South Africa did not back African efforts to block a new “round” of world trade negotiations
Evidence wa ka Ngobeni
South Africa led a Southern African Development Community (SADC) breakaway from the consensus of key African countries this week at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ministerial meeting in Doha, Qatar.
There are fears that the split between South Africa and many of its SADC partners on the one hand, and other African countries on the other, has compromised the continent’s unified bargaining position.
The original strategy of most African countries, along with much of the developing world, was to block a new WTO negotiations “round” until issues still unresolved after the 1986-1994 Uruguay round and perceived as essential to boost developing nations’ interests in the world trade system are addressed.
But on the eve of the WTO’s fourth ministerial meeting, held in Doha from November 9 to 13, the South African government embarked on a broad drive to get African countries to consider, after all, a new round of WTO trade negotiations.
The South African government managed to take the SADC along with it, but failed to reach consensus with other African countries, says the South African Institute for International Affairs.
South Africa argued for new broad-based negotiations that will liberalise rules governing investment, competition policy, government procurement, electronic commerce, the environment and labour, and will open domestic markets to foreign companies.
African countries outside the SADC believe that these issues should be broached only after their concerns about the existing WTO agreements reached during the Uruguay round are met by the developed countries.
They insisted that it was futile for developing countries, especially in Africa, to engage in a new round of negotiations while they have not seen the benefits of the Uruguay agreements, which they blame for imbalances in global trade. Specifically, they charge that the First World has not lived up to its promises to grant greater market access to agricultural and other produce from the developing world, and also to promote developing world access to medicines, for example. Africa is also concerned that it lacks the technical capacity to enter new agreements while it is still struggling to cope with obligations imposed on it by Uruguay.
When Doha closed on Wednesday, the efforts to block a new round had pretty much crumbled. Africa got a sop in the form of a promise to the developing world to help build capacity, but it was decided that a new round of negotiations should start after the next WTO ministerial meeting in two years’ time.
Critics were quick to charge that the majority of African countries will not be able to negotiate efficiently on the new issues when they emerge in two years as they lack technical and financial means in spite of the WTO assurances.
South Africa agrees that developed countries should address Africa’s concerns lack of implementation of the Uruguay agreements by developed countries but also insists that the now-approved round on new issues that aim to further liberalise global trade cannot simply be discarded.
Minister of Trade and Industry Alec Erwin, who chaired the WTO “rules” team this week, said in Doha: “Our starting point in South Africa is that these are not issues that can be avoided. We will have to address them. What is at issue is why, how and when they have to be addressed.”
African countries outside the SADC and specifically Nigeria insisted at the start of Doha that a new round should not take place, finding itself at loggerheads with South Africa and its SADC partners. Nigeria, one of South Africa’s main allies in Africa, repeated this during its presentation to the WTO this week.
Both South Africa and Nigeria were instrumental in the development of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, which promotes development, security, multilateral cooperation and the eradication of poverty in Africa.
The South African Institute for International Affairs warned this week that the disagreements between South Africa/SADC and countries outside Southern Africa on the trade agenda could have a negative effect on the strength of a mutual trust and a common “brotherhood” to advance African goals. This situation, says institute researcher Carin Voges, “might signify to the Africa group of countries that South Africa, a prominent leader of the continent, does not have their best interests at heart, thereby compromising the future of the African renaissance”.
For the past few years the South African government has modelled its objectives in line with the African renaissance. In the area of trade, Erwin has been leading a drive to promote trade and investment links with strategic African countries across the continent.
South Africa now has bilateral trade agreements with a number of African countries. Voges, who has been following WTO affairs closely for the past few years, says South Africa was faced with a difficult choice when determining its agenda for the WTO meeting.
She says the conflict of interest between South Africa/SADC and the West African countries including Nigeria on the trade agenda derives partly from the level of economic development between the parties.
For example, she says, “African countries refuse to negotiate on competition policy, which may well be a credible position if one takes into account that some do not even have domestic competition authorities. Thus they will have great difficulty in negotiating on competition policy. This argument can also be extended to the other new issues such as environment, investment and labour.”
On the other hand, Voges says, “South Africa is more competent to deal with new issues and is thus also more ‘prepared’ to take the next step towards a broad agenda.”