Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Front Matter
 Back Matter
 Back Cover

Courier (English)
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00095067/00017
 Material Information
Title: Courier (English)
Physical Description: Serial
Language: English
Publisher: Hegel Goutier
Place of Publication: Brussels, Belgium
Publication Date: 03-2008
Copyright Date: 2008
Genre: serial   ( sobekcm )
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UF00095067:00017


This item has the following downloads:

TheCourier-2008-X01 ( PDF )

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    Front Matter
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
    Back Matter
        Page 29
    Back Cover
        Page 30
Full Text




.." i Mi





Table of contents


Development and relations with the ACP States:
Europe in action for 50 years

EU's 50th birthday:
Congratulations from the ACP

The need for Cotonou

Unique in the world:
50 years of north-south cooperation
The foundation of the ACP group
ACP-EU Cooperation: Milestone events

The institutions of ACP-EU cooperation
Non-State actors -bigger players in Cotonou
An ACP Civil Society Forum on track
for political recognition

Success stories

Science and technology:
Cooperation on the road to emancipation
S Trade protocols and EPAs

EPAs: Trade for regional growth
and prosperity
WTO dialogue
10 The future of ACP-EU cooperation
11 Country strategy papers launch 10th edition
of development budget

The ACP-EU Agreements




Editorial Committee
Sir John Kaputin, Secretary General
Secretariat of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States

Mr Stefano Manservisi, Director General of DG Development
European Commission

Editorial staff
Director and Editor-in-chief
Hegel Goutier

Franois Misser (Deputy Editor-in-chief),
Debra Percival

Editorial Assistant and Production
Joshua Massarenti

Contributed in this issue
Marie-Martine Buckens

Public Relations and Artistic coordination
Public Relations
Andrea Marchesini Reggiani (Public Relations Manager and Responsible for
NGOs' and experts' network)
Joan Ruiz Valero (Responsible for Networking with EU and National Institutions)

Artistic Coordination
Sandra Federici



Graphic Conception, Layout
Orazio Metello Orsini

Contract Manager
Claudia Rechten
Tracey D'Afters

Design byArketipa

The Courier
45, Rue de Trves
1040 Brussels
Belgium (EU)
Tel: +32 2 2374392
Fax : +32 2 2801406

Published every two months in English, French, Spanish and Portuguese

For information on subscription,
go to our website www.acp-eucourier.info or contact info@acp-eucourier.info

Publisher responsible
Hegel Goutier
Gopa-Cartermill Grand Angle Lai-momo
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not represent the official view of the EC
nor of the ACP countries..
The consortium and the editorial staff decline ail responsibility for the articles written by exter-
nal contributors.

Our privileged

partner, the


C cultural centre promoting artists
from countries in Europe,
Africa, the Caribbean and the
Pacific, and cultural exchanges
between communities through per-
formance arts, music, cinema, to
the holding conferences. It is a
meeting place for Belgians, immi-
grants of diverse origins and
European officials.

Espace Senghor
Centre cultural d'Etterbeek
Brussels, Belgium

The satirical vignettes and illustra-
tions presented in this issue (P. 3, 9,
18, 25, 26 and 27) where realized by
European and African cartoonists that
have been invited to represent the
European Union's Charter of
Fundamental Rights in the project
Manifesta! (www.manifestaproject.eu),
realized by Africa e Mediterraneo asso-


* Bernard Petit

Development and relations with the RCP States:

Europe in action

for 50 gears

n addition to being an area of solidarity
Siihi, ,ii, ii borders (i.e. regarding
regional and social support, cohesion poli-
cy), the European Union is leading the way
in promoting international solidarity, particular-
ly in the case of the African, Caribbean and
Pacific (ACP) States.

This cooperation policy with the poorest coun-
tries of the world was launched 50 years ago at
a time when Eii Ipc' !,iiiu.I.i,. otherss were
,Iliilil. i Ih,11. 'u'iii i n i. ii1- ti, c ini. d prosperity
ll ..c l l ..

; -^^

millions of people have benefited from this
development cooperation policy and its
schemes to, for example, combat hunger, pro-
vide access to water, and build schools and hos-
pitals. All of these initiatives are a reflection of
the values that are the essence of the European
enterprise: solidarity, respect for human rights
and the rule of law.

After 50 years, now is the time to make an
assessment, draw lessons and look towards
the future.

The assessment is that millions of lives have
been saved, people are living in a more digni-
fied way and ,."i, inic ..i developing, prima-
]il,. ih.iiil., to Europe. The EU is the world's
leading aid donor and the .,iiiiik operator
offering the widest market access to poor coun-
tries. However, this has not been enough to
eliminate poverty in the world. Poverty is the
scourge of the 21st century.

The lessons are many -
and have led to rela- '
tions with the ACP -
States being recast in the

L '
eq &-.1- _


light of the partnership's key principle. Signed
in the year 2000, the Cotonou Agreement is
based upon this idea, consolidated by the adop-
tion of the European Consensus on
Development which was adopted in 2005. This
Consensus meant that a European vision (of
Member States and the European Commission)
was defined, based on shared values, joint goals
and principles, and greatly increased resources.

The keys for development are to be found in an
array of policies focused on governance,
accountability and the adoption of an effective
aid system, sector-specific strategies and trade.
The key component of development is good
goverance and the ACP States can count on
: !ii Eii' l..pei.i Commission support and further
;i.I ,iicii. i, c i.. cicourage them to commit to
iIir .i.ii!i..i. l (; iod goverance is of funda-
iic.i i.i !InpI i i.iiic the States need to guarantee
each cii !lil.n n ii.i! access to courts, adminis-
tration, health, c.iiil .ii i .in.d the opportunity
ti ciii j. fundamental f!ccd .l.ii

The way forward for the development
process will be in our ability to take on
board all the major problems in the same
spirit: globalisation, climate change,
energy access, migration management
- and a knowledge-based society.

The European Commission believes
that development is dependent upon a
dialogue between partners in a bid to
i icet all the challenges of a !l Ih. i .c.I world. If
ihii problems of poor countries ;ie 1, ci !, I.cd
i d.lay, the problems of security, health and the
e. onomy will be intensified tomorrow because
.i!! regions ofthe world are now interdependent.

This is Europe's message for the future: taking
l% int action with its partners to ensure develop-
ment in the interest of all.
' Deputy Director General, European Commission,
fi-, DEV M




* Jacques Obia


Congratulations from the flCP

On behalf of the ACP States, I take
this opportunity to congratulate
the European Union (EU) on its
50th anniversary as a political
and economic entity. Since the Treaty of
Rome was signed on 25 March 1957, the EU
-the most successful regional integration
process ever attempted has become a major
player in world politics and an indispensable
development partner of many developing

National interests do drive the policy initia-
tives of individual countries. However, the
success and endurance of the EU has shown
that both national and collective interests in
an integrative setting need not be mutually
exclusive. Therein lies a characteristic of the
EU which demonstrates that unity in diversi-
ty is possible. This is an invaluable lesson for
the 79-member ACP Group, given its size
and far-flung geographical locations around
the world.

The European Union has maintained its com-
mitments to the ACP States. This is remark-
able considering the challenges that it has to
face as it expands its bloc boundaries, con-
fronts new trading arrangements at home and
abroad, and attempts to cope with emerging
s.. .. p.l. .il challenges in a globalizing
world. The 10th European Development
Fund i! one of the latest illustrations of the
EU's willingness to sustain development
endeavours for the ACP States.

This is in full compliance with one of the
goals of the ACP Group which is to ensure
the realisation of the objectives of the ACP-
EC Partnership Agreements, and in particu-
lar, aim for the eradication of poverty, sus-
tainable development, and the smooth and
gradual integration of the ACP States into the
world economy.

Jacques Obia.

The ACP Group agrees that the Economic
Partnership Agreements can be effective and
efficient tools to achieve this objective, espe-
cially if they were truly development-oriented.
To do so needs a strong and permanent political
impetus. The ACP Group is confident that this
underlying political commitment is shared by
both the ACP and the EU, and will continue to
be the main framework to steady our rich and
dynamic partnership.

Once more, a happy 50th birthday to the
European Union!

* Dean of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)
Committee of Ambassadors and Ambassador of the
Republic of Congo. M

Page 2
Bernard Petit. EC Photo Library
25 March 1957: Signing of the Treaty of Rome:
Paul-Henri Spaak, Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs
(on the left); Jean-Charles Snoy et d'Oppuers, Head of
the Belgian Delegation at the Inter-Governmental
Conference (on the right). EC Photo Library
The Treaty of Rome. EC Photo Library



The need for

his special issue of The Courier celebrates
the 50'h birthday of the European Union
(EU). The EU embodies the dreams of
peace and improved standards of living for
people who have, over time, paid a heavy price for the
disunity of their countries, not only in Europe but
throughout the world. For so many people and coun-
tries alike, it has become a model of hope. This is
what Jacques Delors probably meant when he spoke
of "the need for Europe".

Europe's development policy is engrained in the EU
and incorporated into its founding act, the Treaty of
Rome. The novel character of this policy, namely the
contractual nature of its aid to what was to become the
African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group, was
already etched into the Yaound Convention, the fore-
runner to Lom and Cotonou.

As with negotiations on other agreements, those on the
current Cotonou Agreement were tough. Since coming
into being, Cotonou's newest aspect, the gradual imple-
mentation of the Economic Partnership Agreements
(EPAs), which implies a shift from a relationship of aid
to one of trade partners, has caused feelings to run high.
EPAs, which came into force on 1 January 2008 for a
number of ACP countries, are seen by some as diluting
the altruistic nature of ACP-EU relations that could
weakened, in tum, lead to the splitting up of the
ACP Group into disparate, isolated regions.

It is not the first time that innovations in the Lom-
Cotonou Conventions have stirred the prophets of
doom. There was the time when political dialogue
incorporated democratic progress into cooperation.
Scepticism also occurred over the considerable oppor-
tunities given to non-state actors in cooperation, civil
society and the private sector.

A few years on, those who were initially the most nerv-
ous about these features of cooperation now see them as
having made progress by contributing to positive dem-
ocratic developments in ACP countries. Several crises
have been handled skilfully, such as the recent coup
d'tat in Fiji and a short time ago, the unrest in Cte
d'Ivoire. The entry of Cuba into the ACP Group and the
situation in Zimbabwe are also cases in point.

An increasing number of the world's developing coun-
tries aspire to having the Lom-Cotonou type of model
of relations with their wealthier partners.

The need for Europe is well demonstrated; the need for
the ACP-EU partnership cannot be denied, if only for
the commitment to its founding principle: equality
between donor and recipient. It provides a guarantee for
the future.

Hegel Goutier

A group of Togolese peo-
ple engrossed in the
event of the day: the
EEC-ACP Convention
signed at Lom in
February 1975.
EC Photo Libraiy


mNi Rm 1




HiStory 50 Years of Cooperation

L~ ourrier


The rethink brought forward a pragmatic solu-
tion. The 'Association' would continue on a
provisional basis with amendments to be made
in accordance with the status of newly inde-
pendent African States. Each State could
choose whether to remain a member. In the
end, just one "Guinea-Conakry" made the
decision to leave although it would later retum
in 1975 to sign the 1st Lom Convention.

In 1963, negotiations between 18 African
States and the six European countries resulted
in the signing of the Yaound Convention
between the European Communities and the
'Associated African States and Madagascar'
for a five-year period (1964-1969).

At first it was all about trade. The Yaound
Convention was essentially conceded with
free trade areas and under its umbrella
European products received preferential treat-
ment on the markets of the associated African
countries and vice versa. This free trade agree-
ment was also backed up by a financial assis-
tance package -the 2nd and 3rd EDFs for
Yaound I and Yaound II. The 2nd Yaound
Convention (1971-1976) was signed in 1969.

A collection of covers of The ACP-EU Courier from
Lom I to Lom V. EC Photo Libraiy
The negotiations that were opened between the European
Economic Community and the African countries were to
prove a unique experience. D EC Photo Library

> The birth of the HCP Group:
a genuine political choice

As soon as Yaound I was signed, the newly
independent English-speaking countries voiced
a strong dislike to a convention they saw as
'shaped' to preserving links between France and
its former territories. Their concerns were
shared by EEC members such as Germany and
the Netherlands who, since the signing of the
Treaty of Rome, had been inclined towards a
development policy with a broad spectrum.

To bring about these changes, a special bilater-
al agreement was signed with Nigeria in 1969
but was never ratified due to the civil war in
Biafra. Another agreement, separate from the
Yaound Convention, the Arusha (trade)
Agreement, was signed in 1969 with three
East African countries -Kenya, Uganda and
Tanzania. This agreement, implemented on 1
January 1971, at the same time as the Yaound
II Convention and for the same period of time,
brought these three countries into the conven-
tion. Mauritius joined the Yaound II
Convention at a later stage in 1972.


50 Years of Cooperation

LEOPU& CCiwrty

The Courier
i hi i ~ s-* r tm jd |Ii i rrrrlw NF

However, by the beginning of the 1970s
Europe's development policy was still at a
crossroads, with questions being raised about
the direction to take, highlighting cooperation
with Africa and openings towards other
regions. A memorandum of the European
Commission put forward the options.

In January 1973, the United Kingdom (plus
Ireland and Denmark) joined the European
Community. This membership was to put
everything in a new light. One of the protocols
of the Act of Accession opened the door to an

extension of European development policy to
an array of Commonwealth countries. These
were countries not just in Africa, but in the
Caribbean and the Pacific too.

As ofAugust 1973,twenty-one Commonwealth
nations were invited to negotiate an associa-
tion or trade agreement with the European
Community that would possibly replace the
Yaound Convention. All the independent
nations of sub-Saharan Africa, except South
Africa, were present at the negotiating table.
They also included the non-Commonwealth

countries of Ethiopia, Sudan, Liberia,
Equatorial Guinea and Guinea-Bissau.

The negotiations that were opened between
the European Community and this group of
around 45 countries were to prove a unique
experience. All these newly independent
countries were used to meeting within large
frameworks such as the UN or the
Organisation of African Unity (OAU), where
the only matters discussed were political.
Now, however, they had to agree on questions
very close to everyday realities on the benefits
of an agreement with the European Economic
Community (EEC). Not surprisingly, there
were many differences of opinion: between
French and English speakers, between large
and small countries, between geographical
regions. The sheer size of Nigeria, for exam-
ple, seen even then as a future oil giant, was a
concern for some.

The negotiations began at the end of July 1973
with a deadline set on the expiry of Yaound II
at the end of January 1975. The Lom
Agreement was signed immediately after the
deadline at the beginning of February 1975 by
9 EEC and 46 African, Caribbean and Pacific
(ACP) States.

More than developing relations with their
European partners, it was relations between
each other that initially mobilised the African,


SLe Courrier




HiStory 50 Years of Cooperation

.llh 1ihll,- ,,I ih,- ,llhIl,- I l.,,h ,-h l1i ,,Il.1 I_ .i 1 I
hmi il,.~i ,li ,l l,, I: ,~- .iII-iii ,,I L iii,- i,,,,ll
Ihii ll 1 ilil|I h l -1 II i,, I I ,,

Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. Third-
world thinking bound them together and
forged their common interests, and they sur-
prised the Europeans by announcing in the
spring of 1974, through their spokesman
Babacar Ba (cited by Tom Glaser in the special
edition of The Courier, March-April 1990),
with regard to the Lom IV Convention: "You
have before you not three groups expressing
harmonised positions with one voice, but a
single group of ACP countries which want to
recognize their common destiny and the
unshakeable desire to achieve positive results
at these negotiations."

This is how the ACP Group was born and its
constitution was finalised with the ratification
of the Georgetown Agreement of 6 June 1975,
just a few months after the signing of Lom 1
on 28 February 1975 by 44 ACP countries.
These States had made a genuine political
choice of their own, contrary to the frequently
held belief that it was a decision taken under
outside pressure.

> Lom: a new kind of partnership?

Lom I (1975-1980) retained the strong
points of Yaound, especially its character,
including the contractual nature of aid and an
additional number of provisions. This was
obvious at the political level with the affirma-
tion of the sovereignty of each State and
respect for its choices. For example, during the
Cold War period, Europe maintained privi-

leged relations with both the Soviet Union and
US-aligned countries.
At the commercial level, Lom awarded the
ACP countries preferential and non-reciprocal
trade terms, protocols on selected products
(e.g. sugar, bananas and beef) and also guaran-
teed the ACP countries higher prices than
those on world markets. A system of compen-
sation for trade deficits brought about by price
fluctuations (Stabex) also provided a guaran-
tee for the ACP producers (see p.23). All this
was seen as a commitment by Europe to the
creation of a fairer world economic order.

At the sectoral level, the principal priority was
agricultural infrastructure, while at the institu-
tional level, Lom moved forward by creating
common institutions between donor countries
and recipient countries: the EU-ACP Council of
Ministers, the CDI (Centre for Development of
Industry), later the CDE (Centre for the
Development of Enterprises), and the CTA
(Technical Centre for Agricultural Cooperation).

The Lom II Convention (1980-1985) signed
by 58 ACP countries in 1979 was very much a
continuation of what had gone before. The sole
major innovation was Sysmin, a mechanism for
minerals that resembled Stabex and made it pos-
sible to help ACP countries maintain their pro-
duction capacities or diversify their mining sec-
tor economies.

Then in 1985 with Lom III (1985-1990),
cooperation started to be viewed in a different

light. A feeling of 'aid fatigue' began to sur-
face and the optimism of the 1960s and 1970s
on the future of former colonies had long
since evaporated. Administrative chaos in
some countries and the teething problems of
fledgling democracies caused donors to lose
their enthusiasm. At the same time, the citi-
zens of the richer nations began to sense the
end of the post-war boom and demanded
rather less generosity from their governments
towards the developing world.

The first warning shot that all was not well
after the signing of Lom III was the introduc-
tion of a debate on policies that rendered
negotiations on the allocation of resources
more strained than before. Even so, Lom III
recognized another emerging trend with a ref-
erence to 'the importance of human dignity',
although the expression 'human rights' was
still not included in the text. But a corner had
been turned and this was the first blow dealt
to the up-to-now sacrosanct neutrality of the
agreement, where it was customary to turn a
blind eye to the political aberrations taking
place in ACP countries.

> In praise of rigour

Lom IV (1990-2000) was an even more
important tuming point. The fall of the Berlin
Wall changed the geopolitical map overnight
and Europe was looking at reunification.
Also, the good times looked like they were
over as two oil crises in a row shook the


50 Years of Cooperation

Michel Cambon, Untitled, 2007, Manifesta! Africae Mediterraneo
Cover of an ACP-EU document about the Cotonou
Agreement signed the 23 June 2000.

world's economies and the populations of
wealthy countries had a new concern: the
erosion of their material security. Moreover,
it was becoming increasingly clear that aid
had not greatly improved the development of
certain countries, especially in Africa. Worse
than that, many of them had actually become
poorer. On the eve of the Lom IV negotia-
tions these worries and concerns were all too
clear in Europe.

The negotiators of the 12 European Member
States and 68 ACP countries could not ignore
these new realities. Negotiations were diffi-
cult but the final agreement included a chap-
ter on human rights. From now on, human
rights would be a fundamental clause in rela-
tions between the two sides, with the conse-
quence of suspended cooperation for any
country that violated them.

At the same time, control over the use of funds
became ever stricter. That was the stick. The
carrot was that the convention would be valid
for double the period, a total of 10 years, with
the aim of providing a better continuity of
development programmes. There was also
support for countries needing to make painful
structural adjustments, as well as for the diver-
sification of ACP economies, their regional
cooperation projects and the promotion of
their private sectors.

The mid-term review of the convention was
a lot more extensive than planned, for exam-

ple giving greater priority to the political

> Cotonou [2000-2020):
transition leading to completion
of the process

Cotonou gave a bigger role to civil society and
the private sector (which were to be involved as
a new set of cooperative players) and refined
development strategies by awarding priority to
the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). It
also prioritised regional integration of the ACP
countries and brought in the idea of flexibility
enabling additional resources to be granted to
countries that use their funds most efficiently.
Another pillar of the convention was an exten-
sion of political dialogue to include consolida-
tion of peace and conflict resolution as well as
conflict prevention.

The revision of the Cotonou Agreement in 2005
brought the opportunity for political dialogue
between partners.

The EUFOR mission to support the Blue
Helmets in the Democratic Republic of Congo
in 2006 and support for the African Union (AU)
mission in Darfur, both authorised by the ACP
and using available European Development
Funds, bears witness to the usefulness of this
Cotonou innovation. Another symbol of politi-
cal dialogue was the joint meeting between the
European Commission and the Commission for
African Union in October 2006. It was the first

time in its history that the Commission had met
outside the EU.
With the announcement of Economic
Partnership Agreements (EPAs) under
Cotonou, it seemed that cooperation between
ACP-EU countries had turned full circle. Free
trade had been mooted under the Yaound
Convention. Long debates ensued about
whether or not to continue cooperation in the
conventional way because the revised
Cotonou Agreement brought about a funda-
mental change by stating that EPAs should be
concluded by the end of 2007, the reason
being that preferences granted by the EU to
the ACP contravene the World Trade
Organisation (WTO) rules. The aim is to facil-
itate the harmonious integration of ACP coun-
tries into the world economy, where competi-
tion is much fiercer than in the Lom-
Cotonou process. This leap into the unknown
has left some ACP countries and European
civil society actors puzzled.

It has been recognized that cooperation is a
work constantly in progress. It has already
proved itself and will continue to provide an ele-
ment of security in a world full of uncertainty.

1 The 'Memorandum Deniau' of 4 April 1973, defined
the characteristics of cooperation whilst retaining the
established parts of Yaound, such as access to the
European market and guaranteed aid, but also brought
in novelties such as a system to protect developing coun-
try partners against sudden falls in commodity prices. In
accepting this memorandum the Commission was for the
first time given a mandate to negotiate a cooperation
agreement. M




Debra Percival


the foundation of the fCP group

Signed in 1975, the Georgetown Agreement is the foundation of the African
Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group. Over the years its membership has swelled to 79
nations. The agreement was revised in 2003 to bring in aspects of the new ACP-EU
Partnership Agreement, under the Cotonou Agreement. Ail 79 ACP members, except
Cuba, are signatories to Cotonou, signed in Benin's capital.

the objectives of the ACP Group, its
institutions and decision-making
process. The ACP Group has its
own internal decision-making process and its
joint bodies also interplay with EU institu-
tions to take decisions affecting all 79 ACP
and 27 EU Member States of the partnership.

The ACP grouping. ,11! ii. numbers 48 sub-
Saharan African countries, 16 from the
Caribbean and 15 from the Pacific (see
synoptic table p.28). The objectives of the
amended Georgetown Agreement are the
eradication of poverty, sustainable develop-
ment of its members, their gradual integration
into the world economy, peace and stability in
a free and democratic society, and greater
ACP integration overall through cementing
economic, political, social and cultural ties.

A summit of Heads of State of the 79 ACP
countries tops the decision-making pyramid
but since its meetings are infrequent, deci-
sions are often in the hands of the ACP
Council of Ministers. This ordinarily meets
twice a year but special sessions gathering a
limited number of ministers on a particular
topic assemble when necessary. For exam-
ple, at the end of 2007, there were frequent
meetings of ACP ministers responsible for
sugar in the wake of the EU's denouncing of
the Sugar Protocol.

A bureau of the Council of Ministers, consist-
ing of ministers from each of the four African
regions, the Caribbean and the Pacific, and the
rotating President of the Council and outgoing

and incoming Presidents, looks after the
Council of Ministers' agenda (see separate arti-
cle on the activities of all ACP-EU institutions).

> fCP Secretariat

ACP ministers take major policy decisions
and elect every five years a Brussels-based
secretary general,. ,i! !ni 11. Sir John Kaputin
from Papua New Guinea, who guides the
work of the Brussels-based ACP Secretariat
comprised of nationals from the ACP States.
These are technical experts and administra-
tive staff who work in all areas of the ACP-
EU partnership from commodities to culture.

The ACP Committee of Ambassadors of
Brussels-based diplomatic staff from each
ACP state sets an agenda and backs up the
work of the Council. It works closely with
the ACP Council and can take decisions and
resolutions by a consensus of its members.

It reports on its activities to the ACP Council
and it too has a coordinating bureau at
Ambassador level, of the same nine-country
composition as the Council's bureau.

The ACP States interact with other EU bod-
ies in reaching joint decisions (see article on
the institutions p.15-16). The EU's 27
Member States have their own tiered struc-
ture with heads of state at the top. They meet
infrequently with their ACP counterparts: the
last one took place with African countries in
Lisbon in 2007 to inject political impetus
into Africa-EU links.

Day-to-day policies and strategies are drawn
up by the EU Commissioner for Development,
.,ii! i, il. Belgian Louis Michel, and the EU
Directorate for Development and relations
with ACP States, headed by Italian Director-
General, Stefano Manservisi. Brussels-based
Europeaid set up in 2001 and led by Dutch
Director General, Koos Richelle, deals with
the technical management of projects.

The EU's Council of Ministers of Foreign
Ministers approves EU strategies towards the
ACP States whereas joint decisions can be
taken at meetings of ACP and EU Ministers
(see separate article on ACP-EU institutions).

A Parliamentary Assembly of ACP Members
of Parliament meets a statutory twice a year
prior to its biannual meetings with 79 mem-
bers of the European Parliament who repre-
sent the 27 EU Member States. These gather-
ings, known as the Joint Parliamentary
Assembly (JPA), generally take place once
every six months rotating between ACP and
EU states.

The ACP-EU Joint Assembly does not take
binding decisions but issues opinions on EU
strategies towards ACP nations and its debates
on policies in ACP nations are often timely
and always lively. Other EU and ACP institu-
tions often take the lead from the JPA's own
initiative reports, which are full of very useful
factual research, often drafted jointly by an
ACP parliamentarian and an EU counterpart.
Exchanges with attending senior EU officials
are frank and there is much media interest in
the gatherings. M



Franois Misser









Cooperation between Europe and its ACP partners which marked its 50th
anniversary in 2007 came about as the result of an historical accident; however, it
has continued as an example for the development of relations between the EU and
other developing countries. This is certainly the view of one of the key figures in
EU-ACP cooperation and this Courier report examines his analysis and thoughts (plus
a few anecdotes) on a type of cooperation between countries that, despite many
differences, is still vaunted as a model of how to do it.

with the passage of time. For Dieter Frisch (Director General
S sometimess the real significance of an event only becomes clear
for Development at the European Commission 1982 1993)
the first milestone event was the signing of the Treaty of
Rome in 1957. Why? Because the Yaound Convention of 1965 would
never have taken place if the French, during the negotiations on this
treaty, had not insisted on the inclusion of the overseas countries and
territories that were then under their control.
> Cooperation born of an "historical accident"
In retrospect, we can all be grateful to France for its insistence but, says
Frisch, Europe's development policy is not the result of rational consi-
deration. Rather, it is an historical accident.
In 1965, following the great wave of independence, 18 countries all
French speaking except for Somalia signed a cooperation agreement
with the six countries of the European Community the Yaound
Convention. This convention led to the creation of the first European
Development Fund and the introduction of a free trade regime between
these 18 countries and Europe. Later, the second Yaound Convention
marked a major step in assisting African countries move towards indus-
> adapting to the notion of Pan-fifricanism
Diter Frisch recalls that the Pan-African institutions of the time criti- Technical agreements were a significant step in the cooperation between the
Dieter Frisch recalls that the Pan-African institutions of the time criti- EU and ACP countries. Top picture: an indicative prramme f technical
cised Europe for maintaining and consolidating a "colonial structure" and financial cooperation between the ECC and Ghana. C EC Photo Library


HiStory M lestone Events

that constituted an "obstacle to the Pan-African movement." At the
Commission, and also in Bonn and The Hague, opinion was that it was
time to open up cooperation to some of the English-speaking African
countries such as Nigeria and Kenya and, looking beyond that, to the
rest of the world. This was the stepping off point for a development pol-
icy worthy of the name.

There was a shift, from a policy that Frisch describes as "honest, benev-
olent patemalism" to a policy based on responsible partnership,
inspired by the European Commissioner Claude Cheysson. His basic
view was that: "The time when we told them what to do is over." Frisch
said Cheysson was famous for saying, "the European Development
Funds, it's your money -use it for your priorities and if you need tech-
nical advice, we are here to help you."

However, this was not an easy call, owing to opposition from French-
speaking African states who feared that an increase in the number of
beneficiaries would affect the financial and commercial rights they had
already gained. The then Senegalese President Lopold Sdar Senghor
led this protest, even being prepared to fully maintain the commercial
regime of Yaound, that gave preferential treatment to European goods
in the markets of French-speaking Africa.

A road financed by the first European Development Fund (EDF) in the French
part of Martinique. At the time, the EDF contributed to the development not
only of the countries associated with Africa and Madagascar, but also the
French Overseas Territories.
EC Photo Library


The English-speaking African states did not want to give this kind of
preferential treatment to the European Community and Frisch recalls
that they didn't like the term "association" at all as, in their opinion,
it meant a second class membership of a post-colonial nature.
Eventually, the term "association" was abolished and replaced by the
ACP-EEC Lom Agreement, under which the Africans continued to
enjoy preferential treatment on the European market, but the special
conditions for Europe on the African market were removed. Several
developments then took place, the first being the Caribbean and
Pacific states joining with Africa to achieve greater bargaining power
in negotiations with Europe. Indeed, in 1975, a number of ex-British
colonies, from the Caribbean and the Pacific alongside with the
English-speaking African states, became partners of the European
Union as signatories of the Lom I Agreement, two years after the
United Kingdom joined the EEC.

> Lom brings about a real resolution

The first Lom Agreement brought about a series of revolutionary
changes. At that time they were talking about Lom "from Peking to
Washington," recalled Claude Cheysson in an interview with The
Courier published in 1977.

In Frisch's view, the most important change was the preferential trade
regime that provided non-reciprocal access for ACP products to the
European market. Then came Stabex (see p.23), the European
Community's contribution to creating a new global economic order.
However, throughout these North-South discussions, demand for the
stabilisation of the price of commodities was met with ideological
objections from those who argued it was not compatible with a true
market economy.

"It was technically and politically inconceivable," Frisch explained.
But at the same time, Cheysson's team wanted to do something.
According to Ghebray Berhane (Secretary General of the ACP Group
1990-1995), a participant in the Lom negotiations as ambassador of
Ethiopia, one of the major achievements was that the ACP countries
gained access to the European market and the European Development
Fund increased year after year. "That is why the agreements are consid-
ered to have fully satisfied both parties," he said.



E. I~.

Milestone Events

Added Frisch, "And the group to group relationship provided a much
better political balance because North-South relationships are by def-
inition unequal by bringing together both rich and poor countries. But
such a large number of countries negotiating together is not at all easy,"
explained Frisch.

Finally, the Community framework provided what the former Director
General called a "significant political plus-point," due to the fact that
the politically-neutral Community was cooperating with states practis-
ing a market economy as well as countries close to the now defunct
Soviet bloc. This turned, a weakness -its lack of responsibility in for-
eign policy -, into a strength. And although EU Member Statesdeployed
a policy that may have seemed a little schizophrenic, they succeeded in
holding talks with countries and political figures with which they did
not have bilateral relationships. For example, the Community held offi-
cial discussions with several heads of liberation movements well before
the independence of these countries. Leaders such as Sam Nujoma, of
the South-West African Peoples Organisation, formed in 1960, was
received by the Commission in 1978, twelve years before Namibia's

> in ideological shift: the political dialogue

"The third Lom Agreement marked a significant change in approach
conceming the management of financial and technical cooperation," said
Frisch. The Commission realized that results were not always good
enough and improvement was needed. But it was not easy to change tack
and say, "We are partners and we want this to work, so let's engage in real
dialogue on policies. By saying that we don't mean 'political dialogue' in
the modem sense, meaning discussion on weapons of mass destruction,
for example." What the Commission wanted, on the eve of the signing of
the 3rd Lom Agreement (1985), under Commissioner Edgar Pisani, was
to open dialogue on development policies.
The agreements that were concluded involved reciprocal commitments.
That approach was different from that of the World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), which, said Frisch, had introduced
"this wretched concept of
conditionality," that came
across "like a diktat from out-
side." The Pisani team did


not believe that reform imposed from the outside not wanted by the
govemment or accepted by the people was feasible. However, the
introduction of political dialogue into the third Lom Agreement was
not without difficulties. Frisch remembers the time it took to convince
a Tanzanian minister that he represented his country rather than a new
kind of IMF mission.

Frisch also recollects post-agreement discussions with the former
Ethiopian dictator, Mengistu Hal Mariam, to convince him to offer
price incentives for small peasant farmers, a concept that was com-
pletely at odds with the Marxist ideology of the Addis Ababa regime
of the day.

Ghebray Berhane revealed how the ACP countries responded to the
idea of political dialogue by saying, "you introduce conditionality and
that is your right. We are not against it. But you have to have the means
to achieve your goals if you want the ACP to accept certain conditions."
In any case, Berhane, like Frisch, believes that the EEC-ACP negotia-
tions were real negotiations. "An anecdote, which Berhane gave exclu-
sively to the Courier, underlines his feelings. He said: "During the
negotiations, which went on until four o'clock in the morning, the
Europeans had deliberately chosen small rooms in the European
Council building which only had room for ministerial spokespersons.
The experts found themselves sidelined. A colleague and I went into the

Dieter Frisch (on the right): a key European negotiator
during the Lom Conventions. C EC Photo Library

r.UiLIEF LiF LfI I '.:N
rg'lr' Jx FrINANCES r'as' LE
rNTL'E rPitE.
TFP I.'Ir.EUENT9' ,Oz.a .' ..'Y'F!',
i: Hi.l UStE L5 5 5 ;," .l f r a' p 9tA'W Hepo
fI'c .' i ''N TE Ci .IvEU L 'i '? , p r Fru'Ii,'fl f -


rr -~i.

interpreters' booth next to one of these rooms from where we followed
the discussions. From our vantage point we were able to slip a piece of
paper to the ACP negotiators. The talks on the EDF amounts and the
products to be included went on until the end of the third Lom negoti-
ations. The EU Council security staff noticed that a room was being
used by people who shouldn't have been there and they almost frog-
marched us out". They wanted to get rid of the troublemakers!, says
Berhane laughing.

"Such a scenario is plausible", comments, smiling, a retired European
official who also participated in the Lom negotiations. "In fact, there
is always a moment when the bosses want to talk between icilic. l c,
This is common practice when the negotiations reach their p. !iji..il
stage. Yet, I can assure you that there has never been any intention to
marginalize the ACP :c i-.' iii '", he points out.

But Lom had an impact in other ways, not least, according to Frisch,
that this form of cooperation -in particular Lom's inclusion of English
and Portuguese-speaking countries -had an effect on other ..... e .,ii;. i
agreements. He recalled that it was in the wake of iic tirst Lome
Agreement that the initial cooperation .i.!e ciic"ii between the EEC
and the Mediterranean countries were made and aid for Asia and Latin
America appeared in the European budget for the first time. Claude
Cheysson only refers to "the extension of Lom to the south of the

> maastricht: the great watershed

Dieter Frisch believes that the Maastricht Treat- which came into force in
November 1993, was another major tuming point. Coming four years after

the fall of the Berlin Wall and the signing of the 4th Lom Agreement, it
was the first EU Treaty 1.- i, i .ic.c a chapter on development cooperation.
But more !iii !.ii iil. it marked a break with previous policy. Before the
4th Lom Agreement, everyone was welcome to join the club, even
Mengistu's Ethiopia was accepted which would be unthinkable today.

"This Treaty also contributed to the inclusion of foreign and security pol-
icy into the Community's external relations and the need for coherence
between these policies and development policy," noted Frisch. Moreover,
the second pillar of the Treaty, enshrining the common foreign and secu-
rity policy, forced European partners to harmonise their actions in areas
ranging from security and the environment to trade and development.

This led to an analysis of the respective roles and importance of the poli-
cies in relation to each other and this debate continues today. There is a
tendency to make peace and stability a development condition and the
question remains as to whether military or quasi-military action should be
financed with funds earmarked for development. Frisch himself believes
that it should come from the CFSP (EU's Common Foreign and Security
Policy) budget. The same applies to migration -only symptoms are being
dealt with and a "wall" is being built around the Community. But, what's
really needed is to tackle poverty and provide people with decent living
conditions in their own countries. When home office ministers understand
ili.ii dc"clnpment policy can prevent mass migration, measures can be
taken to benefit both sides. Development policy, which has been sidelined
for so long, must be seen as offering mainstream solutions. M

Signature of the Treaty of Maastricht: Roland Dumas, French Minister for
Foreign Affairs from 1988 until 1993 (on the left);
Pierre Brgovoy (on the right),
French Prime Minister from 1992 until 1993.
SEC Photo Libraiy


WUho does whal


of fICP-EU cooperation

The institutions responsible for the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement are the
ACP-EU Council of Ministers, the ACP-EU Committee of Ambassadors and the joint
Parliamentary Assembly (JPA) which groups representatives from the European
Parliament and the Parliaments of the ACP States.


Comprised of ministers of the ACP States and members of the EU
Council of Ministers and the European Commission, it is presided
over in rotation by a European minister and an ACP minister. The
Council meets once a year and whenever the presidency deems it nec-
essary. Its mission is to conduct political dialogue, adopt policy guide-
lines and take decisions to apply the Agreement as well as to resolve
problems that present obstacles for the implementation of cooperation.

The Council examines and takes into account resolutions and rec-
ommendations of the ACP-EU JPA. It also meets with the econom-
ic and social partners and other civil society stakeholders. Decisions
of the Council can be binding.

Find out more: www.acp.int/en/parliamentary assembly e.htm


This is formed of permanent representatives of the EU and the
European Commission alongside ambassadors to the EU of the ACP
States and is altemately chaired by an ACP or a European diplomat. Its
mission is to assist the Council of Ministers in accomplishing its tasks
and to act when necessary to carry out any mandate which the Council
of Ministers :ii.. c.iiiuiii to it. It also prepares Council meetings.

Find out more: www.acp.int


ThIl is one of the most original institutions of ACP-EU cooperation.
It is made up of an equal number of representatives from the
European Parliament and the parliaments of the ACP States; howev-
er the latter are often replaced by the ambassador of the country in
question. Its role is to promote democratic processes through dia-
logue and consultation, facilitate better understanding between the
peoples of the EU and the ACP States, and generate public interest in
development issues. It debates and then submits resolutions and rec-

ommendations to the Council of Ministers with the aim of achieving
the objectives of the Cotonou Agreement. It also seeks to strengthen
regional integration in the ACP countries and cooperation with the
parliaments of the ACP countries and the Pan-African Parliament.

Find out more: www.acp.int/en/parliamentary assembly e.htm


A joint ACP Group and EU institution created in 2000, in the frame-
work of the Cotonou Agreement, the CDE manages (under European
Commission supervision) the ProInvest partnership programme that
allocates 100M from the European Development Fund. Its aim is to
support the development of ACPprivate sector companies, with partic-
ular emphasis on encouraging technology transfers and penetrating
new markets. The CDE is a continuation of the Centre for the
Development of Industry (CDI) that was created in 1977 under the
Lom I Convention.

Find out more: www.cde.int

Conversation between Stefano Manservisi, Alpha Oumar Konar and
Louis Michel (from left to right) during the inauguration of the Julius
Nyerere conference room at the DG-DEV of the EC. EC Photo Library

S, -, -



Who does what ACP-EU


Set up in 1983 within the framework of the Lom Convention, the
CTA's mission is to develop and provide services that improve
access by the ACP countries to information on agricultural and rural
development, and to strengthen the capacity of these countries to
produce, exchange and exploit information in this field.

Find out more: www.cta.int


Charged with implementing EU common policies, including devel-
opment policy (a competence it shares with the individual Member
States), the European Commission is the EU's executive body
responsible to the European Parliament and as such is guardian of
the Union treaties, initiator of legislation and engine for the harmon-
isation of European policy in this field. It is the Commission that
manages the European Development Fund (EDF) that has a global
budget under the 10th EDF of 22.6 billion for 2008-2013.

Find out more: www.ec.europa.eu


Set up by the Georgetown Agreement (1975), the ACP Secretariat,
based in Brussels, is charged with the administrative management of
the ACP group. It is responsible for implementing the group's inter-
national policy as well as organising and coordinating cooperation

policy. Placed under the authority of the Summit of ACP Heads of
State and Government, the Council of Ministers and the Committee
of Ambassadors, its mission is to carry out tasks conferred by these
institutions and by the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly. It
helps implement the decisions taken by these bodies and assists
them, as well as the joint bodies set up in the framework of the ACP-
EU Partnership Agreements.

Find out more: www.acp.int


A consultative assembly of European economic and social partners,
the Economic and Social Committee (ESC) allows its voice to be
heard through formal opinions submitted to the Council, the
Commission and the European Parliament, including the field of
development policy. Its exteral affairs section follows up relations
between the EU and its partners in the rest of the world, including
the ACP zone. This is done through the intermediary of a Monitoring
Committee, a Joint Consultative Committee and a Contact Group.
Close relations with the economic and social partners in the ACP
countries have been established to discuss matters of common inter-
est and the strengthening of civil society. Article 6, Chapter 2 of the
Cotonou Partnership Agreement, mentions economic and social
partners, including trade union organizations among the non-state
actors of cooperation. Article 6 does not mention explicitly the ESC,
which is a European institution. However, the role of the ESC has
been strengthened by the 2000 Cotonou Agreement. In Protocol I to
this Agreement, EU and ACP Ministers made this body responsible
for organising meetings with ACP-EU economic and social interest
groups. It is considered as the architect of civil society's participa-
tion in ACP-EU relations.


An EU body granting long-term loans, the EIB is one of the princi-
pal development partners for most of the ACP countries and over-
seas countries and territories with constitutional links with the EU
dating back 30 or more years. In particular, it manages the Cotonou
Investment Facility (1.7 billion) as well as contributions out of its
own funds (2 billion). It has five regional offices in ACP countries:
Dakar (West Africa), Nairobi (East and Central Africa), Pretoria
(Sniithem Africal. Fort-de-France (Carihheanl and Svdnev (Pacifici

NewActors Who does what


PLAYERS in CoTonou

With partnership at the core of Cotonou, civil society in ail its diversity has been attri-
buted a more prominent role and bigger say in ACP-EU cooperation, 2000-2020.

Conventions, non-gov-
ernmental organisation
(NGOs) were allocated
funds under decentralised coopera-
tion for project implementation but
dialogue on EU policies towards
ACP nations was not cemented
into the agreements.

Under Cotonou, a broad range of
non-state actors, north and south,
are not only recipients of aid but
consult with EU institutions on a
full range of policies towards
ACPs as an integral part of the
partnership accord.

Article 6 of the Cotonou
Convention embraces non-state
actors, "in all its forms according
to national characteristics". They
include the business sector, eco-
nomic and social partners, trade
unions, non-governmental devel-
opment organizations, human
rights groups, grass roots organi-
sations, women's associations,
environmental groups, farmers'
organizations, indigenous peo-
ples' groups and religious organi-
sations, research institutes, cultur-
al bodies and the media.

The aim is to hamess and build on
the dynamics of civil society and
improve ownership of develop-
ment strategies, putting people in
control of their own development.

Since its outset seven years ago,
non-state actors have been keep-
ing a close track on whether
Cotonou has achieved what it set
out to do in this field.
Florent Sebban of CONCORD, the
European confederation of devel-

opment and relief NGOs, which
was set up in 2003 and gathers
some 1.200 development and relief
NGOs in Europe, is currently look-
ing at how Cotonou's commit-
ments towards civil society are
shaping up in practice. This is also
under the microscope in the perma-
nent Cotonou Monitoring Group,
gathering a cross-section of its

Sebban applauds what Cotonou
set out to do in terms of a greater
say for NGOs and an increase in
their project funding -15% of the
10th European Development
Fund (EDF) (2008-2013) is allo-
cated to civil society.

> The litmus test

As far as the success of policy dia-
logue is concerned, the litmus test
is the extent of EU institution-civil
society consultation on the
Country Strategy Documents
(CSP), which also include the
National or Regional Indicative
Plans (NIP/RIP), the EU's five-
year policy planning and program-
ming for individual ACP countries
under the 10th EDF.

Even though non-state actor con-
sultation with the EU may fall
below expectations for Cotonou,
its meetings with the Commission
feeling more like sessions to
exchange information rather than
real dialogue, their increasing
voice is being felt in many EU fora.
They are an active and diverse
lobby in the European Parliament,
its Committees, the Joint ACP-EU
Parliamentary Assembly and the

annual European Development
Days (EDD) event where non-
state actors from the EU, in par-
ticular, have stands to inform the
public about their activities and
mount side events that stimulate
open discussion on EU develop-
ment policies.

NGOs from francophone West
Africa have been especially vocal
in the EU media over their fears
that Economic Partnerships
Agreement (EPAs) with the EU
will mean cheaper food on their
markets harming local farmers.

The influence of ACP NGOs on
EU policy often depends on how
well organized they are locally.
Florent Sebban points out that, in
Cameroon, NGOs have organ-
ised Les jeudis de Cotonou,
(Cotonou Thursdays) which meet
every Thursday just to discuss
the convention.

And there is always a plethora of
position papers by civil society
on Cotonou at each ACP-EU
Parliamentary Assembly, espe-
cially on the EPAs.

The platform of ACP businesses,
already established in 1998,
bringing ACP and EU companies
closer to embark on joint invest-
ment schemes is active in many
fora, including the December
2007 meeting of African and EU
Heads of State in Lisbon. An
ACP-EU local government plat-
form was also set up in 2001 by
mayors and representatives of
existing ACP local government
associations to heighten the
advocacy of local government in
ACP-EU cooperation.

Activity commercial, Bamako 2007.
Afrique in visu /Baptiste de Ville dAvray


Natli Core-Koras ffi AC requred stutrs in order

nale th gecso a dyai eto. To faiitt thi proe and-

here fo th fis tie rpent- t the intitie ofte AC Gru and

c Caiba an te Pacii reog Elgblt Crtera fo o-tt

raptac of deeop a c omo acto wa deie an poiial

Jin of th challenes and op enos ed 5 in Demer 2002 Th

-tatvtes. mane and, in patclr to cate S ot
thp (1iplnn pnt np i n

Didier Viode, UrtitId. 2007, Manifesta!
CAfrica e Mediterraneo

ne of the issues facing European Commissioner Louis
Michel when he took office was how to express in concrete
terms the considerable sums allocated to cooperation with
ACP countries: 13.5 billion for the period 2002-2007 and
22.6 billion for 2008-2013. A closer look behind the figures shows a
number of undeniable successes in EU-ACP cooperation.

A case in point is Mauritius, a principal beneficiary of the Sugar
Protocol. By being paid considerably more than the going global rate
for its sugar exports to the EU, the country has been able to diversify its
economy into textiles, tourism and service industries. Furthermore, the
free and non-reciprocal access to European markets for Mauritian tex-
tiles has seen the manufacturing sector take off. Also, the European

Investment Bank (EIB) has financed innovative technologies to make
the most of local resources like the Bellevue coal-bagasse combined
cycle power station.

In the Seychelles, EDF money has been targeted at improving living
conditions among the local population. Equally, in its July/August 1997
edition, The Courier highlighted the positive results of this cooperation
in Barbados, a country which has invested heavily in people and now
enjoys a higher human development index than some European coun-
tries. A success story that is down to local leadership with the wisdom
to allocate European funds to education, both university and skills
teaching, which has produced a workforce trained for growth sectors
like tourism and communication technologies.

Activity commercial, Bamako 2007.
Afnque in visu /Baptiste de Ville d Avray




ItI. -



_J :: ...::::m: "

re -M-M : . . ........... lim

results Success Stories

In Congo-Brazzaville, Liberia and Djibouti, EU funds have been used
to distribute that most precious of all commodities -peace. This is
thanks to the financing of programmes for the demobilisation and reha-
bilitation of combatants after civil wars. In Mali, the European
Commission recorded a major success by financing development pro-
grammes in the north of the country that also played a role in prevent-
ing conflict by making the people involved understand that the govern-
ment of Bamako and the EU didn't mean them to be left behind in their
quest for a better day-to-day existence. In the Democratic Republic of
Congo, the supervision of democratic elections by EUFOR was anoth-
er sign that EU Member States' aid can make a significant and lasting
impact on a nation.

Countries such as Tanzania, Rwanda and many others are indebted to
the EU for the construction of their main trunk roads. In Liberia too, the
EU contributed to reconstruction by financing the re-establishment of
the electricity grid after the civil war. In Uganda and St Vincent, the EU
has invested in the renovation of school buildings.

All these examples are testimony to the diversity of sectors, actions and
cniintric l thc nn-thic-yrnind 'thcntrc-' nf ACP-ET cnnpcratinn 4 mnrc

i I, i ti .I h .' l. 'ii . i !L *l i .i !iC! il lt !i li t ,Il l it .il ii ii .ii ,!
-ii|i|i.. l i,,,I!,i'! i" .., |! i' il i.iii ., I,, ,ih 1 iI !'. !' i l ', ii.l)i" i ii !
I Iiii* i Iii t. I .11 D F i i I. *i. E 'i ii t I t iii. .!ili i L II[ I I j li IJ i i il. : tjlllli ii .0 1 ii ii. i-

| i.i !! I l lii. l I, I .I L .I i I l,'i. 'I l lIII|I I 'I IIl i !r_ J .II l.l .i I i

P I, I tin. -l.uI| I . I l, -i,' !I l it l ii !! III \ fiii .I t. Ii.1t F M

i *.. j. j.. . j I. * ~, I. . ',j'*. T ~ j,


1 *.


,I ~ u







iii i. l Il'I C .11 h . E l i I l i. licL .I '.il i i .1i .l ,.l i. I .'P! ii nil
i L *) I .i 1 "l|i I. II ll i iII i i LI il I .ll ii. .i l.' i i l .l Ili .l i ll Lii l
I ll I I l I ll | l| l l.... !L l II .l|1 .' T ,, Il ,,I ll ,,I h l .'
SI-' r,1 i. Il.' I .I l .ll l ili. Ei iii |ii...I i i ui.iiii l .ll l .i, !..' .l ih li. .
d. t I! Ih' ,n llli!.uuu lll i n i c I '! l 1 .I II!t '. 'l1 !l! I 'i i l .'i ,, ,..I i l..' .
.llli IIci.i lliul.l Ai rl I ic lil n A l) i l i l 'lii I* .I| ' 'l.'I ic .I -

I.. In l a e l IlcI Ii .l ci d I

i|ii l .li. i Ii. i i i . .
iii L i !l L i h h I . II .L I i i i l iL i iL I i i L i L I i i | I l | IL N'l, I, | I I |I |-
T h e IIII .I.'.. .' 1- .' '. .l! .ll!,\ **, ll I ll ,.. lh k' l ll L' il 111 .11 !il

i. li| L i. i | i il -. I l l il i il i i. I I L I i l i iL i ii il. .i i .i i .
I.' ,i |i.l i il i i ( i ..i i l I I.- l ii ii lI .i.'. .i' I. . III

S i ic E
i I L ii i i i. ,i i i I. i i l .I i ii ii i i l i i l l i i. il i.
III i l l |i i' Il .. iln i 7i'.- lin ll |l i l'i.in i I F iii i lL ,! l. l li n l. ll i li

R ihi i c Ii. i II ill I. II. i il i. I i. . il i -i -
h IIIIc Ill ich.' I ...I.I in c. l._ .1' 1- I' l l ,,hc ,.l in l ic ,.'11c!!1., !

h).' C. li l h,,llll nI III lll i .1 e s h ll l i .. i ii, nlb H.IC I ll ,I

n wi.l .ll . i. l l il i.. C o -



t hiie ~ i ..p. r.it. m- in ci.:r Ii riih :ii: ntr .:iz -re r zur-.p. i .in :l tlour.
h. ,:,,_ n ,:.re .nt r| o rt -o l:, t n l-,. h:,r -ni,:,[^ lnk+ L r .',.rrt n tlh h -i.r

i-i: ,irh. r :1 n-ii.: ri ini ri ri. -i. :l Ir .. i m ..lI hrii-k n I. :.i lin- iii

L~'l l 1 r. lr l i in. i.- ''li iun: Il'riil l; r l-ll 1 rili ih- J r: I k O 1:U r ii-i.n: iii

D rln .- r.-CI 1, _lu -Ia, I r l C, _. l rln p ,, I r .- a i n l iineau

i.r-.re. T Ihe npr. o:rk -,_ k-- r.:o nri-il:.,I t i.: n ra.:,n snn-r r nn,, i. : p[.:,l .:r
lii' iii iiliu :r ,:r-r._ 1. Irl i :l r :lr -rr:,:,, n.n .i.=_ u i-.. = ir:l ,:iuu: ,ir ti].nnii ni

pompen mhr_.I r_- ',l. ci l. i rh u n C I Elh. i i_ o i l h .h-.: 1
pa.ir .:ii l ir.l ,Ith l s. | l :.l' : i -i i i-.l nI i.ii-i' M- E h.l., h, i,-n t ii;. .]rn k pr.l:-

:li iniii .ii: re u:CIe.]; thIr i. ii. fit tr[ ni T ,

,1 r .I .:. F. .:,r I unrm'.:, c .:'. r.', .:.I r. f l J ,, r.:I ,lud .M

,ju ' l'n' .-l ill- -i ,-. n,:,l .a D,,l- ,'n ,:,I _,-n .'.:,i :,n'.I l l,. -. I 1 .:n .:e
,-,I r,,nu rl' ln,_--

SPECi L issiE ri E r.1iRi:.H :i :ll.


*.: ir 1 V iJII h ri' 4 l r 1 '_J h ilf'

il,. r.-. ..* i r i..-.1r ,I,,i t
n!i ,`i .-,,ii : l4~.!iiit ~r i i~,i -~iri:i

A i '1,1.-. Til f:':l. .1 ,Lii, n r,-i
4 i 1.-I t' i

Iil .1~il II.I t, I
ri wl ls rcq r z e Ir il r r J 1 r r 1 r

h q I 1 d u.- I 1:-l 1 .

ments from 2.2% to 3% of gross national income
by 2010, two-thirds of which should be financed
by the private sector.

R&D has become an established feature of new
strategies developed by the EU in the field of
cooperation. This is clearly illustrated by the new
EU-Africa partnership recently adopted at the
Lisbon Summit in December 2007 which gives a
major role to research, particularly in the fields of
agriculture and food security, and information
and communication technology. In the past, the
EU's approach to R&D was to give priority to a
vertical involvement within a specific programme
(namely INCO on international cooperation). It
also funded sub-regional agricultural research
organizations in Africa (through the EDF) as well
as agricultural research programmes under the
Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research (CGIAR), financed out of the Food
Security budget. The new Seventh R&D
Framework Programme (FP7) (2007-2013) has
adopted a horizontal approach that includes spe-
cific mechanisms to enable developing countries
to participate based on their real needs. This last
development is important, as it was only possible
to pay out 80M of the 285M foreseen in the
INCO programme under the FP6 agreement

the cIinicat counter-olfensiue

n 2001, in partnership with scientists and health officials in the most affected countries, the EU
launched a major clinical research programme to halt the progress of three transmissible pandemics
that were ravaging sub-Saharan Africa. The EDCTP (European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials
Programme on poverty-related diseases) project aims to increase and coordinate clinical trials using new
vaccines and forms of treatment in the fight against Aids, tuberculosis and malaria. The EU contributed
200M to implementing the EDCTP initiative in addition to national and international funds.

The challenge is formidable as each pandemic adopts different forms and poses problems of diagnosis,
treatment and prevention which are also dependent on specific local conditions, both geographic and
social. For example, plasmodium falciparum, which is present across the whole of Africa, is a very severe
form of malaria that is proving increasingly resistant to known anti-malaria medicines and is responsible
for an ever-growing mortality rate among newborns and pregnant women. To counter this it is neces-
sary to test new combinations of treatment and to try possible new vaccines, and at the same time devel-
op new generations of protection based on insecticides. In the case of Aids, the genetic diversity of the
HIV virus in Africa poses a major problem, as the use of complex forms of preventative or therapeutic
vaccines that are the subject of intense research in the developed countries are, at present, unrealistic for
Africa. Research and clinical trials therefore focus on forms of prevention/treatment/vaccination that are
adapted to the supply and consumption capacities of the poor countries. Finally, in the face of the resur-
gence of a particularly acute and multi-resistant form of tuberculosis, there is not only a lack of new med-
icines but also of the research to develop them in the first place.


results :: ,, ,: : ,-,

The Cape Town Declaration has, however, not
lacked constructive follow-up. In May 2003 the
ACP-EU Council approved this new approach and
decided to allocate an EDF grant of 30M to
strengthen the science and technology capacities in
the ACP countries (see below). M-M.B.


Decoding results

Trade protocols


introduced as part of the first Lom Convention (1975-1980), trade
protocols have become one of the characteristics of EU-ACP coop-
eration, significantly promoting economic development. For
example, the banana protocol ensured exemption from customs
duties for specific quotas, primarily exported by Caribbean countries.
Equally, under the sugar protocol -which expires in two years' time
18 ACP exporting countries can sell a quota of 1.3 million tonnes on the
EU market at a guaranteed price which is aligned with internal
European prices that are considerably higher than the price on the glob-
al market. This protocol has promoted economic development in coun-
tries like Mauritius, Fiji, Guyana and Barbados. Finally, the meat pro-
tocol provides for a reimbursement of 90% of the tax on beef imports
from several southern African countries, in particular Botswana and

During 2008, the new Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs)
between the EU and all six ACP regions should come into force, and the
trade protocols and current non-reciprocal preferential regime will dis-
appear to be replaced by a new reciprocal but asymmetric trade regime.
In other words, the EU will offer duty-free and tariff-free entry into its
market as soon as EPAs come into force, except for sugar and rice
which are subject to a short transition period. ACP countries, on the
other hand, will scale back tariffs on imports from the EU gradually
over the next 25 years. Simply put, Europe will speed up the opening of
its markets while at the same time the ACP market openings are
designed to encourage investment, employment and boost growth.

Stabex is the abbreviation for the fund for the stabilisation of export
revenue from agricultural products, introduced as part of Lom I. It has
compensated for losses in revenue from exports of products to the EU
by ACP countries as a result of fluctuations in prices on the global mar-
ket. This is on the condition that the losses represented a significant por-
tion of their trade balance. The major beneficiaries of Stabex have been
the large-scale producers of cocoa, cotton, coffee, groundnuts and tea.
Since 2000, this compensation mechanism has been replaced by anoth-
er called Flex, which stands for the compensation fund for the short-
term fluctuations of export revenues, triggered by both losses of these
revenues and the subsequent deterioration of the public deficit.

The Sysmin fund, introduced under the Lom II Convention, has
enabled countries dependent on particular minerals to receive loans,
and subsequently grants, to maintain their production capacity and, if
necessary, to diversify their economies. The principal beneficiaries
have been Zambia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (then called
Zaire), Guinea-Conakry and Jamaica.

This instrument has been replaced by the Flex (see the paragraph above
on Stabex). The EU's support to the ACP mining sector has also been
provided so far through the European Investment Bank (EIB). F.M.


EPfRs and UWTO Extending Cooperation

EPRs: Trade for regional

growth and prosperity

T he six regions of the ACP group:
Ce, A.il VIK.i E.,.i IK.i S,,,.,iiiiii
Africa, West Africa, the Caribbean
and the Pacific, were expected to
conclude Economic Partnership Agreements
(EPAs) with the EU by 31 December 2007.
Tailor-made for each region, the EPAs free
trade terms are to replace the existing waiver
for Cotonou's trade preferences in the World
Trade Organisation (WTO), which expired at
midnight on 31 December 2007.

EU officials stress the innovative nature of
these regional accords which go further than
opening access for goods and products. On the
table are also trade in services, public procure-
ment and investment, and changes to the rules
of origin to add value to ACP merchandise.

EU aid to underpin EPAs is an important chap-
ter in the agreements. In addition to the
22.682 billion from the 10th European
Development Fund (EDF) for ACP states over
five years (2008-2013), the European
Commission has agreed to an additional 1

billion to help trade in developing countries
until 2010 and a further 1 billion from the
EU's 27 Member States, of which half has
been earmarked for ACP nations.

EU officials say that EPAs will fast-forward
regional integration in each ACP, which will
lead to an increased foothold on the global
economy and e"entiinlly bring greater growth
and prosperity.

The centrepiece of the agreements is open
access to one another's markets. Under WTO
rules, these agreements must cover ,iilii.ui,-
tially all trade" although the degree of market
access is open to interpretation. In April 2007
the EIT put its offer on the table to open its
market to all imports from ACP nations from 1
January 2008, apart from sugar and rice. Due
to the sensitive nature of these products in the
global marketplace, the EU proposed lengthier
liberalisation timetables for both commodities.

NGOs in hp.i! ,,!l.i! have voiced reservations
about harmful competition for domestic pro-

ducers and some ACP governments fear
import tariff revenue losses in signing up for
an EPA. At the end of December, only one
regional group, the 14-member Cariforum'
and the Dominican Republic, had initialled a
fully-fledged EPA, including goods and other
aspects, to assist greater movement of trade
within the region and between regions, such as
trade in services, investment, govemment pro-
curement and sustainable development.
Several sub-regions within the six ACP
regions and individual countries had submitted
offers to open the substantial part of their mar-
kets to EU goods, paving the way for 'goods
only' EPAs to be signed by the end of 2007.
These 'interim agreements' will give more
time to discuss the EPAs' trade-related con-
tent, which will lead to finalising fully-fledged
agreements with each by the end of 2008.

1 -The 14 members of the Caribbean Forum of states
(Cariforum) are: Antigua & Barbuda, the Bahamas,
Barbados, i .I1 Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti,
Jamaica, St Kitts & Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent & the
Grenadines, Surinam, and Trinidad and Tobago.
D.P. M


The uture

of fICP-EU cooperation

W hat form will future cooperation between the EU and
the ACP countries take? Glenys Kinnock, co-presi-
dent of the Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA),
responded to that question by considering the imme-
diate future: finalising the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs).
Over the course of 2008, Glenys Kinnock will be following the
progress of the EPA negotiations, observing that. so far. the agreements
already signed with various ACP regions only concern trade in goods.
Because of that it is still difficult to gauge what the impact of the agree-
ments on the countries will be. Kinnock also explains that the EPA
negotiations have created a certain bitteress on the part of some ACP
countries, and that if they were to perceive the slightest sense of betray-
al, they could easily turn to other partners China, India, or, in the case
of the Caribbean countries, the United States.
Former French prime minister and member of the European Parliament,
Michel Rocard thinks that it would be fitting if the conditions imposed
on aid being made available focused primarily on issues like "putting

an end to arbitrary arrests, the elimination of the use of torture in cer-
tain countries, independence of the judiciary and effective controls on
the police", because we must remember that "pluralistic democratic
elections are the apotheosis of a system whose end point is democra-
cy, but they are never the beginning". "A dictatorship cannot be trans-
formed into a democracy, but a dictatorship can be transformed into
enlightened despotism, and represent a move forward that defines
what follows," concludes Rocard.
Referring to Africa in particular, Kinnock says she is convinced that
relations with the EU will "grow and deepen". "What we must do on
the European side is quite simply take our responsibility seriously and
work together to bring people out of poverty." She adds, "Political
will is all we need to secure change." She points out that progress has
already been made. Gross domestic product figures are rising, infla-
tion is falling and the flow of direct foreign investment is increasing.
Added to that, the percentage of primary school-aged children receiv-
ing full-time education in Africa has risen from 71% to 93% between
1991 and 2004. Kinnock emphasises the unique character of the





-iii1w 1iiLIiii Ili 1
,t;""~lPfil. n 1. J..1



The Future

Cotonou Agreement; she calls it a very special agreement, which links
the two sides and defines many aspects of development.

As for the future of the ACP group itself, Glenys Kinnock asserts that
the ACP countries are a strange hybrid. But the mixture is a mixture
that works, resulting in a remarkable solidarity that shows during the
JPA sessions. On his part, the former secretary general of the ACP
group, Ghebray Berhane, says that in the past, the ACP countries
wanted to convince themselves that the ACP's raison d'tre wasn't
necessarily the cooperation agreement with the EU, but the
Georgetown Agreement. Unfortunately, they were unable to give the
agreement sufficient substance as trade between regions was almost
negligible. That said, he admits that during negotiations with the EU,
the ACP countries came to realise that coming together with unified
negotiating positions gave them a great advantage.

The new shape of cooperation with the EU, with its distinct agree-
ments with different ACP regions, constitutes a major challenge. The
ACP countries now need to find a new momentum and a new ambi-
tion in their discussions with Europe, whilst retaining their unity. This
new momentum, says Berhane, will come in discussions on the major
challenges that cannot be dealt with on a purely regional level, such
as climate change or other global issues that confront all of us.

Former EU Director General for Development, Dieter Frisch points to
a new reality that will undoubtedly characterise EU/ACP relations in
the future: the politics of development are coming out of their isola-
tion. Indeed, European interior ministers in charge of migration issues
and their colleagues in foreign affairs are increasingly coming to
recognize a common thread between immigration policies and devel-
opment questions.

As a final word, former Senegalese trade minister, Seydina Oumar Sy,
is of the opinion that Africa's first priority is to reconsider the situa-
tion, take a good look at itself and begin to take the necessary steps to
becoming a dependable partner in the global economy. Africa must
take charge of its responsibilities and rely primarily on its own
strengths. Only if Africa shows itself capable of producing sound and

Tayo Fatunla, Untitled, 2007, Manifesta!
Africa e Mediterraneo

convincing plans, and is able to demonstrate a common willingness to
succeed, will it, in his view, receive the necessary external support to
complement its own efforts and make them effective.

The debate, of course, is still open.


" .

Country strategy

papers launch

10 t edition

of development budget

Drawn up by The EC Directorate-General
for Development in consultation with
numerous stakeholders, the individual
strategy papers for the 78 African,
Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States map
out e22.682 billion' of development
spending over five years under the 10th
European Development Fund (EDF)

flot fo

10 M

- -O. d

press, 43 of the indi-
vidual papers had
been signed with
African and Pacific countries,
bringing annual commitments
from the 10th EDF to sub-
Saharan Africa alone to 3.3 bil-

Respective individual spending
plans for the next five years are
known as National Indicative
Programmes (NIPs), with ACP
regions benefiting from Regional
Indicative Programmes (RIPs).
These regional funds specifically
target the integration of regional
groupings. The 10th EDF's RIPs
highlight the fact that the regional
integration of ACP groupings has
doubled, if not tripled, under the
10th EDF. Projects which under-
pin the new Economic
Partnership Agreements (EPAs)
are particularly targeted.

The strategy papers are much
more than budgets. Each contains
a diagnosis of an ACP State. The

idea is for each paper to explain
why funds are earmarked to any
one focal sector in the recipient
ACP State or regional grouping.
There are policy commitments to
make on the part of the ACP State
and national goals to be achieved
by the end of the EDF in 2013.

The EC Development Directorate
compiles the papers alongside its
delegations in ACP States and in
concert with domestic authorities.
Consultation with non-state actors
is a priority. Each paper is tailor-
made to an ACP State and region,
reflecting an ACP State's own
domestic development priorities.

> Good qouernance

Of major importance under the
10th EDF in ACP states are proj-
ects to promote Cotonou's 'essen-
tial elements': the democratic rule
of law and human rights, and the
'fundamental element' of good
goverance. The 10th EDF will for
the first time see a 2.7 billion

'incentive tranche' to assist coun-
tries with good goverance, which
also encompasses the good man-
agement of financial, tax and legal
"You will not catch me moralising
you," said EU Commissioner for
Development, Louis Michel.
"What I am interested in is sup-
porting what is or what has the
potential to come good. What real-
ly matters are your commitments,
your ambitions in terms of gover-
nance, in terms of increasing your
capacity to deliver services to your
people." He was speaking at the
Pacific Forum meeting in Tonga in
October 2007 where 13 Pacific
States signed NIPs totalling 276
M and an RIP of 95M.

Aiming to excel at what it does
best and to avoid duplicating the
initiatives of other donors, the 10th
EDF limits its range of sectors for
focal spending essentially to trade
and regional integration; the envi-
ronment and sustainable manage-
ment of resources; infrastructure,
communication and transport;

water and energy; territorial plan-
ning, agriculture and food securi-
ty; governance, democracy and
human rights; support for econom-
ic and institutional reform; conflict
prevention and fragile states; and
human development, social cohe-
sion and employment. Non-focal
spending may include such things
as funding for non-state actors or

"In signing these papers we are
moving into an ambitious partner-
ship. Africa and Europe now
share the same vision of the future
and have agreed on practical steps
to be taken," said Commissioner
Michel at the signing of 31 papers
for Africa at the Africa-EU Heads
of State Summit on 6 December,
which amounted to 8 billion. He
added, "The strategy papers are a
guarantee of results. They set out
clearly, country by country, the
priorities and results expected in

1- This figure includes 286M for OCTs
(see box). M




1957 Treaty of Rome. Convention of Application EDF 1


France French West Africa comprising: Dahomey, Guineal,
Cte d'Ivoire, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Sudan, Upper Volta
French Equatorial Africa, comprising: Cameroon (Trust Territory),
Chad, Middle Congo, Gabon, Ubangi-Chari
Other French Territories: autonomous Republic of Togo,
Madagascar, Comoros, French Polynesia, French Southern and
Antarctic territories, Algeria, Runion, Guyane, Martinique,
Guadeloupe, St Pierre and Miquelon, French Somaliland, New
Caledonia and dependencies, Surinam (became effectively
associated on 1 September 1962)
Belgium Congo, Ruanda-Urundi
Italy Somaliland
Netherlands New Guinea
Federal Republic
of Germany

(1) Guinea left the Association in 1958, but returned for Lome I
Note: A "declaration of intent" left open the possibility of association to Surinam, Netherlands
Antilles, Morocco, Tunisia and Libya.

1963 Yaound I Convention EDF 2

EEC (6)

As before

AASM (Associated African States and Madagascar) (18)*

Burundi (formerly part of Ruanda-Urundi), United Republic of
Cameroonl, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo-Brazzaville
(Formerly French Congo), Congo Leopoldville (Formerly Belgian
Congo), Dahomey, Gabon, Cte d'Ivoire, Madagascar, Mali (for
merly part of French Sudan), Mauritania (formerly part of French
Sudan), Niger, Rwanda (formerly part of Ruanda-Urundi), Senegal,
Somalia2, Togo, Upper Volta

* OCTs remaining to Member States of the EEC were the subject of a Council decision, renewed in
1970 after Yaound II and regularly thereafter. They are not part of the 18 AASM.
1- formed in 1961, through the union of French and British Trust Territories of Cameroon.
2- Comprising former British Somaliland (1960)

1969 Yaound II Convention EDF 3

EEC (6) AASM (Associated African States and Madagascar) (19)

As before Burundi, United Republic of Cameroonl, Central African Republic,
Chad, People Republic of Congo (formerly Congo-Brazzaville),
Dahomey, Gabon, Cte d'Ivoire, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania,
Mauritius (joined in 1972), Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Somalia,
Togo, Upper Volta, Zaire (formerly Congo-Kinshasa and before
that Congo Leopoldville)
i* L .i :' 1 federal Republic of Cameroon

1975 Lom I Convention EDF 4

EE.: :'. ACP GROUP, CREATED IN 1975 (46 : 37 AFRICA, 6 CARIB, 3 PAC)

As before plus:
Denmark, Ireland,
United Kingdom
(which joined
in 1973)

As before plus:
Commonwealth countries
Bahamas, Barbados, Botswana, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana,
Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi,
Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Tanzania, Tonga, Trinidad and
Tobago, Uganda, Western Samoa, Zambia

1980 Lom II Convention EDF 5

EEC (10)

As before, plus
Greece (which
joined in 1981)

ACP" (59 : 43 AFR, 9 CARIB, 7 PAC)

As before, plus:
Cape Verde, Comoros, Djibouti, Dominica, Kiribati, Papua New
Guinea, St Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Solomon
Islands, Surinam, Tuvalu, Zimbabwe (joined in 1980 after the
convention has been signed by the ACPs)

(the following have changed their names since joining: Dahomey is Benin, Upper Volta is Burkina Faso)

1985 Lom III Convention EDF 6

EEC (12) ACP(66: 45 AFR, 13 CARIB, 8 PAC)

As before, plus As before, plus:
Spain and Angola (joined in 1980 after the convention has been signed by
Portugal, (which the ACPs), Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Mozambique,
joined in 1981) St. Christopher and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines,

1990 Lom IV Convention EDF 7

EEC (12) ACP (69: 46 Africa, 15 Caribbean, 8 Pacific)

As before As before, plus:
Dominican Republic, Haiti, Namibia
(will join after independence in April 1990)

1995 Revised Lom IV Convention EDF 8

EEC (15) ACP (70 : 47 Africa, 15 Caribbean, 8 Pacific)

As before As before, plus:
Plus Austria, Eritrea
Finland, Sweden
(which joined on
1 January 1995)

2000 Cotonou Agreement EDF 9


As before As before, plus:
Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands,
Nauru, Niue, Palau, South Africa

2005 Revised Cotonou Agreement EDF 10

EEC (25) ACP (78*: 48 AFRICA, 15 CARIBBEAN*, 15 PACIFIC)

As before plus
Czech Republic,
Estonia, Cyprus,
Latvia, Lithuania,
Hungary, Malta,
Poland, Slovenia
and Slovakia which
joined on 1 May
2004) (Romania
and Bulgaria to join
on 1 January 2007)

As before, plus:
Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands,
Nauru, Niue, Palau, South Africa, Timor Leste

Non Commonwealth Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Guinea (will join later), Guinea-Bissau,
Liberia, Sudan

* Cuba which joined the ACP Croup in December 2002, is not included as it is not part of the ACP-
EU cooperation


flfrica I la5iii en I PcIf
and Euopean nion cntrie

Antigua and i iL.ii i- ,l ii I Barbados Belize Cuba Dominica Dominican
F.-1.ii L. i. i.i-,, i .1 i,, i, H r i i miaica Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint
, .' 11'.- .. -. i,,,,,, Trinidad and Tobago


i i ''r




." ,i- iil . iii, j rn l I, i, ,i i l,,,,,,- i: h- i- li ,l11 ., '1 i ,I r, i , il. 'i l" ii,- ,ir ,
i.. ... 1,i .. .. .,I d -U .. ,,1 ., 1 ,, ,, ,, .- 1..
, I ,.. |: _-,.1111
:.- .- 1,.- ,.- _ .... : . :.., "- :,1.1 .1, -. T ,I ,:.,..ii. T.
_.. ~ ,,, ,- ,,' ,.,, :' ,,j-- -; l, ./ _

Cook Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Kiribati Marshall Islands Nauru Niue
Palau Papua New Guinea Samoa Solomon Islands Timor Leste Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu


I r

..Nether s P d P l


Austria 'i nni. ~ lii'n , /prL I-,-, I" h i _.r,,,,, 1:,,,1 i ,II France
Gerran' *i-,:- Ir-i.''' i i iii i _i ,-l d,,ii Miii valta
Netherlands Poland Portugal :',,,,,,,,, i ',, -,-, United

4 .
1 ";

The lists of countries published by The Courier do not prejudice the status of these countries and territories now or in the future. The Courier uses maps from a variety of sources.
Their use does not implv recognition of anv particular boundaries nor prejudice the status of anv state or territory.

-;r F