Eur Centre for Development Policy Management http://www.ecdpm.org/

• Think-tank Notre Europe www.notre-europe.asso.fr

• Bond UK NGO www.bond.org.uk

• Centre for Economic Policy Research www.cepr.org

• Cotonou Treaty http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/cotonou

• European Parliament www.europarl.eu.int

• A weekly EU newsletter www.european-voice.com