by Dirk
Messner, Niels Keijzer, Svea Koch and Julia Leininger.
The very
first sentence of the Joint Africa EU Strategy (JAES) that was adopted by Africa
and Europe in 2007 observes that “Africa
and Europe are bound together by history, culture, geography, a common future,
as well as by a community of values”. Such a high degree of convergence and
confirmed shared vision, as headlined by the JAES, would make it not more than
logical to join forces globally. This seems even more opportune given that
since the adoption of the JAES a new African country (South Sudan) and a new EU
member state (Croatia) adds to a total of 82 nation states– uniting over 40% of the United Nations'
membership.
The
upcoming Africa-EU Summit in April 2014 should thus not only be used to discuss
the future of EU-Africa relations from an inter-regional perspective, but
include a focus on how to act jointly in global governance fora and
negotiations. The eventual adoption of a post-2015 framework for global
development, for which the next stage in negotiations was launched at the UN
General Assembly last week, will mark a decisive turning point for both the EU
and Africa by agreeing on new sets of objectives for addressing global and
national development challenges.
The JAES
does recognise the importance of coordinating positions in international fora
dealing with issues key for African and European development. This recognition
however stands in stark contrast to a rather poor track record of coordination
between Africa and Europe during recent important international negotiations. This
poor track record stems from the fact that both, each for their own reasons,
find it difficult to operate as a ‘block’ in international fora, let alone to
operate and act together.
A key
example, and for Europe a rather defining moment, were the negotiations during
the 15th Conference of Parties (COP) in Copenhagen in 2009. On 16
December that year, the late Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi in his capacity
as leader of the African Delegation presented a compromise position reached with Europe in the presence of the Swedish President as chair
of the rotating EU Presidency and the President of the European Commission (EC).
This compromise position called for a lower amount of climate finance to Africa
than what was initially called for, and was welcomed by European leaders as
leading to a joint position on climate finance.
Sudan’s chief negotiator Lumumba Di-Aping, as the chair of the G77
group, was fast to accuse Zenawi of capitulating to the EU and argued that no
African nation would accept this as Africa’s position. This effectively meant
the end of the African Common Position
negotiation strategy.
Roughly two
years later, the EU’s position on climate change again won the support of the chair of the African group
of negotiators close to the conclusion of the 17th COP in Durban.
This time around the emphasis was less on finance, but on the recognition that
both Europe and Africa wanted to call for a legally binding agreement covering
all nations of the world. Although the outcome of the Durban agreement has
received a lukewarm reception, it does stand as a successful case where Africa
and Europe cooperated together. A key difference with Copenhagen was that in
this case both groups of countries, who together cannot unilaterally drive
global decision-making, invested more in coalition building with other nations and thus
together helped assemble a critical mass to put pressure on the remaining
reluctant G20 members that eventually conceded to what was agreed.
The
post-2015 framework for global development is too important to fail, both for
Europe and Africa and it is crucial that both sides draw the right lessons from
past experiences in order to use their joint weight in the negotiating process.
The Op-Ed by the EC President and AU
Commission chairperson published this April in several African and European
media reflects this priority: it recognises that the continents had to reinforce
global cooperation, while stating a priority for such an engagement towards the
adoption of the ‘post MDG development agenda’. Process-wise, the EU member
states have adopted their joint position in June this year, while on the African side
High-Level Panel member and Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf is presently
chairing the AU’s High-Level Committee on the post-2015 agenda. Moreover, in
its vision for "Africa 2063" the African Union re-emphasizes the
relevance of speaking with one African voice in global fora. Content wise, the
Op-Ed highlighted a shared challenge in promoting inclusive and sustainable
growth, which may lead endeavours to formulate a joint position.
The process
ahead is however highly complicated given the Inter-governmental Working Group
negotiating Sustainable Development Goals, the short timeline available for
negotiating the post-2015 framework following last week’s UNGA meeting, among
other key factors. While discussions will definitely focus on the extent to
which both continents positions are compatible, and will probably point out
that in essential areas this is not the case, the Durban experience shows that
Africa and Europe stand to benefit most from a ‘joint venture’ approach guided
by an overall concern that surpasses the difference in interests and
perspectives. The EU’s position recognises this by saying it prioritises a
continuing dialogue and ‘outreach’ with third countries, while the African
position prioritises identifying African priorities for the new agenda. The
challenge therefore is for Africa and Europe to seriously invest in a joint
endeavour based on headlines, in the spirit of the dialogue and partnership all
have committed to.
---------
Photo by Erik Cleveson Kristensen.
This blog post was written by the German Institute for Development (DIE).
The Post 2015 framework will be discussed at the upcoming European Think Tanks' conference: Looking Beyond 2013 Are EU-Africa Relations Still Fit for Purpose?
No comments:
Post a Comment