Trade Negotiations Insights • Volume 8 • Number 2 • March 2009

Why EPA negotiations have slowed

The Central African perspective

by Platform of Central African Non-State Actors (PANEAC)

Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

A negotiating session on the Economic Partnership Agreements between the European Union and Central Africa has been underway in Libreville, Gabon since 2 February 2009. This meeting has provided both parties the opportunity to resolve points of disagreement that are delaying the signing of an EPA. To reiterate, the negotiating parties have always expressed their intention to make the EPA an instrument for development and strengthening of regional integration. In light of this, the agreement must be balanced so as to include both commercial and development aspects. On the commercial side, there are disagreements over the degree of liberalisation and the transition period for trade in both goods and services. In terms of development issues, disagreements remain on all the points under negotiation.

After four days of work in Libreville, negotiations have once again stalled for two main reasons:

First: the EU’s lack of flexibility on all issues under discussion. Despite calls for flexibility from current European Trade Commissioner Ashton, the European negotiators have not moved from their initial positions on any issues, whereas Central Africa has made numerous concessions.

The degree of liberalisation in trade in goods exemplifies this point; since March 2008 Central Africa, following a study carried out in all countries of the region, has moved from a position of market access liberalisation of 60% over a twenty year period to one of 71% liberalisation over twenty years, whereas the European Union has persisted with its unreasonable demand for 80% of trade in goods liberalisation within fifteen years. We should note that the European Union’s demand is not based on any WTO stipulations, as was confirmed by Pascal Lamy, WTO Director General.

Faced with continuing requests for flexibility from Central Africa’s negotiators, the European experts remain fixed in their position and are currently taking refuge in calls for a political solution to this issue. We consider it deplorable to rely on politicians to deal with what are essentially technical problems that need to be addressed using objective, coherent, and logical arguments.

Second: the European party has retreated on several points concerning development aspects of the EPA. According to a top official leading the European delegation at the Libreville meeting, “The European Commission’s mandate is to negotiate a trade agreement, not a cooperation for development agreement.” This statement is in flagrant contradiction to all statements made by both politicians and negotiators since the beginning of the negotiations and marks a reversal that will have a negative impact on any future EPA agreement.

Some further examples help to illustrate this situation. Since 2007, the two parties have been in agreement on a roadmap for strengthening capacities and developing Central African economies. This document, outlining the priority areas to be addressed in terms of capacity building, has been subject to a number of jointly agreed amendments but has been ignored by the European party; it has not been signed by European Commissioners and Ministers.

In addition, the two parties have adopted the principle that there should be compensation for the loss of tax revenue following the dismantling of tariff barriers as part of the EPA. However, we have observed a lack of willingness by the European party to consider the specific situation of each country within the region, whether least-developed (five), landlocked, in post-conflict situations, or without reliable data and statistics for calculating such losses, even though Central Africa has provided a simplified method to account for country specifics that covers the whole region.

Moreover, there has been a lack of coherence in statements by the European Commission’s Directorate General Trade and Directorate General Development regarding the budget for EPA financing. The promise to devote 75% of the European Development Fund to setting up the EPA has been dropped in the current planning of the Regional Indicative Programme now being negotiated.

Faced with this situation, the Platform of Central African Non-State Actors (PANEAC) feels it must express its grave concerns over the already fragile negotiating process, since the tendency towards regional integration has already been affected by Cameroon’s signing of a bilateral EPA. The methods used by the European party, including intimidation and recourse to political pressure, cast serious doubt on its desire to “re-establish trust” with Central Africa, and prejudice the possibility of a lasting agreement.

Notes
1. The above article is a press statement released by PANEAC on 5 February 2009 from Libreville, Gabon. It has been translated from French into English; otherwise it is published here with minimal modifications.

For more information contact: PANEAC CONGO: PREGESCO, (Jean Pierre NAKOUNTALA), Tel. 00 242 521 13 41/ APASH-CADTM BRAZZA, Rock NIANGA, Tel. 00 242 570 68 93 PANEAC – Cameroun: S/C ACDIC B.P: 30 989 Yaounde, Cameroun - Tel. 00 237 22 20 73 37 PANEAC – GABON: S/C EKAMA B.P: 459 Libreville, Gabon – Tel. 00 241 07 60 60 22 E-mail: paneac2007@yahoo.fr Coordination: Bernard NJONGA (acdic@acdic.net)/ Yvette NGWEVILO REKANGALT (ynr7828@yahoo.fr)