Michael White and Liz McGregor
What should have been a triumphant valedictory tour for Nelson Mandela before he steps down as president of South Africa has been marred by European Union failure, under Tony Blair’s presidency, to deliver on open trade promises made when apartheid collapsed.
Mandela joined the EU heads of government for lunch in Cardiff after a breakfast on Monday with businesspeople and tea with the queen at Windsor, but there was disappointment in Cardiff that he was unable to seal his visit with the completion of a trade agreement between his country and the EU.
South African diplomats expressed dismay at what they see as EU intransigence in defence of domestic products like fruit and wine.
EU officials admit that countries like France, Spain and Portugal, whose farm produce competes with much that South Africa would like to export to Europe, have been making difficulties during the protracted negotiations.
But they insist that Mandela’s negotiators failed until recently to come up with a formula for reciprocal opening of South Africa’s long-protected markets, as required under the rules of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).
Downing Street’s representative said Blair would have liked to see more done “to take forward EU-South African trade relations, and that is no doubt something President Mandela himself will want to give voice to when he is here. We see that as a useful opportunity because his presence will concentrate minds on it.”
Mandela made an oblique reference to his disappointment over the trade deal before an audience of business people.
He expressed his gratitude to the British for funding his defence in the treason trial that put him in jail for 27 years. “I know how generous the British are,” he said.
But he reminded them of the R254-billion debt his government had inherited from the apartheid government; how the servicing of that debt swallowed the funds that could have fed and housed 20 000 homeless children “whose hopelessness and anxiety” haunted him.
At stake in the trade negotiations are key South African exports such as wine, cut flowers and citrus fruits. The South Africans argue that since their seasons are the opposite of Europe’s, they do not compete directly, although they pay the same tariffs as the United States.
The EU case hinges on “WTO compatibility”. That requires a reciprocal opening of trade to cover an average 90% of products on both sides. It aims to prevent local distortions which, in this instance, could hurt neighbouring African states.
The EU side is offering 95%, including the disputed products, but until this month Pretoria was seeking exemptions on 1 200 mainly manufactured products, reduced on June 10 and 11 to about 100. That puts it within the 85% range – meeting the 90% average. EU companies want to be able to compete for South Africa’s infrastructure contracts.
South Africa’s complaints amount to saying that European leaders made generous promises when Mandela took power and bask in his reflected glory. But they do not put their money where their mouths are.