The EU should deal in trade not aid
James Gubb, 17 October 2006
An enlightening publication released today by the Centre for European Reform (CER) heavily criticises the EU’s flailing attempts through the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) to advance democracy in the Middle East and North Africa. The ENP, through MEDA (for Mediterranean neighbours), offers greater integration into the EU’s single market and financial assistance in return for, amongst other things, political economic and legal reforms. Yet despite a budget of c.$1bn p.a. the report finds EU efforts to have been almost totally ineffective, and virtually silent on set-backs to the very things it is supposed to be offered in return for. There have been no EU communiqués on the slowing momentum of political reform in Jordan and Morocco, the EU only reluctantly offered fund to Lebanon after Syria left and the EU refuses to bat an eye-lid when moderate Islamist groups are cracked down upon.
There are two points to be made here. Firstly, the EU is distributing aid wrongly. Aid has been front-loaded and – much worse – in collusion with corrupt governments. The EU really should have learnt from fifty years of post-colonial aid that this strategy doesn’t work and will only serve to prop up the very undemocratic regimes it is attempting to reform. Aid should be offered to a State only in response to improvements and, where this isn’t forthcoming (and preferably anyway), to independent groups in civil society.
Secondly, if the EU really wants to make an impact it should deal in something the MEDA recipients really care about: trade and full access to the EU single market (a point touched upon, but probably not emphasised enough, by the CER paper). This is worth a whole lot more than one-off aid payments. Moreover, with access to a vast new market for its goods, enterprise should be encouraged, production diversified to more than just the State and with it increased demands for representation and reform. But this is the EU and free trade we are talking about, never mind.
the EU refuses to bat an eye-lid when moderate Islamist groups are cracked down upon.
What exactly is a moderate Islamist? An oxymoron surely.
The whole idea of aid needs to be looked at. In the Horn of Africa there is a nation that – because it is not recognised as a de facto state by any other nation – receives no bilateral aid or assistance from the various financial institutions.
Nevertheless it has made remarkable progress in the decade and a half since it became a nation. After suffering years of war and strife this former British colony has a government democratically elected in free and fair elections and a functioning parliament. It has rebuilt much of it’s infrastructure – roads, hospitals, modern airports – and cleared it’s land of mines. It has a relatively stable currency, a free press and is repatriating refugees.
Although secular, it is a nation where Islam is the dominant religion. It is geographically and strategically important having a large coastline close to the entrance to the red Sea and being situated right next door to the troubled Somalia – and it is keen to forge alliances with the west in general and the US in particular. Unfortunately, no one will recognise it as a de facto state – so it remains largely ignored. This is a shame as the strife in Somalia is now threatening this thriving nation.
Somaliland is a fantastic example of what Africans CAN do if they are not subject to the external interference of supranational institutions like the EU.
But it is time for the west to recognise Somaliland. Britain should take the lead and recognise it’s status as a nation now.