Within the ACP-EU cooperation framework, good governance is said to be one of the fundamental principles of the partnership. This is a welcome development. But it has been unfortunate that the focus of the discussion has been disproportionately on the ACP side.
It is in fact of little use to tackle the issue of governance in ACP countries without situating these problems in a more global analytical framework. In other words, we can not isolate one set of governance problems - even if they are commonly associated with a particular region - from the rest. All states are players on the same world stage. There may be different plots and sub-plots running simultaneously, but all these are inter-woven into one script.
For the purpose of this discussion, we are defining governance as the actions and conduct of states in our "global village", and the different interests that they choose defend, promote or undermine in the exercise of the power that is vested in them.
The current global context is not a very good place for good governance to begin to take root and flourish in those countries which are "badly governed". We would like to imagine a community of nations that are peace-loving, responsible, accountable and enlightened guardians of humanity and the planet. This is far from the case.
Despite the noble rhetoric on freedom, democracy and justice, the global arena is characterized by well marked double standards - there is one set of rules for the rich and mighty and a different set of rules for the poor and weak. Superpower status allows for a state and its allies to be able to violate the principles of international law and multilateralism upon which our "modern" world is founded, and pursue political and economic goals through military means.
The US-Iraq war - use of force, violations of rule of law, double standards, disregard for human life, impunity - is simply a larger scale of a pattern that replicates itself again and again in the way that power relations play themselves out everywhere: between North and South, between states and their people and even between husbands and their wives. If anything, the global context is generating more governance problems in developing countries than it is resolving.
The introduction of political dialogue in the Cotonou Agreement was sold as one of new pillars of the partnership. As ACP citizens, this innovation will lose credibility and legitimacy unless it takes as a point of reference the global geo-political context, and allows for the space to discuss all issues. This political dialogue can not single out what happens within a
particular state in isolation from the global dynamics and expect that lasting solutions will be found.
It is important to link the issue of good governance very closely with the social and economic justice agenda. We live in a world characterized first and foremost by inequality and inequity. In the Cotonou framework, the EU is providing aid to ACP countries, but that is nothing in comparison to the drain of resources from South to North through various ways. For over twenty years, ACP countries have called upon the EU to work with them to try to reverse these flows, particularly through addressing the very central problem of the debt burden.
Regardless of the responsibility creditors share for creating the debt crisis, year after year, people starve and die because of a refusal to find sustainable solutions. Entire societies are disintegrating because of the lack of resources to guarantee adequate income for the most basic human needs. The magnitude of the debt crisis can only lead to tensions, conflict and violence. The best response so far has piecemeal measures in policy packages that exacerbate the problem. In fact the debt could be written off with the stroke of a pen. It is that simple.
Again, it is important to state that the perpetuation of the crisis is not simply an issue of economics and finance … on the one hand, a major factor in this crisis has been the overwhelming balance of power in favour of the creditor countries and the misuse of that power. On the other hand, the debt crisis also demonstrates the weakness - if not the complicity - of our own governments when they fail to mobilize themselves into a bloc to present a consolidated front to deal with this injustice.
ACP governments are continually compromised because they have failed to follow their own prescriptions to redress power imbalances and dependency in the global order. One of the reasons why we as citizens clamour for good governance, is so that as people's we can live in dignity. There is no dignity in the poverty and vulnerability we experience when we can not cover even our most basic needs with our own resources.
While certain leaders in the West rightly lament that Africa is a scar on the conscience of the world, the dust gathers on reams of resolutions containing international commitments to tackle pressing social, economic, political and environmental problems. Some people might say we should acknowledge progress where it has happened. Indeed, we celebrate the few minor victories and advances, including in the Cotonou Agreement. We appreciate progress, but how is it that with all this progress, things are getting worse?
When it comes to spending relatively small sums for social programmes that would do good for very large numbers of poor people, responses are slow and wallets have to be prised open. In contrast, when it comes to helping rich corporations make more money, somehow we are seeing states mobilize themselves and with missionary zeal, preach the gospel of the free market. Here again in the Cotonou Agreement, it takes years to establish procedures that will ensure that money can be disbursed rapidly to fund much needed development programmes. But somehow it is not unrealistic to expect to finish negotiations for free trade areas (ie. 8 years) in less time than it takes to spend one EDF (13 years).
Ghandi said "poverty is the worst form of violence." In that case, today all states stand accused. In the current context and given the challenges that humanity faces, what is this "good governance" supposed to deliver? If it is true that we have better governance in ACP countries, why there is more poverty? How is it that we have more democracy, and yet somehow, we have less choice?
The governance question will not be solved by a few consultations with civil society here and there, or even by staging democratic elections every five years. Good governance might in part mean allowing civil society, the media and business to operate more freely and autonomously, but it does not mean that the state is supposed to abdicate its economic, social and welfare responsibilities as has happened in the past 20 years. The governance problems and challenges that we face call for a much deeper kind of transformation in our social, political and economic orders. It calls for a rethink of how we have come to interpret the role of the State beyond the market, and look towards reconstituting the developmental state.
Trends such as privatization of public services and many other proposals for the new multilateral trade regime, to which there are growing protests in the ACP and EU, are not compatible with good governance. This is simply because they put profits before people. Our world is not for sale and governments must stop those who believe that they can buy, own and try to sell it back to us - damaged and with a hefty mark-up.
Good governance means that at the global level, states must take their international commitments and obligations seriously. Within the Cotonou Agreement, morally it is Europe, not the ACP, on whom the obligations fall most heavily to respect commitments. Yes, the ACP governments and peoples must take first responsibility for securing a prosperous and peaceful future for themselves, and time is running out for excuses. But where our relationship with the EU is concerned the basis of the "partnership" remains, in our view, a historical debt accumulated over the past 400 years which must be repaid honestly and unconditionally.
It is necessary to say these things this bluntly because as women, our backs are broken from having to bear the burden of the fallout from decades of exploitation, bungled development, predatory partnerships and unfulfilled promises. We do not have access to power structures where we can speak, be heard and orchestrate change. We are excluded from the mainstream economy where national resources are turned into profits for the benefit of small groups of wealthy elites and even foreign corporations. We are expected to be able to feed, clothe and educate our children with no public support, and yet we contribute over 50% of the nation's wealth. For centuries we have held together communities and families, kept social breakdown at bay and provided a free social welfare system to the nation and yet we are consistently denied the enjoyment of universal social, political and civic rights. We are ridiculed, castigated or threatened when we try to come forward to make change happen. Our exclusion the ultimate proof that whatever states have done, it is not good enough. It is proof that yesterday is not too soon for a deep change in the values and priorities driving our political, social and economic systems.
We are certainly not going to give up these struggles. After all we know have only one chance at life and there is much hope that change can happen if we work at it relentlessly. Another world is possible!
Footnote:
-
The ACP Civil Society Forum groups 6 sub-regional networks: ENDA Tiers Monde, InterAfrica Group, MWENGO, The Pacific Concerns Resource Centre and the Caribbean Development Policy Centre.
|
Related documents
