Why Africa Rejected 'Divide & Rule' EU Trade Deal: During the Lisbon AU-EU Summit, the Majority of African Nations Refused to Sign the New Trade Agreements Put Forward by the EU. They Said the Deals Brought Them No New Benefits but Left Their Industries Threatened by European Imports. Neil Ford Explains Why Africa Took This Stance

By Ford, Neil | African Business, February 2008 | Go to article overview

Why Africa Rejected 'Divide & Rule' EU Trade Deal: During the Lisbon AU-EU Summit, the Majority of African Nations Refused to Sign the New Trade Agreements Put Forward by the EU. They Said the Deals Brought Them No New Benefits but Left Their Industries Threatened by European Imports. Neil Ford Explains Why Africa Took This Stance


Ford, Neil, African Business


Perhaps the most outstanding feature of the Africa-European Union summit in Lisbon in December was Africa's bold and united refusal to be browbeaten by the EU into accepting the status quo as sign of progress. (African Business, January 2008).

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The overriding object of the summit was to try to settle the rules of trade between Africa and Europe but little progress was made on this count. The failure to reach agreement could have important ramifications for both Africa and Europe. Africa could lose some export markets but Europe could find itself facing supply deficits of vital raw materials and also losing ground on its own exports to Africa.

It is difficult to grasp the significance of the Lisbon meeting and of the ongoing trade discussions without some understanding of exactly what is at stake.

Most European colonial powers enjoyed close trade ties with their African colonies; colonialism provided direct access to raw materials and also an, albeit limited, market for manufactured goods from the metropole. The creation of entire colonial economies built on a narrow export market obviously left most African states in a vulnerable position at independence.

This dependency was recognised by the colonial powers, which provided the newly independent states with preferential trade agreements that enabled their former colonies to maintain their existing export industries by allowing duty free export to the European country in question.

In addition, the former colonial power insisted on duty free access to the African market for some of its consumer goods and other processed output. Although this arrangement prevented severe economic dislocation at independence and helped to stabilise the international price of some commodities, it also entrenched the existing dependency on a narrow range of raw materials. Many also argued that it was of more benefit to Europe than to Africa.

The creation of the European Economic Community (EEC) and its gradual evolution into the EU forced member states to adopt common tariff structures. Following the accession of the biggest former African colonial power, the UK, to the EEC in 1973, an all-embracing preferential trade agreement was created between the EEC and almost all of the former colonial territories within the Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of nations. This trade agreement, which allowed all ACP states to export many goods duty free or with reduced tariffs, was finally signed as the Lome Convention in 1975.

It was periodically renewed until it was replaced by the Cotonou Agreement in 2002. This deal sought to encompass efforts to tackle poverty and promote sustainable development within the trade agreement.

New framework of trade

However, it was becoming increasingly clear that both Lome and Cotonou broke World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules on fair trade because they discriminated against non-ACP developing countries. Matters were eventually brought to a head by complaints from Latin American banana exporters that Caribbean producers had unfair access to the EU market. The WTO ruled in their favour and insisted that a new framework for trade between the ACP and EU be installed by the start of 2008.

Rather than replacing Cotonou with another deal that would encompass all ACP states, Brussels has decided to negotiate separate Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with all 78 ACP governments. The EU insists that this is necessary to abide by the WTO rules.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

However, during 2007 it became clear that many African states were not happy with the deals offered to them. Although the pace of negotiations speeded up during the final months of the year, just 14 states had agreed an EPA by the time of the Lisbon summit.

Each ACP country will retain preferential access to all EU member states for many of its key commodities. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Why Africa Rejected 'Divide & Rule' EU Trade Deal: During the Lisbon AU-EU Summit, the Majority of African Nations Refused to Sign the New Trade Agreements Put Forward by the EU. They Said the Deals Brought Them No New Benefits but Left Their Industries Threatened by European Imports. Neil Ford Explains Why Africa Took This Stance
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.