Intra-regional conflict is a big drain on the region's resources. Not only does it deprive States from expending the limited resources on development projects such as roads, bridges, school the health sector and other infrastructural developments, but it also diverts human resources and national attention to areas not immediately leading to national and regional development.
COMESA, therefore, takes conflict prevention, resolution and management very seriously. This is in recognition that the poverty that is so pervasive in the region today can be attributed to conflict, both internal and external that has ravaged the region for as long as 4 decades in some countries. The low HDI (or high HPI) and the poor (devastated or underdeveloped) infrastructure is a result of this conflict.
4.1 Conflict in COMESA - Case Studies
Inter-State and intra-State conflict has significantly retarded the development of the region. Examples of such conflict include the following:
- Angola situation
The Angola conflict has an impact on Zambia, Congo DR, and Angola itself. Immediate issues concern destruction of the Benguela Railway line which links Zambia, Congo DR to Angola, providing a good alternative route to the sea for Zambian and Congolese copper and other merchandise.
- Burundi situation
Instability in Burundi has caused investment and production to be stunted in several sectors especially in textiles where the country began investing significantly in the late 1980s. Burundi experienced static investment in textiles as the Chinese-built plant could not be modernised. The type and quality of fabric and other textile products has remained more or less the same since the late 1980s when the plant was set up. Compared to Zambia where an identical plant was established using identical technology, modernisation has led to the production of very competitive fabric both in terms of quality and price to those coming from Europe.
Similarly, use of port facilities for Burundi's own merchandise from Zambia, Congo DR and Tanzania has been significantly affected.
- Congo DR situation
The Congolese conflict has had widespread impact on the region. For Congo itself, investment and trade has taken a toll notably in copper and diamond mines which lacked resources for production and rehabilitation; cross-border trade with neighbouring countries such as Zambia, Burundi and Uganda has also fallen and the use of facilities such as the Zambian railway network for transportation of copper also declined.
- Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict
The Eritrea-Ethiopian conflict deprived the region and businesspersons in particular the use of common facilities such as ports and shipping lines, limiting trade from within the region and from overseas.
- Uganda-Sudan conflict
While both countries have vast potential for agricultural production, instability has rendered any meaningful production difficult in the northern part of Uganda and the southern part of Sudan, and limiting trade between Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda. For example, the textile plan in Burundi could benefit from cotton from Sudan.
Power generation capacity remained static or declined when the dam at Jinja has capacity to supply power to not only Uganda but a few neighbouring countries as well. This potential could not be harnessed due partly to conflict.
- Rwanda
Internal strife led to a lack of expansion of production facilities in roofing sheet production, beauty products and dairy products as demand for these products declined significantly on the domestic market. Tourism in the northern parts of the country (gorilla areas) also declined.
4.2 Cost to the Region and Impact on Poverty levels
While no study has been undertaken to quantify the cost of conflict to the region, it can easily be estimated in Billions of Dollars exceeding the average GDP of the majority of COMESA countries whose GDP is less than US$ 10 billion. Total production as measured by GDP declined markedly in most of the countries that experienced conflict over the period 1990 and 1999. The table below shows the contraction in GDP.
While Uganda and Eritrea experienced some growth of US$1.9 billion and US$0.2 billion respectively, all the other countries under conflict experienced declines in GDP totalling US$13.6 billion in nominal terms.
While the population was going up, the GDP per capita, which is one of the factors in the HDI/HPI measurement, was obviously going down, leading to higher poverty levels.
4.3 GDP Growth and Investment Flows
The net effect of these conflicts on the region has been a slowing down of the rate of growth of the region's economy. This is because, other than Uganda, nearly all the other countries listed below experienced negative growth for the most part of the last decade. GDP growth for the COMESA region fared as shown in the Table below between 1990 and 1999.
With the return to peace in most of these areas in the last two years, thanks to the efforts of distinguished African leaders such as the late former President Nyerere, former President Mandela, former President Masire and current presidents in the region, there is renewed hope that the region may record and enjoy and record meaningful levels of development which it can sustain.
Nominal GDP figures, US$ Billion
| |
Population1999, million |
GDP 1990US$' billion |
GDP 1999US$' billion |
Decline/Increase in GDP in US$ terms2 |
| Total COMESA |
339.07 |
123.5 |
163.44 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| Angola |
12.3 |
10.2 |
8.5 |
-1.7 |
| Burundi |
6.7 |
1.1 |
0.7 |
-0.4 |
| Comoros |
0.54 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
|
| Congo DR |
49.8 |
9.3 |
5.6 |
-3.7 |
| Djibouti |
0.65 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
|
| Egypt |
62.6 |
43.1 |
89.1 |
|
| Eritrea |
4.0 |
0.4 |
0.64 |
+0.2 |
| Ethiopia |
62.8 |
6.8 |
6.4 |
-0.4 |
| Kenya |
29.4 |
8.5 |
10.6 |
|
| Madagascar |
15.1 |
3.1 |
3.7 |
|
| Malawi |
10.8 |
1.8 |
1.8 |
|
| Mauritius |
1.1 |
2.6 |
4.2 |
|
| Namibia |
1.7 |
2.3 |
3.1 |
|
| Rwanda |
8.3 |
2.6 |
1.9 |
-0.7 |
| Seychelles |
0.08 |
0.4 |
0.5 |
|
| Swaziland |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.2 |
|
| Sudan |
28.9 |
13.2 |
9.7 |
-3.5 |
| Uganda |
21.5 |
4.3 |
6.4 |
+1.9 |
| Zambia |
9.9 |
3.3 |
3.1 |
|
| Zimbabwe |
11.9 |
8.8 |
5.6 |
-3.2 |
Source: World Development Indicators, 2001, The World Bank.
Footnote:
- The GDP figures have not been adjusted for inflation.
|
Related documents