NEPAD
unwrapped
Will the African leaders who met in Abuja translate the NEPAD vision into reality?
Gamal Nkrumah searches for answers
African heads of state have converged on the Nigerian capital Abuja to assess the progress of the New African Partnership for Development (NEPAD), bandied as a blueprint for African economic survival. At the Sixth Summit of the Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee (HSGIC) of NEPAD, two issues dominated discussions: the impact of an imminent punitive strike by the United States on Iraq and the controversial African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) which permits African governments to critically evaluate and examine the good governance standards of fellow African governments.
Western governments insist that development assistance be conditionally dished out. Accordingly, only the African governments that apply stringent standards of good governance will receive aid. During the 1990s, aid to Africa fell by a third, from $17 billion at the start of the decade, to $12 billion today.
In return for Western development assistance, African governments pledged to run transparent governments and embark on a radical programme of democratising state institutions.
African states, however, are concerned that NEPAD will degenerate into an empty talking shop. Even though NEPAD is touted as an "African" plan, the plan's detractors warn that it is dangerously dependent on Western largesse. Moreover, Western powers are in a position to dictate terms and outline policy directives since those who pay the piper call the tune.
A critical bone of contention has been African leaders' reluctance to be critical of the government of President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. Western donor nations, led by the US and Britain, insist on penalising the Zimbabwean government for its land grab policy in which white-owned farm land has been forcibly returned to black African landless peasants. Western powers are also highly critical of Mugabe's government's human rights record. African governments, however, are most reluctant to condemn Zimbabwe.
The African leaders who met on Sunday in Abuja also attempted to work out the modalities of NEPAD. They agreed that tough action is needed to keep NEPAD on course. Good governance, human rights and democracy are pivotal elements in the NEPAD plan and there are grave concerns that some African leaders who do not run their countries democratically will reject the so-called "peer review" principle. One of the main criticisms levelled against the moribund Organisation of African Union (OAU) is that it did not permit interference in the domestic affairs of one member state by other member states. Under the African Union (AU), constructive criticism by fellow member states is encouraged.
In Abuja, Nigeria, South Africa, Algeria, Senegal, Ghana, Botswana, Uganda and Ethiopia signed the peer review mechanism. Ominously, many others declined.
Still, the tenor in Abuja was upbeat. NEPAD must deliver, African leaders and opinion-makers insist. "The problem is that there is a growing gap in the perceptions of NEPAD between African governments and non-governmental organisations," Yao Graham, director of the Accra, Ghana-based Third World Network (TWN), an international development advocacy group, told Al-Ahram Weekly.
"The lines of controversy around NEPAD have settled into a clear pattern: African and G-8 governments on one side, strongly defending NEPAD and campaigning hard for it, largely supported by foreign capital, with civil society organisations raising important critical queries," explained Graham.
The peer review mechanism is an issue that topped the agenda in Abuja. The politically contentious issue of APRM must be seen in the context of, "the insistence of a minimum of good governance. This is the least that African governments owe their people," Graham said. APRM, he added must not be seen as just a foreign funding conditionality otherwise it will only add to the crisis of legitimacy of African governments.
"African governments must find common cause with the people [in dealing with outside forces]," Graham said. He said that APRM, when viewed in the light of African governments and people working hand in hand, can become an "important tool of legitimation with the people".
The other problem identified by Graham is that little is actually known about NEPAD in the African media, by the population at large or even among policy-makers. "Legislatures in most countries struggled to understand what was going on," Graham said. "For example in February [British Prime Minister] Tony Blair sang a paean to NEPAD before a Ghanaian parliament, most of whose members had never seen the NEPAD document."
In spite of the widespread ignorance of the full facts concerning NEPAD, Western governments and international financial institutions as well as the United Nations continue to approve NEPAD. "Last March the UN Financing for Development Conference endorsed NEPAD, setting in motion a procession of endorsements by major international gatherings," Graham warned. "So we have the perverse and sadly all too familiar situation of African leaders being cheered on by foreign politicians in the face of the scepticism and even hostility of the local population."
NGOs in Africa are especially alarmed that the philosophical underpinnings of NEPAD are rooted in private sector-led growth strategies. At an important gathering of representatives of African social movements, trade unions, youth and women's organisations in July 2002 in South Africa the conclusion was that NEPAD was not acceptable and detrimental to African development. "Africa is not for sale," they angrily declared.
In particular, African NGOs are fearful of the rapidly accelerating rate of resource plunder in Africa today. Coupled with environmental degradation and the attendant social problems, resource plunder will ultimately lead to disaster, to environmental degradation, economic ruin and social collapse.
Afro-pessimists point to the review of development effectiveness in poverty alleviation. Africa accounts for less than one per cent of global trade, and prospects of increased access to Western markets remain dim.
Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo spoke optimistically about NEPAD's record. "Our joint resolve to uphold good government practices and democratic principles have greatly facilitated the return of constitutionality and the rule of law in some African countries, including Madagascar," Obasanjo told reporters in Abuja. "We have continued to enhance cooperation with our developed partners, especially regarding financial support and execution of development programmes," he added.
Obasanjo's Algerian, South African and Senegalese counterparts Abdel-Aziz Bouteflika, Thabo Mbeki and Abdoulaye Wade respectively, attended the Abuja summit, but overall attendance by heads of state and government was noticeably low with only seven heads of state and governments present.
Obasanjo, the chairman of the 15-member state Implementation Committee of Heads of State and Government (HISIC), stressed the strengthening of Africa's business climate and attracting more foreign investment. The implementation committee includes Algeria, Egypt, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa. Other leaders concurred with Obasanjo that a large financial stimulus is sorely needed to boost African economies.
The consensus among African leaders was that ending the civil wars in Africa would be a major aid to economic upliftment. The World Bank estimates that conflicts across Africa are knocking two per cent off Africa's economic growth rate annually. "Brain drain" and capital flight remain critical concerns. An estimated 47 per cent of savings by Africans are sent out of Africa by Africans themselves. The promotion of African exports and the removal of non-tariff barriers were deemed as essential to economic progress in Africa.
NEPAD is officially sanctioned and supported by the AU, which replaced the now defunct OAU. The AU's mechanism for conflict prevention and its declaration on good governance are in line with NEPAD's outlook. But, the all important African debt crisis barely got a mention in Abuja.
In Manila leftist Filipina women raise their fists in protest as they were showered with violet confetti on 8 March as they use International Women's Day to protest against the possible US-led attack in a march on the presidential palace (photo:AFP)
