Why governments should not sign Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) with the European Union without negotiation

Why governments should not sign Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) with the European Union without negotiation

By Moses Kulaba, Governance and economic analysis centre, Dar es Salaam-Tanzania

From the tenets or principles and its design, the EPA offers critical economic challenges. Indeed, according, former Tanzanian President, HE Benjamin Mkapa, has cautioned that signing the EPA less developed Countries like Tanzania will be signing off an economic death warrant to their industries and jobs. Similar sentiments have been echoed by President John Magufuli when he described the EPAs as a form of colonialism and bad for our Country. Experts have equally warned against signing EPAs in their current form and content-perhaps there is reason to fear

The Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) are bilateral agreements signed between less developed Countries and the European Union which allows free access of goods and services to   the European Union and vice versa. At the core of the EPA’s are said to be free trade between Less Developed Countries and the European Union.  They were set to replace the current existing trade relationships under the Cotonou Agreement and any other preferential trade related provisions such as the Everything But Arms (EBA).

It is from this perspective that as an expert and economic diplomat, I would advise Tanzania’s government and other least developed countries (LDCs) not to sign EPAs in their current form and pursue any future negotiations with utmost caution.

Firstly, EPAs would open up the Tanzanian market and industrial sector to extreme European competition this would be contrary to Tanzania government’s industrialization and job creation agenda. According to European Investment Reports in Tanzania, EU companies accounted for 68% of the total FDI in Tanzania. This makes the EU the single largest investment block into Tanzania. Under the EPA framework domestic industries will not be able to compete with their European counterparts. The EU also subsidizes its products through subsidizes extended to its farmers and industries making them unfavorably competitive.

The EPA does not guarantee free access of Tanzanian goods into the European Market. This is because the European market restrictions and non-tariff barriers such as quality controls and psytosanitary standards which are imposed by the EU on goods and services coming from less developed Countries.

According to the European Commission the net trade volumes between the EU and Tanzania amounted to1, 602 Million Euros. The EU also toped Tanzania as a trading partners with trade volumes estimated at USD2 Billion in 2016  Out of these Tanzania exported goods worth Euros632 million while it imported goods and services worth Euros 970 million creating a trade balance of Euros 338 million in favour of the EU. This therefore means that the trade imbalance would worsen   if Tanzania was to open up its markets to the European Union without any restriction.

Free trade between the EU and Tanzania would lead to high import revenue foregone by Tanzania. It is estimated that at the current figures (Usd2 billion in 2016) the trade created through signing of EPA would amount to 10 Billion. If an average amount of import duty charged on these goods is projected over the five-year period of the EPA, the government would lose billions in revenue foregone. This would be a major loss to the government which is struggling to build its tax base and aims to achieve a tax to GDP ratio of 19% by 2020.

There are other opportunities to trade with the EU exist under the Cotonou Agreement. The Everything But Arms provisions with in the current Cotonou Agreement allow Tanzania to export goods and services apart from arms to the EU on preferential terms. It does therefore not make prudent economic sense for the Country to enter into another agreement whose perceived economic benefits could be still achieved under the EBA. It would be to continue or re-negotiate with the EU under the EBA framework. The EPA may also be contrary to WTO rules of MFN. By signing the EPA Tanzania would be obliged to provide the same treatment to other nations. This would dangerously open up Tanzania’s economic to extreme competition and potential dumping from other Countries

The signing of the EPA would create a multiplicity and duplicity of membership to regional trade groupings. Tanzania is a member of SADC and EAC. By signing up to the EPA, Tanzania would also violate some of the economic rules of SADC which requires a common external tariff on goods coming from outside the SADC. The EPA requires that EAC signs as a region. This is requirement is oblivious to the fact that the different member states are at different economic levels. Kenya is a developing Country and therefore stands to benefit more from the EPA than Tanzania. Kenya’s flower market has already been a major export to the European Markets and this implies that Kenya would be a major beneficiary.

Obviously, by not signing up, Tanzania stands to lose its diplomatic darling status in the face of EU’s foreign policy to Africa. Tanzania’s good will have to meet high standards and heavily compete with other countries for entry into the European market. The non-preferential tax treatment and potential border taxes imposed by Tanzania on foreign goods may make EU products entering Tanzania’s markets to be highly priced and costly for local Tanzanians. Tanzania may be forced to seek alternative trading partners to replace on previously EU sourced goods.

Despite the potential economic benefits that appear to be offered by the EPA, if weighed the advantages of signing the EPA in their current forms has potential catastrophic consequences on Tanzania. A cautiously renegotiated approach would be the most appropriate pathway.

References

A comparison between the East African Community (EAC) and the   European Union (EU) in search for stronger Regional Economic Cooperation

A comparison between the East African Community (EAC) and the   European Union (EU) in search for stronger Regional Economic Cooperation:

By Moses Kulaba, Governance and economic analysis centre, Dar es Salaam-Tanzania

The East Africa Community (EAC) is a regional economic block comprising of 6 member states. The EAC was originally established in 1967, resolved in 1977 and later revived in 1999 comprising of three founding members; Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda.  It has since expanded to include Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan.  Currently, discussions are ongoing to admit Somalia into the block. A comparison of the EU and EAC shows that the two blocks have some similarities but also fundamental differences.  Despite having the longest history, the EAC’s to maturity has remained punctured and slow like a tortoise while its younger cousin towers in speed and form like a mighty colossus. What lessons can be learnt?

The European Union (EU) is a regional economic grouping of 27 member countries. The history of the EU can be traced back to 1950 when the first proposal towards integration was made by the French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman towards integrating the Coal and Steel industries of Western Europe. 

This culminated in the establishment of the European Coal and Steel community (ECSC) in 1951 comprising of six members: Belgium, West Germany, Luxembourg, France, Italy and the Netherlands. The next steps towards the EU advanced further with the signing of the treaty of Rome in 1957 and establishment of the European Economic Commission (EEC).  Since its inception the EU has evolved through various stages into one of the most successful regional economic and political blocks.

Similarities between the EAC and EU regional economic blocks

Common economic theoretical motivation

All are economic regional blocks aimed at fostering trade amongst its members. By their nature, regional economic blocks aim at promoting the economic prosperity and development of its members.

The economic theoretical motivation of the blocks is informed by liberal and neo liberal school of thought that suggests the need for mutual cooperation and common collaboration by states to address global problems.   According liberal economists such as Adam Smith who suggested that countries benefited from free trade and elimination of tariffs while Gottfried Haberler suggested that those excluded from the preference arrangements arising from economic integration should lose.  There was value for states to cooperate for the sake of enjoying trade and economic benefits. 

Economically just like any other regional blocs, the EAC and EU seek to benefit from economies of scale, trade creation, product differentiation and efficiency gains through regional trade policies created within the community blocs.

Geographical proximity is a major success factor for economic integration. In both the EU and the EAC, respective member states abide to the factor of geographical proximity by sharing common borders. Expansion to countries that are considered not sharing common borders has been largely opposed and remained a politically divisive issue. For example, EAC member states rejected Sudan’s application to join the block because it did not share a close border.  Some EU countries have used the same reason, among others, to deny Turkey’s membership to the EU.

Common historical background is evident amongst both regional groups. The EAC is bound by a common historical background linking its members to a common African cultural and linguistic heritage embed in Bantu and Kiswahili as a language of the region. Although separated by artificial colonial borders the East African people are the same and related in many aspects. The EU is a diverse block of many countries with various linguistic backgrounds but common European heritage. In recent years, the EU has been gradually trying to build a European Culture, by allowing free movement and settlement of its citizens across EU member states.

Differences between EU and EAC

In order to make an informed differentiation of the two regional blocks, one has to look at the history, rationale, organization structure, operations and political economy of these organizations.

According to Njura, the fundamental difference between the EU and EAC lies in their respective rationale.

The EU was basically established to promote peace, economic prosperity, and the well-being of its peoples based on the constitutive act of the EU Article 3. While the rationale behind the establishment EAC  as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty for the establishment of the EAC, was to develop policies aimed at widening and deepening cooperation among the Partner States in political, economic, social and cultural fields, research and technology, defense, security and legal and judicial affairs for the mutual benefit.

The EU was conceived as a tool for peace. Between 1954 and 1959 the cooperation amongst European states was set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbors, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community began to unite European Countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace.

The current EAC was revived after the collapse of the first East African Community in 1977, whose prime motivation had equally focused on building economic development of the region after the struggle for independence. The first EAC had collapsed largely because of political indifference. Building a new EAC fundamentally anchored on economic cooperation made sense.

A deeper analysis reveals further that there are significant differences between the EU and the EAC in terms of stages of its integration, organs and operations. Its pillars and structures have (leadership, decisions making and accountability

Different sequencing and stages of economic integration development

The sequencing of integration is an important feature in regional economic integration. The various stages provide room for partners to build consensus on the shared degree of ambition, the size and diversity, and convergence of economic block

Classically, there are five major stages of economic integration. Free Trade Area, Preferential Trade Area, Customs Union, Common Market, Monetary Union and ultimately a political union.

The Free Trade Area (FTA) is the initial stage toward regional economic integration under which Countries agree to cooperate on selected areas. The Preferential Trade Area (PTA) is second stages where Countries agree to remove tariffs across member states while maintain independent tariff regimes on imports from outside countries. The third stage is the Customs Union where member states agree on all conditions in FTA and PTA and also establish a common external tariff (CET) on all imports from outside the block. The Common Market follows with features comprising of all the other stages including free movement of labour, capital goods and services across member states. The Monetary Union is the next stage where by member states agree to all the terms under the previous stages, including a common monetary policy and currency. The last stage is the Political Union, where the member states cooperate on political matters and cede considerable political power to a central authority.

The European Union is currently of Monetary Union with also some characteristics of a political union.  A close scrutiny of the EU shows that its stages of integration were not cleared distinct but inter-related in a reinforcing manner leading towards full economic integration.

Since the signing of the treaty of Rome in 1957 the European has developed into an internal single market through a standardized system of laws that apply in all member Countries and into a Monetary Union with a single Currency-the Euro.

EU policies aim to ensure the free movement of people, goods, services and capital within the market. It has enacted legislation concerning justice and home affairs, and maintained common policies on trade, agriculture, fisheries and regional development.

Has adopted a common external border control policy and within the Schengen Area, passport controls have been abolished allowing free movement across borders for all EU nationals and foreigners possessing a Schengen Visa. A monetary union was established in 1999 and came into full force in 2002. It is comprised of 19 EU member states which use the Euro as a common currency

On the contrary, the EAC has attempted to follow a chronological order of growth from one stage to another. The EAC was established in 1999 as a Customs Union. Because of its history and level of economic cooperation amongst its founding states, the EAC skipped the first stage of economic integration. It is currently a Common Market, which is the third stage of economic integration whereby there is supposed to be a common external tariff, free movement of labour, goods and services.

The EAC is still aspiring to achieve a monetary Union by 2024 and ultimately a political federation thereafter. Attempts to fast track to a political federation have not materialized because of a number of mitigating factors such as competing political interests and perceived leadership ambitions.

Major Timelines for EU and EAC Regional Integration

EU Timeline

EAC Timeline

Event

Year

Event

Year

European Coal and Steel  Cooperation (ECSC)

1951

Tripartite Commission for Cooperation signed

1993

Treaty of Rome –European Economic Cooperation (EEC)

1957

Treaty for EAC signed by Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda

1999

Single European Act (SEA)-Single Union

1986

Customs Union Protocol

2004

Maastricht treaty-European Union (EU) established-EU as Common Market

1992

Expansion of EAC by admission of Rwanda and Burundi

2007

Treaty of Amsterdam and Nice- Monetary Union and Euro as a Currency

2001/2

Common Market

2010

Treaty of Lisbon-Political aspects of the Union, including Constitutional issues and leadership

2007

Protocol for establishment of Monetary Union signed not yet implemented

2013

Organs of the EU and the EAC

The EU operates through a hybrid system of supra-national and intergovernmental decision making. Under this arrangement some of the member state powers have been delegated to be exercised by the EU Headquarters in Brussels on behalf and interest of its member states.

It has got seven principle institutions governing its operations. These are also known as Institutions of the European Union. These institutions do not actually directly represent the government members of the EU but actually operate within the dual supranational and intergovernmental structure. Based on the institutional provision, organization structures of the EU are:

The European Council which defines the general political direction of the EU. This is composed heads of state or government of the member states plus the president of the European Commission. The high representative of Foreign Affairs and security policy is also a member. This body forms the EU summit;

The European commission: Established in 1958, this is the EU executive body. It is the organ entitled with the management of the EU decisions, common policies and budget. It is composed of 28 members as commissioners, one from each member country;

The European Council or Council of the European Union: This is also known as the council of Ministers which was composed of 28 (27 after the exit of the United Kingdom) members. These are tasked with the responsibility of adopting EU laws and coordinating policy implementation.  It is comprised of Ministers from members from all member states and convenes regularly depending on the policy areas under discussion. The Presidency to this is held for 6 months on a rotational basis

The European Parliament: This is comprised of 751 members directly elected by the European Union member state citizens through direct adult suffrage for a five year term. They bear the responsibility of representing the citizens of the EU.

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) established in 1952 comprising of 1 judge from each country and 11 advocates. This plays a significant role in interpreting the laws for the Union and its decisions and rulings have de jure binding powers on all its members.

The EU has other bodies such as the European Central Bank (ECB) and the European Investment Bank (EIB). The ECB conducts Economic and monetary policy and manages the Euro. The EIB provides funding for EU projects.

The European Court of Auditors and Office of the Ombudsman investigates all complaints against the EU institutions and bodies.

The EAC Organisation and Institutional Structure

There are seven main organs through which the EAC works, however in contrast to the EU, there are slight differences in how some of these organs operate and exercise their powers.  These organs include:

The summit of heads of states which provides strategic direction towards realization of the goals of the EAC: it is composed of the Presidents of the member states with the authority to make final decisions on the direction the community needs to take in terms of economic developments and political cooperation;

The council of ministers: it composes of the various ministers of member state governments in charge of the EAC affairs in their respective governments. Its major responsibility is policy direction but also keeps constant review and monitoring of the EAC programs. These are major custodians of the decisions taken by the summit.

The coordination committee whose primary responsibility is to foster regional cooperation and supervision of sectoral committees: it is composed of the permanent secretaries in various member governments‟ ministries responsible for the affairs of the EAC. The responsibility of the body is to prepare reports, submit and give recommendations on the implementation of the treaty

The Sectoral committees are composed of senior officials established by the council ministers with the major responsibility of conceptualizing programs, preparing comprehensive implementation and monitoring of programs. These meet on a regularly depending on the issues

The Secretariat: this is the administrative organ of the EAC. It is the one responsible for managing the everyday affairs of the EAC but has no powers to decide the direction on which the EAC need to go; this power is reserved for presidents. It is the guardian of the EAC treaty, ensuring that the treaty and decisions made by the other organs are implemented.

The East Africa Legislative Assembly: it is the legislative arm of the EAC; it debates and approves the community budget. It is composed of 45 members (nine from each member states) and 7 ex-officio members comprising of Ministers or Cabinet officials responsible for EAC affairs from the member states. These are elected by the members of the national parliaments of member states

The East African Court of Justice: this is the court of the EAC which has the responsibility of interpreting the laws, the treaties and hears the disputes among the party states members. It is the principle judicial body of the EAC. It is comprised of judges appointed from member states. It has jurisdiction to entertain all matters related to the implementation of the EAC treaty and its associated legislations.

According to the EU regulations, its organs appear to have more independent mandate to exercise their powers and take binding decisions while the EAC organs are still subject to approval by the Summit of Head of states of the member countries.  The summit is chaired one of the head of state of the member countries on a rotational basis.

Differences in EU and EAC operations

The EU is largely a treaty-based organization.  The treaties are the major binding agreements between EU member states.  Every major decision and step is taken and effected by treaty. No major decision can be taken and applicable to all member states without a treaty. Examples of the various treaties and their application include;

Treaty

Significant decision or changes made

Treaty of Rome (1957)

Establishment of European Economic Community (EEC)

Single European Act  (SEA) 1986

Deadline for single full market

Treaty of Maastricht (1992)

Widening of the EEA and establishment of the European Union

The treaty of Amsterdam (1997)

Expansion of the EU, admission of 10 members from former communist countries, absorption of Schengen Convention into EU Law, expansion of Common Foreign Security Policy

The treaty of Maastricht –Nice (2001)

Reformed decision making, changed procedures for election of Commission President, defined role of EU institutions

The treaty of Lisbon (2007)

Major amendments to the Constitutional basis of the EU

The Paris Treaty (2015)

Climate Change

The EU decisions are also made  and transmitted to the members through Regulations, directives / guidelines, decisions and recommendations.  Regulations are legally binding to all member states and must be implemented in their entirety. For example the EU regulations on Common safeguards on goods imported from outside the EU.  Directives are EU legislative acts setting out goals that all EU member states should achieve and member states left to devise mechanisms for domestic application (eg directive on elimination of hidden costs on the internet). EU decisions are applicable to those to whom they are addressed such as Countries or specific companies (For example participation in Counter terrorism and humanitarian measures) while recommendations remain largely recommendations for best practice such as best practices in use of e-commerce

The EAC operates based on treaties and protocols. The treaty to establish the EAC was signed in 1999. Thereafter subsequent decisions have been taken through protocols. Examples of such protocols include the protocol to establish the Customs Union (2004), Protocol establishing the Common Market (2010), the EAC Monetary Union Protocol (2013) and the protocol establishing the East African Kiswahili Commission (2012). The EAC also issues guidelines to member states and has passed various legislation in line with the EAC treaty.

Difference in EU and EAC membership and benefits

The EU allows none members to enjoy some of its benefits.  The members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) are not part of the EU but are subjected to EU economic regulations. Countries such as Liechtenstein, Norway, Iceland and Switzerland which are members of the Single market through the EEA are none EU members but enjoy trade benefits from the EU. Switzerland and Norway for example are also part of the Schengen area. Some member states of the EU such as the United Kingdom opted to keep their own currency, the Pound. The EURO is only used in only 19 member Countries of the 28 member block.

In the EAC, none members are restricted from enjoying benefits from the block. Countries such as Somalia have been given observer status since 2012 and may enjoy some economic privileges and benefits from the EAC. Discussions to have Somalia formally admitted has stalled since 2015

Differences in political development, roles and global influence

The European Union has advanced into a political organization with a formidable force on both economic, political security matters -while the EAC is still aspiring to achieve a monetary union and ultimately a political union. Through the Common Foreign and Security Policy, the EU has developed a role in external relations and defence.  The EU has permanent diplomatic missions (EU delegations) and represents itself at the United Nations, the WTO, the G8 and the G20.  Because of its financial and political global influence, the EU has been described as a current and potential super power.

The EU has succeeded in building common democratic values and standards that must be demonstrated and respected by the member states.  The different values of democracy are reflected in the manner in which the EU is administered, how its representatives are elected and participatory nature in which major decisions, such as to join, expand or changes to key treaty provisions are made. For example, countries only the EU after express approval of their citizens through a vote or referendum. Votes of this kind have failed in countries such as Norway. 

While in the EAC there are significant political challenges, such as lack of respect to constitutionalism, peaceful transition of power through democratic means such as elections. Political, ethnic and resource based conflicts are prevalent and these have been a major hindrance toward the fast progress of the EAC.  To date, the EAC has not garnered converging common political momentum towards a political union.

Differences in geographical, population and economic size

There are significant differences in terms of Geographical and Economic size between the two bodies. The EU comprises of 508.2 million people accounting for 7.3 of the world population and 4,324,782 Square kilometers. In 2014 the total GDP of the EU was estimated at 18.495 trln USD. This constituted approximately 24% of global nominal GDP and 17% if measured terms of purchasing power parity. The GDP per capita of its residents measured at PPP was estimated at 40.486 USD. The level of industrial growth and advancement is higher compared to its EAC counterpart.

The EAC’s size is 2.5 million square kilometers. Its population and GDP were estimated at 168.5 Million and 159.5 bln respectively.  The GDP per capita was USD918 and its economy was largely driven by agricultural and semi processed goods. The total export from the EAC was USD13.6 bln while it imported 40.2bln. The total trade volume between the EU and the EAC was 6,008 million Euros.  The exports to the EU from EAC were mainly coffee, cut flowers, tea, tobacco, fish and vegetables.  The imports from the EU into the EAC were dominated by machinery, mechanical appliances, equipment and parts, vehicles and pharmaceutical products. The EAC exported goods worth 2,415 Million Euros and Imported goods worth 3,593 Million Euros creating a trade balance of 1,178 million Euros in favour of the EU. From the statistics clearly, the trade balance and terms of trade between the EU and EAC was heavily biased in favor of the EU.  Perhaps this explains why the EU has been keen on establishing strong trade relations with the EAC through the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs)

In conclusion therefore, despite the fact that these two bodies are both regional economic integration blocks formed to achieve a common purpose of economic prosperity.  A careful scrutiny of the two reveals some subtle differences, their history, operation and structure, economic size and interest. Comparatively, the EU is far advanced as an economic regional block compared to its East African counterpart. Perhaps these differences explain why the relationship between the EU and EAC has been a subject of significant divergence and discussions in recent times.

The following lessons can therefore be learnt

  • Collective will and desire to unite is essential for a successful integration
  • People centeredness rather than state centeredness regional economic integration succeed
  • Elimination of personal ego and ‘big-man syndrome’ amongst the members and their leadership increases chance for success
  • Essence of having an anchor state rallying all the other member states together for the common cause and standing for and in bail of other member states whenever political and economic catastrophe strikes such as the economic meltdown and Euro financial turbulence in 2008 and indebtedness of Greece and Portugal.
  • Economic size is not a factor as both small and big member states stand chance to benefit if necessary, measures and structures are put in place and operational.

References

Jeffrey, A. (1990) “The European Community in the 1990s: Perspectives on Integration and Institutions

Monnet, J and Schuman, R. (2005), Paper series Vol. 5 No. 37. Dec. 2005 

Laursen, F. (2003). Comparing Regional Integration Schemes: International Regimes or Would-be Polities? in Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, Vol.3, No.8, Available at: http://miami.edu/eucenter (Accessed on 29th  June 2018). 

Njura, S, Odoyo (2016). A Comparative Analysis of the European Union (EU) and the East African Community (EAC) Economic Integration models: Lessons for Africa: A research project submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Arts in International Studies at the Institute of Diplomacy and International studies, University of Nairobi, October, 2016

Online sources:

https://www.uneca.org/oria/pages/eac-–-east-african-community, accessed on 28th June, 2018 at 6:pm

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/november/tradoc_151901.pdf accessed on 28th June, 2018 at 10:00pm

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/regions/eac/, accessed on 30th June 2018, 9:00 am

https://www.eac.int/documents/category/protocols; accessed on 30th June 2018, 11:00 am

https://europa.eu/european-union/law/treaties_en; accessed on 30th June, 2018 at 8:00 pm

https://europa.eu/european-union/eu-law/legal-acts_en; accessed on 29th at 11:00am

https://www.eac.int/eac-organs; accessed on 1st July, 2018 at 2:00pm

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodies_en; accessed on 30th June at 2:00pm

Foreign Policy and state behaviour:  How US Foreign Policy to Africa changed during Presidents Bush, Obama and Trump Administrations

Foreign Policy and state behaviour:  How US Foreign Policy to Africa changed during Presidents Bush, Obama and Trump Administrations

By Moses Kulaba, Governance and economic analysis centre

Foreign policy has been defined as a set of principles, decisions and means, adopted and followed by a nation for securing her interest in international relations. In posture and practice, the US edifies a perfect realist state and its leaders have embraced realism as a theory of choice in exercising US foreign policy and relations with other continents such as Africa. By understanding state’s foreign policy, we can predict their behavior and how to engage with them

The United States (US) is by any account a dominant super power whose foreign Policy has global influence. Historically, the US was discovered by foreign immigrants and plunderers. It acquired its independence in 1776 after a bloody revolution against British rule. The federalist triumphantly christened the new Country as ‘the land of the free’ and adopted ‘E Pluribus Unum’ a latin word meaning ‘Out of many-One’ as a national motto.

At independence, the US adopted a Bald Eagle and a Bison (North American Buffalo) as its national symbol-signifying strength, power and dominance. Since then, this historical triumph has translated into how America views and relates with other Countries and Continents. The bald eagle clenches in its talons an Olive branch and thirteen sharp arrows, perhaps reminding the entire world of America’s power -the US is ready to deploy its power to achieve its interests.

Realism scholars such as Machiavelli have argued that states’ foreign policies are solely a product of the international system—merely a reaction to external conditions and other actors.  Realism operates on the assumption of anarchy—the absence of an overarching government in the international system—as one of the most important external conditions that affect foreign policies. In an anarchic world, states must look out for their own interests.

Realists consider the state as the principal and rational actor in foreign policy, which seeks to maximise its own national interests and objectives since they believe that world politics exist in an international anarchy.  What drives realist foreign policy is its focus and responsibility to ensure national security and state survival, as well as its struggle for power.  Realists and Neorealists alike emphasise that the international system is anarchic and therefore because of this, states act the way they do in order to ensure their own survival.

As suggested by former US Secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, this has been the dominant view, taken by the US foreign policy relations with other Countries and continents such as Africa. A country’s foreign policy is determined by internal and external factors. Internal factors include; history, national values, geography, national capacity and political organisation. External factors include; international environment, internal organizations, world opinion and reaction of states to other states

Quick historical overview of U.S. Foreign Policy

US’s foreign policy has been largely influenced by its history. During the pre-World War I, the US pursued an isolationist foreign policy. The world was Eurocentric and Britain, France and German dominated global affairs. The US was protected by Oceans and technologies of the day did not directly threaten its vital interest. The US was sparsely populated and focused on its own internal destiny of building its democratic institutions and economy.  The US had trading partners, but did not exert influence globally.

The two world wars (1914-1945) ended US’s period of isolation. At the end of the Second World War, the US remained as the last standing global power. Europe and Japan were physically, financially and emotionally destroyed. German lost its industrial and military power foreign territories abroad.  Russia was financially destroyed and suffered severe losses of life. China, India and most of Asia were isolated peasant, colonial or post-colonial states with insignificant global influence. The US therefore took over this vacuum. It strengthened and asserted its global hegemony as a super power.

The years that followed the Soviet Union emerged as a superpower challenger to the U.S. In most of the world, America enjoyed an almost universal hegemony. When the Cold war ended (Fall of the Iron Curtain) in the 1990’s, America remained as the world’s only superpower.  America enjoyed world hegemony. It became de-factor world’s police and protector of the so called liberal world order. The US had financial and military power. Pax-Americana came into full flourishing replacing the Pax Britanica as the dominant world paradigm. The role of the United States was generally viewed as one of global leadership and significant engagement in international affairs. The US and its leaders have continue to pursue this view in shaping their foreign policy positions to other Countries

Extent of Change in US Foreign Policy to Africa during Presidents Bush and Obama Administrations

In order to understand the differences between Foreign Policy Approach of the two regimes, a comparative foreign policy analysis approach is used.  This is done by identifying foreign policy decision making processes related to the momentous events as well as patterns in day to day interactions of the United States and Africa during the two Presidential administrations.  The general posture of the US towards Africa and the world during the two administrations and the key policy instruments which characterized US foreign policy and presence on the African Continent between 2000 and 2015 are identified.

President George Bush’s Administration foreign policy towards Africa

President George’s Bush’s foreign policy was dominated with security and war on terror. When Bush took office before the 9/11 attacks, his foreign policy was to be based on various assumptions of classical realism. This thought assumes that the state is the main actor in foreign policy, and therefore the U.S policy would focus mainly on state-to-state relations. Classical realists also focus on the managing of relations with major powers since they are considered to be the main threats to the international system. In the case of U.S foreign policy of Bush prior to the attacks, he made it clear that the refurbishing of alliances would be a top priority in order to manage great-power relationships.

President Bush was to pursue symmetrical relations with other countries based on the view that oceans no longer protected the US from engaging overseas. However, the September 11 attacks changed dramatically President Bush’s foreign policy. The Bush administration developed a neo conservative foreign policy, focusing on regime change. He pursued an offensive realistic approach using pre-emptive force, conventional and unconventional warfare to secure American security and interests.  He divided the world as into a coalition of the willing and an axis of evil. In the war on terror President Bush asserted ‘You were either with us or against us’. The Bush administration linked the war with spread of democracy as defined by America’s foreign policy doctrine. America would pursue and defend its self and its interests anywhere in the world, including using war.

President Bush’s key foreign policy instruments for Africa

In pursuit of the war against terror, the Bush administration established an Africa Command as part of the US Military force based in Djbouti to oversee Counter terrorism and security operations in Africa. Support to African governments to establish anti terror-capabilities, including training and military equipment to African governments. The US facilitated legislative reforms supporting Counter terrorism.  The administration mobilised a coalition of other countries to counter Piracy and its threats to maritime traffic off the Coast of Somalia.

President Bush continued supporting the Africa Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA). This was a trade arrangement through which African states were eligible to export a variety of goods duty free to the US. AGOA had started during President Clinton’s administration.

In 2003, Bush established the President’s Emergence Plan for Aids Relief (PEPFAR) through which African governments were supported to fight against Aids. In 2004 the administration established the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) as an innovative and independent U.S. foreign aid agency that is helping lead the fight against global poverty.

President Obama’s Administration foreign policy for Africa

As a democrat, President Obama came into office with a neo liberal perspective with his commitments to ending war and seeking for negotiated settlements through for multilateral systems such as the UN. President Obama promised to use diplomatic engagement, internationalism and soft power.  Wanted to appease an international community feeling alienated by Bush policy. Obama wanted to pursue a liberal international order as core to America’s foreign policy. Promised military disengagement from wars oversees, but use of special operations, clandestine operations and drones to target terrorist leaders and security threats.

However, he was pulled back by America’s realistic and neo realistic values of US foreign policy.  Neorealisim or structural realism as supported by writers such as Waltz emphasise  that the international system is anarchic and therefore because of this, states act the way they do in order to ensure their own survival. He argues that although states are obliged to look after themselves and regard other states as potential threats, they are not inherently aggressive. 

Obama justified his American interventionist foreign policy with a neo-realistic argument that global peace was best achieved if there is a balance of power where great powers manage the international system. President Obama approved a troop surge of US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.  His administration facilitated the throw of foreign regimes in the North Africa and Middle East through the famous Arab Spring. The regime authorized drone strikes on suspected terrorist targets in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan.  America’s perceived actions against the Muslim world fueled an insurrection of religious fundamentalist groups such as ISIL and Alshabab in Iraq, Syria, North Africa and Somalia.

Obama’s Key Foreign Policy instruments to Africa

President Obama’s administration was a continuation of US foreign policy towards Africa.  The administration supported anti-terrorism measures in Africa.  Obama authorized drone strikes in Somalia and parts of Central Africa. The administration deployed a small American Military tactical forces and equipment to help African states to combat terror. American Special Forces were deployed in Countries such as Uganda in pursuit of rebel leader Joseph Kony in Sudan and Central Africa republic

Obama continued support for previous foreign policy instruments such as AGOA, PEPFAR and MCC. In compliment to these, Obama’s administration established the Power Africa initiative aimed at supporting African states generate enough power. Also promoted US policy to support for Renewable energy –such as solar and wind.

With the two Presidents coming from two different political ideological backgrounds, Bush being a Republican and Obama a Democrat, it was expected that there would be a shift in U.S. foreign and Africa policy from one administration to the other. Yet the evidence as supported by various scholars and actions show that in substance there was little change in the foreign policy area with regards to the War on Terror and the fight against terrorism. There was no fundamental change in US national interests. What changed was the style and how to go about such policies.

To assert U.S. foreign policy interests in the world and continuity, explains the motives of such style and consequent U.S. foreign policy behaviour and outcomes of both administrations with regards to Africa.  Perhaps, the desire to defend America’s vital interest and global power aggressively contributed towards the election of President Donald Trump as new President for the United States in 2016.

President Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy approach

Since coming to power in 2016, President Trump adopted a neoclassical realism foreign policy approach towards the world. Neoclassical realism is a combination of both classical realist and neorealist approaches. It departs from neorealism by claiming that states respond to the international system when they conduct foreign policy.  Neoclassical realists put forward that domestic political processes act as a transmission belt ‘between systemic incentives and constraints, on the one hand, and the actual diplomatic, military and foreign economic policies states select, on the other.’ Therefore, the international political outcomes usually reflect the actual distribution among states

According to President Trump, the US was gradually losing its dominant position international system to new emerging powers such as China and Russia.  This power needed to be reclaimed.

President Trump’s foreign policy approach

The tenor of President Trump’s Foreign policy is to protect the homeland, the American people and the American way of life. He has vowed to promote American prosperity, preserve peace through strength and advance American influence

According to President Trump, a nation that does not protect prosperity at home cannot protect its interests abroad. A nation that is not prepared to win a war is a nation not capable of preventing a war. A nation that is not proud of its history cannot be confident in its future. And a nation that is not certain of its values cannot summon the will to defend them.”  Donald J. Trump, December 18, 2017

The theme of the National Security as espoused in Trump’s Foreign policy towards other states is “principled realism” of an “ever-competitive world,” where the question of “how we advance our goals is more critical than ever.”

Trump’s Foreign policy strategies and position towards Africa and the world

President Trump’s strategy aims to create a ‘New Global Order’ where the US goes from dominance to leadership.  As he declared in 2015-‘From now onwards it will be America First!  His foreign policy has focused on dividing and conquering of other states by withdrawal from major multilateral arrangements such as TPP, NAFTA and seeking bilateral engagement based on strength and interest. The regime has played off China against Russia and India and Japan against China.

US foreign policy undermines and seeks to out-compete emerging power centers such as China and the EU through various actions such as tariffs seeking to “Make America Great Again”.

US defense strategy and Military organization has been structured to patrol the world with the goal of preventing the emergence of regional hegemonies throughout the world.  Pesident Trump uses flexing military muscle and threats for war such as was the case with North Korean to advance American interest.  The administration uses coercive means such as sanctions as a foreign policy tool towards other states such as Iran, North Korea and Yemen.

According to Haas, President Trump’s policies have contributed the rise of nativism, nationalism and Isolationism from global affairs.  The United States is now engaged in a great foreign policy debate between a besieged traditional internationalism and an energized new isolationism. President Trump’s domestic policy position has taken a radical view towards immigrants from other parts of the world as a threat to US security.

Based on this, Trump’s view of the world, Africa has largely remained off the American Foreign Policy radar. Since his administration came to power in 2016, there has been no concrete plan for Africa. It was no wonder that in early 2018, President Trump referred to Africa as a ‘shit hole’.

Morality without security is ineffectual.

In Conclusion, foreign policy is largely driven by national interests. National interests can be categorized into core, important and peripheral.   For the US, securing US global dominancy is a vital interest.  An assessment of the different regimes shows that policy of securing the US core interest never changed. Peripheral interests such as US’s position on population control and aid to poor people could have changed because of the different political ideologies between the conservative republicans and the liberal democrats. However, it is evident that the vital and important interest remained at the core. Perhaps, the different instruments used by the two administrations such as AGOA, PEPFAR, MCC and Power Africa were used as tools to generate support and alliance from the African continent in regards to protecting US vital interests such as the war on terrorism, Nuclear weapons proliferation,  access to natural resources and  securing  US’s influence in the United Nations Security Council. It is no wonder that in 2016  President Trump switched to pursue this American realistic view aggressively.

References

Caroline Muscat,  ‘A Comparative Analysis of the George W. Bush  and Barack Obama Administration’s Foreign  Policy in the Context of the War on terror: A cases study-Pakistan’, A dissertation presented to the Faculty of Arts in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the  degree  of Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in International Relations, May, 2013

Henry A. Kissinger, ‘Continuity and change in American Foreign Policy, 1977

Lobell, S.E., Ripsman, N.M. and Taliaferro, J.W. (2009).‘Neoclassical Realism, the State and Foreign Policy.’

Richard Haas; ‘Trump’s No Isolationist. Is That a Good Thing?’

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-01-13/richard-haass-on-trump-s-foreign-policy-and-america-first accessed on 6th July, 2018 at 3:00pm

Jeffrey. S. Lantis and Ryan Beasley: Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis: Available at http://politics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-398

McCormick, J.M. (2010) ‘American Foreign Policy & Process’ (5th ed.) p.206-207 – Europe and Asia were to be his top foreign policy priorities since they both carry American allies as well as potential rivals. 

Waltz, K.N. (1979).‘Theory of International Politics.’ http://www.popularsocialscience.com/2013/11/06/neorealism-in-international-relations-kenneth-waltz/; accessed on 6th July, 2018 at 11:00am

https://www.pepfar.gov/ accessed on 6th July, 2018 at 2:00pm

https://www.mcc.gov/about; accessed on 6th July, 2018 at 12:00pm

Why growing influence of Non-State Actors in diplomacy and consular practice is a cause for alarm in smooth running of State foreign affairs

Why growing influence of Non-State Actors in diplomacy and consular practice is a cause for alarm in smooth running of State foreign affairs.

By Moses Kulaba, Governance and economic analysis centre

Diplomacy has been defined by scholars such as Ernest Satow as the intelligent act of applying tact in the management of international relations by actors through relationships and interactions in the official conduct of their official activities in order to achieve the goals of their national interests guided by a nation’s foreign policy. It can equally be described as an international intercourse between sovereign states with an aim of advancing mutual interest in a peaceful manner. However, in recent years, non-state actors are becoming influential diplomats with credentials worth for government recognition.

Since diplomacy and consular practice is still largely about interaction between sovereign states, the role of the state is still significant.  However, if the current trend continues, it is likely that in the future, the state will become a player with different roles and functions, such as facilitation of diplomatic and consular interaction.

From the onset of its definition and practice, diplomacy was conceived as an activity within the exclusive purview of the state.  Realist and Classical theorists of politics and international relations at the time believed in the supremacy of the state and its dominance in diplomacy. Diplomacy was seen as a tool for seeking dominance and asserting power.

For political philosophers such as Machiavelli (1469-1527), in his book The Prince, he argued that state power and foreign relations were so sacrosanct to be entrusted with any other actor other than the prince (The leader) and the state.  For Machiavelli, diplomacy was only pursued in preservation of the safety and security of the state. This was the main goal of the state and he urged his Prince (The ruler) to pursue these interests at all costs, including war where diplomacy failed.

The realist ideas were challenged by liberal theorist such as John Locke and Immanuel Kant who saw that actors in International relations were both state and non-state actors. The world was viewed as anarchic in nature, with conflicting interests and competing egos. Restoration of the world order and the pursuit of global peace, democracy and international cooperation required a multilateral approach with multiple actors.

Indeed, overtime diplomacy has evolved. Today, diplomatic activities are carried out by non-state actors, whose activities transcend beyond their national borders and the confines of the state. 

Participation on Non state Actors in diplomacy and consular practice has become a pronounced phenomenon. Concepts such as corporate diplomacy, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) diplomacy, business diplomacy and conference diplomacy have become quite familiar in diplomacy and consular practice.  Experts such as Saner & Liu acknowledge that diplomacy has mutated overtime.

Globalization and democratization have rendered the professional boundaries more porous and put into question the territorial claims of the traditional diplomats. Alternative diplomatic actors have emerged within and outside the state and often act independently from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Diplomacy as a profession has undergone changes in terms of definition, qualification and role expectation of what is or not supposed to do  (Saner & Yiu: 2003).

The following non state actors influence postmodern diplomacy and consular practice in greater proportions than before.

International Organisations and agencies have become key non state actors influencing postmodern diplomacy.  These operate at sub regional, regional and global level, pursuing different sets of predetermined goals.  Sub-Regional international organizations such the East African Community (EAC), South African Development Cooperation, Common Market for Eastern and South Africa (COMESA) and North America Free Trade Area (NAFTA) may have economic integration agendas while continental and global international organizations such as the African Union and the United Nations respectively pursue broader international goals.

These organizations have vast resources and access to countries and interact with a wide range of actors and issues ranging from political affairs, peace to development.  They generate reports and international law documents shaping international diplomacy. They have a large membership base whose collective voices at times counteract or challenge individual state concerns. Indeed, this was one of the arguments advanced by the British Prime Minister Ms Theresa May in her campaign for Britain to exit the European Union. In her opinion, the United Kingdom as a state had become weak and most of its sovereign the powers to govern and diplomatic interaction had been transferred to Brussels. According to the ‘Brexit’ campaigners, the UK could not make foreign policy decisions on issues such trade and asylum without consulting the European Union headquarters in Brussels. The UK’s appropriate answer to this counter influence, in Ms Theresa May’s view, was to quit the European Union. The influence of the European Union in influencing the European Continental diplomacy is therefore significant and alarming its member states.

The International Non-Governmental Organisations (INGOs) are the other major non state actors influencing diplomacy and consular practice. Saners and Yiu have describes this new phenomenon as Diplomacy of International or Transnational NGOs. These operate at various levels from the national to the global level. These include INGOs such as the Oxfam, Human Rights Watch and humanitarian agencies such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.

They are engaged in various activities such as environment, human rights defense, economic and social development. Some are focused on Monitoring state excesses and bad corporate behavior. They may be concerned with the negative impacts of development and exclusion of the poor. INGOs have abilities to mobilize, protest and challenge states, corporate and multilateral agencies such as the World Bank and the United Nations.

They have demanded and recieved representation in major multilateral agencies such as the United Nations. Through these representations, they have been effective in putting forward policy options, alternative models and articulating their views in the international arena, their by challenging the roles of the state and traditional diplomat in dominating policy formulation and practice at the international arena.

A good example was during the negotiations towards signing of the Kyoto protocol on climate change and the recently concluded Paris Climate Change Summit, where the environmental INGOs were instrumental into pushing the member states into signing the protocol and an agreement respectively to reduce carbon emissions and global warming. INGOs and grassroots movements were in 2000 effective in influencing the World Health Organisations and governments to negotiate the framework Convention on tobacco control with aimed at reducing exposure to effects of tobacco to the public through stringent regulations of tobacco companies and smoking in public places.

Others such as the Red Cross respond to emergencies and deliver humanitarian aid in areas of crisis.  Have strong connection with the international community and often use their extensive network to communicate with the international arena by submitting reports, policy position papers and are represented at international forums with equal status as member states, their by limiting the dominance of the traditional state in diplomacy and consular practice.

National NGOs have become influential in modern diplomacy and consular practice. These represent the interests of civil society at the national level. They constitute a broad range of Civil society ranging from small to big organizations, engaged in a broad range of issues such as corruption, economic and social development and human rights monitoring.

By constantly interacting with other foreign actors they have curved a niche in foreign relations which is now commonly referred to as diplomacy of National NGOs.  They largely receive funding from outside the Country and share their periodic reports with their local and international benefactors and constituencies. With greater access to information, they are capable of sharing their views with a wider global audience and shaping international opinion at greater speed and effect than national state actors and Ministries of Foreign Affairs (MOFA).  Their unfettered access to the global audience and influence on foreign relations is a cause of alarm in diplomatic and consular relations

Transnational Corporations (TNCs) and Multinational Corporation (MNCs) have become major non state actors in diplomacy operating across borders in both developing and transiting economies. With globalization and free movement of capital in the form of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) companies today conduct businesses across Countries. However, this comes with a lot of challenges such as regulation, taxation, intellectual property and dispute settlement. MTNCs also interact with international organizations such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the International Labour Organisation (ILO) on matters of trade and labour standards (Saner & Liu: 2001). Companies also want to keep good international reputation and their global market share.

In order to deal with these international challenges, MTNCs have been encouraged to start ‘diplomatic’ activities which promote or consolidate their operations. Examples of such include trans-national business councils and forums such as the Trans-Atlantic Business Council (TABC) which is a major forum both the US and Western Europe as a forum to coordinate their position at the WTO and other related issues. Similar forums exist in Tanzania such as the Tanzania-Nordic business forums, India Tanzania Business Council and Tanzania National Business Council (TNBC).

These business councils put forward policy positions and papers and form alliances through multiple networks (embassies) to promote their agenda.  Tanzania’s National Business Council is chaired by the President of the United Republic of Tanzania. TNCs and MNCs through their councils influence foreign policy positions of their countries and may also call for global action on matters of peace and war, thereby limiting the dominance of the traditional state actors in diplomacy. The American Oil Corporate lobbyists through the American Council on Foreign Relations were instrumental in influencing the United States invasion of Iraq in 1991 and 2003.

In underscoring their roles and influence in Diplomacy and Consular practice, Saners etal and Kishna suggest that the increasing participation of MTNCs in diplomacy has contributed to the rise of new terminologies to diplomacy such as Corporate Diplomacy, Commercial Diplomacy and Business diplomacy.

Eminent Individuals are also becoming major actors in diplomacy and consular practice.  These are people with influence on global affairs and impact on diplomacy and consular relations. They include eminent persons such as the late Koffi Annan, the Aga Khan, the Dalai Lama, Bill Gates or Yousaif Malala. They have international following and always invited to international forums to share view and offer policy options. They work through various informal, formal, state and international networks to influence diplomacy. For example, Ms Malala’s views on the girl Child’s education may have more global impact than the views of an education minister from poor sovereign states. Their influence is insurmountable.

There is also an increasing debate and acceptance of the view that even ordinary individuals have influence on diplomacy. For example, when an individual makes a presentation at a global conference about his country, such a person is engaging in a form of diplomacy and his or her opinions may shape the perception and views of other states against his or her Country. Although this debate is not conclusive, it is evident that diplomacy and consular practice is no longer restricted to state actors.

The role of organized criminal Gangs and armed Groups such as drug cartels, pirates, fundamentalist and terrorist groups such as Al-Qaida, International State in Syria and Levant (ISIL), Alshabab  and nationalistic movements such as the Free Syrian Army and Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) are equally becoming major actors in diplomacy and consular relations.  These operate across borders and have significant influence on the politics, economy, peace and security in the territories where they operate. They have access to vast resources and may use their extensive international network for mobilization and propaganda.

Recent history has shown that conflicts are largely involving non state actors. The 2001 attack on the World Trade Center by Al-Qaida operatives working through a wide network of operatives and alliances has shaped the post 911 era and global approach to peace and security. After the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center, many Countries strengthened their national security apparatus by enacting strict security and counter terrorism laws. The US reviewed its relations with some states by blacklisting them as state sponsors of terrorism. The role of the UN in addressing global peace was effectively discussed and its influence as a multilateral body for pursuing global peace and diplomacy was discussed. This discussion continues to date.

In some Countries organised criminal networks have worked to overthrow or install governments and contributed largely to instability forcing state actors to negotiate for peace. A good example is the FARC in Colombia and the ongoing peace talks between the Syrian Government and the Free Syria Armed forces.

These actors have drawn states into international wars such as the US led Coalition in Afghanistan, Iraq and the current ongoing conflict in Syria and Yemen. The US has also increased its military presence in the Middle East and Africa including establishing an African Command to oversee US engagement in Africa in operations such as tracking the Lord Resistance Army (LRA) in Central Africa Republic and overseeing Counter Piracy Operations in Somalia. Clearly, their influence on diplomacy and consular practice is evident.

The Media is becoming a major non state actor in diplomacy and consular practice. The advent of the internet and social media has opened forums for influencing diplomacy and consular practice to non-state diplomats. Access to the media and global community is no longer an exclusive of the state. The media and internet have challenged the power relations between the state and non-state actors. Through the internet and various social media practitioners, citizens and individual bloggers can interact with the world with greater speed and access than state actors. Using social media platforms non state actors can create content, develop imagery and mobilize. They can shape and influence foreign relations and diplomacy by sharing their independent thoughts. Through social media, they are able to galvanise support and determine, extend or counter the foreign policy of their countries. An example of the increasing role of the media was during the Arab spring in 2011 where social media, the internet and mobile phones were used to mobilize support and participation in the overthrow the governments in North Africa and the Middle East.

In emphasizing the role of the media in international relations, the US and other actors have always promoted the use of the internet and social media as a vent for free speech. The US as a major global player in diplomacy has always condemned any state acts to restrict access to internet and social media.

Despite, the increasing role of non state actors, their participation in diplomacy has raised concerns within the modern field of diplomacy and consular practice. Perhaps Melisens definition and concerns (in Saner and Yiu.pp11) best captures the post modern nature of diplomacy that is characterize by simultaneous participation of multiple state and non state actors and pulse of concerns generated from their influence when he writes

While greater representation and participation of diverse interest groups leads to a democratization of the political processes at the national and global levels, it also makes diplomacy and international relations vulnerable to fragmentation and possible outbreak of conflicts due to potential paralysis caused by too many state and non state actors with mutually exclusive policy goals

Saner further adds that the ‘New entrants’ to diplomatic arena represents different groupings and organizations of local, national and international interests. These divergent forces co-exit with each other and exercise different forms of diplomatic influence to achieve their objectives. The alarm arises from a number of reasons which include;

The representation of Non state actors may be private and not state inspired. Sometimes their interests may not necessarily be aligned to the national interests. The primary goal of a multinational company may be to maximise profit and dividends to its shareholders. This may be contrary to its Country of origin’s foreign interest in that Country.  The states interest may be to secure stronger political or military alliances rather than pursuing commercial interests.

Non state actors may be oblivious to political and cultural sensitivities of foreign states. Diplomacy and consular practice is about understanding the political and cultural sensitivities of a given country and respecting these when pursuing a Country’s foreign interests is vital concern. Their involvement is therefore seen as a risk of concern to state actors in diplomacy and international relations.

Non State Actors may be frontiers of external actors whose interests may be contrary to either the national interests of their Countries of origin or countries of operation. Prof. Mweisga Baregu, a scholar of International relations, in his book and articles on understanding obstacles to peace, the actors’ interests and strategies, deconstructs the role of international agencies in peace.  Baregu has sarcastically referred to humanitarian agencies such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent and Medicen sans Frontier and some United Nation agencies as ‘ambulance chasers’. In Baregu’s views, the interests of these agencies are sometimes not necessarily humanitarian but may be driven by other interests such as employment and foreign actors like research and pharmaceutical companies. They may therefore be interested in the continued existence of the conflict so as to maintain their status quo and other related benefits. Their influence in diplomacy and consular practice is therefore of concern.

These non state actors may not be fully equipped with diplomatic tools and customs of diplomatic practice. Diplomacy is a profession guided by a set of customs and international law such as the Vienna Convention on diplomacy and consular practice (Vienna Convention 1961 and 1963). As suggested by Zirovcic and Simonitti (Simonitti: 1994) the customs of diplomacy and legal norms of diplomatic law are positions whose violation results in sanctions. Any breach of these customs is a violation of diplomatic ethics and constitutes incorrectness in diplomatic relations (Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961) and consular relations (Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963). Violation of these customs is a blow to the international reputation of the international entity that allows such practices and may result in a breakdown of diplomatic relations between states. While non state actors such as TNCs may at times engage personnel with diplomatic training to pursue their ambitions. However, their actions cannot be subject to the global rules of International law as such as the Vienna Convention.

This position is well captured by Saner (Saner etal: pg9) when they argue that global managers are competent in managing business stakeholders in all countries they operate. They may not be able to deal with complex issues such as democracy, political pluralism and respect for human rights in countries where they operate.  Failures in dealing with these non business related issues can easily lead to crisis, open conflicts which may spark diplomatic confrontations between their home countries and their countries of operation. The increasing influence of Non state actors in diplomacy and consular practice therefore raises alarm.

The lack of centralized leadership and respect of international norms or custom of international law by non state actors such as criminal gangs and their threat to international peace and security is a ground for alarm in diplomacy and consular practice. Organised criminal groups are difficult to coordinate and may be difficult be held to account for their actions in international diplomacy and consular practice. The actions of ISIL, Al-Qaida and Alshabab in Syria, Iraq and Somalia may be clear international war crimes and crimes against humanity in international law. However with the difficulty in pinpointing their actual leadership, it is difficult for the international community to hold specific persons or states to account for their actions. These organizations also operate without respect to internationally recognized state territorial borders and are therefore threat to state and transnational diplomatic relations and practice.

In light of the above, it is proper to conclude that diplomacy in the post modern era has changed with more influence of non state actors in diplomacy and consular practice. As suggested by Saner diplomacy has mutated and the role of the state diplomat and traditional embassy in advancing diplomacy and consular practice is ebbing (Rana: 2009). This is because in the future the main consumers and beneficiaries of diplomatic interaction will be businesses and non-state actors.

Since diplomacy and consular practice is still largely about interaction between sovereign states, the role of the state is still significant.  However, if the current trend continues, it is likely that in the future, the state will become a player with different roles and functions, such as facilitation of diplomatic and consular interaction.

References

What is state capture and its impacts on political governance in Tanzania

What is state capture and its impacts on political governance in Tanzania

By Moses Kulaba, Governance and economic analysis centre, Dar es Salaam-Tanzania

State capture can be simply defined as a way in which individuals, corporations, organizations or groups of organizations and interest groups such as political elites, business interests, cartels and criminal gangs influence government decisions, structures and processes through political or quasi political systems and structures with an intention of promoting, protecting and achieving their own interests.

There are two major types of state capture: These are spectrum state capture, which involves individuals having undue influence on decision making processes in government and Oligarchy, which involves organized cartels, organized groups of individuals and syndicates controlling and influencing government decisions and processes. Examples of oligarchies include the famous Russian Oligarchies and cartels include the South American (Colombia and Mexican) drug cartels such as Sinaola drug cartel under the leadership of Joaquin Guzman, famously known as ‘El Chapo’

The impact of state capture on the proper functioning of the state is enormous in a sense that state capture affects government’s ability to function and make proper decisions. State capture has also been with the famous term called kleptocracy, which is essentially stealing from the state coffers for private gain.

State capture leads to creation of a rent seeking state, where corruption shrives, becomes systemic and entrenched in government and public service. In a rent seeking state, key public services such as health, jobs are only received after paying bribes and ‘back shisi’ to government officials and those entrusted to serve the public.

It causes bad public spending as the corrupt secure lucrative public tenders for procurement and supply of essential goods and services to government. The procured supplies or goods may be over priced, of poor quality or never supplied at all.

It creates an unfavorable business environment where the politically connected businesses with influence on the national leadership and state organs manipulate, influence and secure government decisions, regulatory frameworks and protection in favour of their business interests.  Small legitimate businesses either seek protection of the big corrupt businesses or collapse under the weight of unfair competition.

It significantly affects the rules of justice, law and order where by individuals, corporations or groups ‘capture’ institutions of justice and influence judges and high ranking officials of the judiciary, law and order sector through bribes to protect or make decisions in favour of their private interests.

It also affects national security as the corrupt individuals, corporations or groups use their influence to infiltrate the system by ensuring their collaborators secure jobs in the government security apparatus. Through these connections and influence, top national secrets may be shared with these individuals, businesses or cartels for private gain. They are also able to use the government security apparatus and resources such as police, military and arms for protection.

Through illicit political party financing, election fraud and intimidation, state capture may lead to ascension to power of bad leadership.  This is achieved through financing political of political parties and sponsorship of candidates whom they deem to be in their favour. Once in power, the elected political leaders are influenced to make corruption deals, award tenders and protection as reciprocal gesture to their political god fathers.

New threats to peace and Security:  Extent to which new security threats of Piracy have affected economic and human security in East Africa

New threats to peace and Security:  Extent to which new security threats of Piracy have affected economic and human security in East Africa

By Moses Kulaba, Governance and economic analysis centre, Dar es Salaam-Tanzania

Security is taken to be about the pursuit of freedom from threat and the ability of states and societies to maintain their independent identity and their functional integrity against forces of change, which they see as hostile.

In recent years piracy and cyber security have emerged to represent new security threats to economic and human security like never before.

Security has been defined as protection from any kind of threat but in total departure from the orthodox view as perceived by the military and war professional. Experts such as Buzzan (1991) have defined security as freedom from fear or threat of social, economic, society, environmental and military concerns.  Buzzan therefore expands the definition of security to include human and economic security dimensions to the concept of security. 

Human security, as an approach gives understanding to national and international security by adding a dimension that gives primacy to the safety of human beings and their complex social and economic interactions.  In this approach to security, the subjects are individuals and the end goal is the protection of people from traditional threats such as military concerns to nontraditional threats such as poverty and disease.

The UN has advanced this concept further by declaring that “Human security is an approach to assist Member States in identifying and addressing widespread and cross-cutting challenges to the survival, livelihood and dignity of their people” (General Assembly resolution 66/290

Other organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross view security from an economic lens. The ICRC defines economic security as the ability of individuals, households or communities to cover their essential needs sustainably and with dignity. This can vary according to an individual’s physical needs, the environment and prevailing cultural standards. Food, basic shelter, clothing and hygiene qualify as essential needs, as does the related expenditure; the essential assets needed to earn a living, and the costs associated with health care and education also qualify.

By understanding peace and security from such a broad lense, it is therefore possible to understand the nexus and extent to which new threats such as piracy and cybercrime have on human security.

Piracy as a security threat

Piracy has been defined as an act of robbery or criminal violence at sea. It includes acts committed on land, in the air, or other major bodies of water or on shore. It generally involves unlawful, boarding, kidnap and commandeering of marine or land vessels or convoys to undesignated locations or destinations for looting, ransom or other purposes.

Although the term “piracy” may conjure up images of bearded men with eye patches, wooden legs and parrots who were convicted and buried centuries ago, pirate attacks are indeed posing a threat today’s shipping lines (and human wellbeing) all over the world.   According to reports, the number of Pirate Attacks globally between 2009 and 2017 was 2717 with 180 attacks registered in 2017 alone.

Causes of an upsurge in piracy

There are many reasons to explain the increasing rise in piracy but some of these have been constantly made;

  • The disappearance of US naval forces fleets from major international water bodies after the end of the cold war. This has allowed pirates and criminal gangs to operate freely on the open high seas with minimal interference
  • The improvement in maritime navigation and technology which has enabled launching and navigation of larger ships manned by smaller crew who are extremely vulnerable to pirate attacks
  • Expansion of jurisdictional waters beyond those which are directly in effective control and patrol of their claimant states.
  • Instability, state collapse and increasing harsh economic conditions in Countries such as Somalia and Yemen.
  • Falling states and absence of centralized governments in Countries such as Somalia
  • Lucrative ransoms paid which acted as incentives for more attacks
  • Long uncompleted trials and deterrent punitive measures to convicts which motivated others to conduct attacks
  • Radicalization and justification of piracy as tool in response to political interference, economic dominance and over exploitation of marine natural resources by global super powers such as America.

Today, pirates’ attacks pause a genuine threat to maritime transportation and security. Pirates are capable of cutting off important transit choke points such as the Strait of Bab al-Mandab between Arabia and Africa or the Strait of Malacca in South East Asian waters.  In 2017, the trade routes around the Indonesian coast as well as in Bangladeshi and Nigerian waters were counted among the most perilous at sea paths globally.

The Horn of Africa, along the Somalian coastline, has become one of the most dangerous waters prone to piracy attacks.  According to various reports maritime piracy off the Horn of Africa grew in frequency, range, aggression, and severity at an alarming rate covering more than 2.5 million square miles of ocean. Since 2007, Somali pirates attacked and harassed vessels transiting up to 450 miles offshore in the Indian Ocean and in the Gulf of Aden, a natural chokepoint providing access to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal.  The number of actual or attempted attacks in the Somalia’s territorial waters off the East African coastal shore line was 462 with 5 attacks reported in 2017 alone

For 2017, an International maritime organization, One Earth Future (OEF)’s Oceans Beyond Piracy (OBP)  recorded a total of 54 incidents in the Western Indian Ocean region, marking an increase of 100 percent from 2016. Accordingly, 2017 saw an increase in the number of seafarers affected by incidents of piracy and armed robbery at sea, from 545 in 2016 to 1,102 in 2017. For the first time in two years, OBP recorded incidents of hijacking and kidnapping at sea in the region. Suspicious activity continued to be the highest represented incident in the region in 2017 reporting a significant increase from 13 recorded incidents in 2016 to 32 in 2017.

The short surge in hijacking attacks in the first quarter of 2017 was attributed to several factors. These include the continued intent of pirate action groups to launch attacks and the opportunity to do so, due to lessened adherence to ship self-protection measures, including Best Management Practices (BMP). Independent deployers represented the primary naval presence in the region, but both coalition forces and independent deployers decreased days of operation, or days on station in the region, in 2017.

Effects of Piracy on human security

Piracy has led to significant decline in human security, by instilling fear, insecurity and fatalities along the East African coastal shoreline. According to OEF- OBP on the state of piracy, the number of piracy on the East African coastline tripled in 2016. There were 54 piracy incidents on the East African coast in 2017—more than triple the 16 incidents recorded in 2016.  It states that the number of sailors affected increased from 306 in 2015 to 1,102 in 2017, with at least 79 of them injured or threatened in the attacks in which 41 per cent of the attackers were armed. The number of attacks as in previous years shows that the capability and intent of pirate networks has not decreased. This was witnessed with the increased number of hijackings, including of the Aris 13, the Asayr 2, and Al Kausar. The number of hostages killed or injured by Somali pirates increased significantly in 2017, according to further maritime reports.

Nearly 4,000 seafarers were fired upon by Somali pirates, the report said. Of that number, 968 seafarers faced armed pirates who managed to board their vessels, while some 413 of those seafarers were rescued from secured rooms on their vessels by naval forces. At least 1,206 hostages were held by Somali pirates in 2011, including 555 seafarers attacked and taken hostage during the year, and 645 captured in 2010 who remained in pirate hands. Half of those held were subjected to punching and slapping and 10% suffered violent abuse such as being locked in freezers, burned with cigarettes and having their fingernails pulled out with pliers, the reports stated.

Effects of piracy on economic security

In 2017 the economic effect of piracy on East Africa was estimated at USD1.4billion. This was a slight decline from $1.7 billion in 2016, mainly due to a 13 per cent decrease in the use of privately contracted armed security personnel. The costs had stabilized over the past three years, after a decline between 2010 and 2015, from about $7 billion in 2010 to $1.3 billion in 2015.  None the less, these amounts are substantively high if measured in correlative development terms and represent a significant economic security risk to the region.

Piracy has increased administrative cost measures in counter piracy measures. It has led to increased military presence and diversion of vital resources to combat piracy.  In 2011 the total costs in military counter piracy measures was estimated at USD 1.27bln.  This was spent on administrative budgets, military vessels and unmanned aerial vehicles. An additional USD 635 million was spent on insurance premiums. The cost of prosecuting pirates in trials and imprisonment was USD5.3 million.  These figures have substantively increased in 2017.

These are vital resources which could have been used for other development activities such as social service provision and infrastructure development but have been switched towards addressing piracy off the coast of Somalia.

Effect on trade and commerce

Piracy has affected trade and commerce along the East African coastline. According to the South African Institute for Strategic studies (ISS), trade in sub-Saharan Africa was slowly suffering from the consequences of piracy on major shipping liners along the Eastern African coast.

The resurgence of incidents of piracy has the potential to affect international trade and maritime movement of cargo around the East African coastline. In advertently this has collateral damage to East African economies and other Countries around the world.  Shipping liners have to consider alternative routes which are perceived safer routes such the Suez Canal, the South African tip or even the Panama Canal.

Increased costs in freight and insurance charges.

One of the major consequences of piracy is the increase in insurance rates for the shipping industry and the need to purchase additional insurance to cover the risk associated with transiting a piracy prone region. For example, insurance companies now offer “kidnap for ransom” policies to ships that move through the Suez Canal.  According to one insurance company, the U.K. based Hiscox, prices the policy at US$15,000 per trip through the Gulf of Aden and was reported to have increased dramatically.  Also, because of the danger posed to shipping transiting the Gulf of Aden, insurance premiums had risen tenfold. For example, insurance companies had increased premiums for sending a cargo shipment through the Gulf of Aden to about US$9,000 from US$900 in a period of one year.

From an economic point of view, having Africa’s access to internationally developed materials such as nuclear reactors, vehicles, tractors, imported and exported food, and other materials reduced will be devastating. More worrying is the impact of a decrease in exports of natural resources from African countries.

Piracy has changed the livelihoods of communities along the Somali coastline who have abandoned vital livelihoods such as agriculture and nomadic farming to join piracy. Fishing communities have also been forced to abandon fishing from fear of attacks at sea and hence changed the entire economic security of communities living along the coast of Somalia. According to the UNDP many Somali youth joined piracy as a source of employment and piracy is seen and proven to be a vital ready source of income and path to quick wealth and prosperity.

Piracy financing of money laundering and terrorism

The proceeds from piracy have found their linkages to finance money laundering and terrorism activities. According to the World Bank, the Somali pirate business model relies heavily on onshore support infrastructure to conduct ransom negotiations. Generically a pirate operation consists of armed offshore operations with onshore support that provides shelter for returning pirates and access to markets for stolen goods and for the goods, services, and manpower needed for pirate attacks. The total amount of money paid in ransom fees by various companies was estimated billions of dollars. Most of this was invested in legitimate business such as real estate, forex bureaus and financing Alshabab terrorist activities.

There is risk of fueling war and further instability with deadly military hardware captured by pirates falling in the hands of militants.  Although previously pirates targeted fishing vessels and smaller cargo ships, they later targeted larger vessels such as chemical tankers, bulk carriers and thus pausing a higher security risk than ever.

Amongst their high-profile targets included a Ukrainian vessel loaded with heavy weapons and a Saudi owned VLCC. The MV Faina, or “crown” in Russian, was a Ukrainian vessel loaded with rifles, heavy weapons and 33 Soviet made T-72 tanks that the pirates captured on 25 September 2008. The ship was initially thought to have been heading for Sudan or some other African country, possibly Kenya. The MV Faina was then surrounded by three warships from the Combined Task Force 150 during its hijack to prevent the ship’s deadly cargo from ending up in the hands of Somalia’s Islamic insurgents and other terrorists. The initial ransom demand was for US$35 million but it was finally released for a reported sum of US$3.2 million.

Piracy has affected Tourism and investment along the East African coast of Somalia. Piracy attacks on hotels and large deep-sea fishing vessels has significantly retarded invested in East African coastal economy, along the Somalian coastline.

There have been regional attempts to combat piracy. The US and EU Naval patrols and tracks pirates off the East African Coastline and the Gulf of Aden under the auspices of Joint Task Combined Task Force (CTF) 150 including troops from the US, EU and Canada. This has accounted for the declining numbers of attacks in the recent years. The downside of this effort is that the task force is externally funded and cannot be a long-term solution.  This therefore demands that Eastern Africa states step up their capabilities to counter piracy along its long coastline.

In a nutshell, piracy represents one single new threat to human and economic security. Despite a reduction in reported cases of piracy in 2018, the disappearance of piracy in the 19th Century and its resurgence in the 1990s and increase between 2000 and 2017 shows that this security threat is not over. Perhaps the pirates and their benefactors are planning and waiting to strike their next target.  Extra vigilance, collective military and civilian measures are required to contain this threat.

 

 

Reference:

Effects of Cyber Security on Human and Economic Security

New threats to peace and Security:  Extent to which new security threats of Cyber security have affected economic and human security in East Africa

By Moses Kulaba, Governance and economic analysis centre, Dar es Salaam-Tanzania

Cyber security or attacks by using highly sophisticated technology and cyber space to penetrate, modify, adulterate or alter existing ICT infrastructure to inflict significant, damage to a country, an installation, equipment, companies or individuals. According to NATO cyber insecurity is crippling of vital defence and military installations and capabilities to protect human security

Effects of Cyber Security on Human and Economic Security

From a military or defense security perspective, cyber security threat from the following angles or forms

  • Cyberterrorism is the disruptive use of information technology by terrorist groups to further their ideological or political agenda. This takes the form of attacks on networks, computer systems and telecommunication infrastructures.
  • Cyberwarfare involves nation-states using information technology to penetrate another nation’s networks to cause damage or disruption. In the U.S. and many other nations, cyberwarfare has been acknowledged as the fifth domain of warfare (following land, sea, air and space).
  • Cyberwarfare attacks are primarily executed by hackers who are well-trained in exploiting the intricacies of computer networks, and operate under the auspices and support of nation-states. Rather than “shutting down” a target’s key networks, a cyberwarfare attack may intrude into networks to compromise valuable data, degrade communications, impair such infrastructural services as transportation and medical services, or interrupt commerce.
  • Cyberespionage which is the practice of using information technology to obtain secret information without permission from its owners or holders. Cyberespionage is most often used to gain strategic, economic, political or military advantage, and is conducted using cracking techniques and malware.

In recent past cyber-attacks have become quite rampant. In 2008 the Estonian attack in which the entire Estonian Government agencies, financial institutions and broadcasters were jammed by Russian cyber attacker was a good example. In 2010 the reports of attacks on googles mails by Chinese hackers and Sony pictures were a clear reminder of the extent of the risk posed by Cyber security.

Cyber-attacks have capabilities to disrupt government systems, transport and communication infrastructure and defence capabilities.

However, from a human and economic security perspective, cyber insecurity has largely affected social and economic sectors. Cyber security has globalised or regionlaised organized crime. According to the UK government’s Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2017 found that the average cost of a cyber security breach for a large business was £19,600 and for a small to medium-sized business was £1,570. According to a CISCO Annual report on cyber security, over one third of organizations that experienced breach in 2016 reported loss of substantial customer opportunity and revenue loss in more than 20%

Effects of cybercrime of human and economic security in East Africa

Experts have described the East African digital economy as weak and vulnerable to multiple cyber attacks

“Essentially, in terms of cyber resilience, the Kenyan digital economy can be likened to a slow, plump gazelle stumbling through the ‘cyber savanah’’ in the full view of an agile, informed and hungry cyber predator, keen to sink their teeth into their sumptuous prize”

In 2016, African countries reportedly lost USD2bln in cyber-attacks. Remittance based economies, which depend on electronic wire transfers of money from its foreign sources and nationals living abroad via the international financial system were the worst hit

Effects on Financial systems

Financial transactions such as banking and money transfer services have been the largest targets affecting millions of people. In East Africa it was reported that Kenya was the worst affected with a total estimated of loss of USD 171Mln while Tanzania lost USD85million and Uganda lost USD 35million in its financial sector.

Tanzania’s cyber security report for 2016 warned of critical dangers facing the country. According to the report technology adoption is driving business innovation and growth in Tanzania, while at the same time, exposing the Country to new and emerging cyber security threats. Terrorists, spies, hackers, fraudsters are increasingly motivated to target Tanzania’s Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) infrastructure due to the value of information held within it, the report indicated.

One of the major risks was lack of awareness amongst technology users. According to the report over 1.6 million Internet Portals (IPs) were publicly accessible and over 138,000 network security events were reported.

Effects of exposure through interconnected and domestic gadgets

Cybercrime has reduced human security risk through exposure to interconnected things such as medical devices, smart TVs, cars and other gadgets. Research has found potential vulnerabilities in dozens of devices such as insulin pumps, and implantable defibrators. Hundreds of connected TVs are potentially vulnerable to click fraud, botnets, data, ransomware. Cybercriminals have developed mechanisms to remotely take control of personal gadgets such as remotely opened cars, personal computers.

Threat to privacy and confidentiality

There is a security risk of breach of confidentiality and personal privacy on vital confidential documents and personal data. As governments become digitalized through the drive for e-government, confidential government documents and personal details of its citizens are now more exposed to cybercrime. From passports, birth certificates, medical reports, pension numbers and personal IDs are now interlinked via the electronic networks

Costly policing and administration in cyber defence

Fighting cybercrime is very costly to police and enforcing cyber security diverts the already constrained government resources away from financing vital social services such as education and health. According to  cybersecurity readiness report very few governments and companies can afford to invest in highly sophisticated cyber security defence systems.  The Kenyan Cyber Security report highlighted that about 44% of financial institutions run on a paltry cyber security budget of USD1-1000 annually. About 33% of financial institutions in Kenya have spent nothing on all matters of cyber security.There are limited skills to manage and address it and keep ahead of cyber criminals, the report warns.

Regional attempts to counter and fight cybersecurity

Regional initiatives to combat cybercrime have been initiated through specialized units now established in the military and police forces of the East African states. However, they are still ill trained and under equipped to effectively contain the threats.

In conclusion, it is evident that the threats of piracy and cyber security has been increasing and pause a major threat to human and economic security of the region. Piracy and Cybercrime are highly organized global crimes with vast networks operating miles away. The weak counter measures and lack of adequate resources to counter these threats suggest that these will remain security threats to the region for longtime.

Indeed, given the increasing threat that cyber-crime has generated it is probable to suggest that future wars may/will not be fought on the battle fronts but in cyber space. Soldiers of the future will not be Generals commanding battalions and platoons of mobiles soldiers marching across battle fields.  The generals of the future will be technologically savy individuals sitting in high-tech offices and issuing commands to remote computers, gadgets and robots deployed to engage targets thousands of miles away.

 

Reference:

State fragility and conflicts

The Countries in the East African region are prone to varying degrees of state fragility and conflicts. The countries are defined by latent, perennial, intermittent and protracted conflicts. The causes and drivers of these conflicts are many and complex and include political and resource governance concerns, manipulation of ethnic, political and religious identities, mobilisation and manipulation of a largely unemployed youth force.

Even though the multi-party system established in many of the countries in the region since the 1990s has endured. Elections in the region are as much a ritual than a democratic process. There are widespread reports of bad electoral management and electoral fraud with none of the elections held during the past few years fully passing the test of free and fair.

Natural resource-based conflicts and the zealous appetite to control extractive resources and benefits have pushed Countries such as Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia into war and conflicts. The prospects for petroleum resources occurring largely in border lying areas threaten further efforts for regional stability and co-existence.

Incumbent presidents have largely relied on state institutions and armed forces or rigged elections to remain in power and countries such as Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda, Djibouti, DRC and Eritrea have had constitutional changes to facilitate the extension of presidential term limits while Sudan and Tanzania are pushing for similar changes.

The region is faced by an ever-looming threat of terrorism.  New in this regard is the increased radicalisation and recruitment of women and children into the terror groups. An example of this is the Mombasa police station attack by 3 women in September 2016 and hence the importance of addressing gender dimensions in efforts to counter violent extremism.

With over 1000 ethnic groupings subscribing to a multitude of faiths of which Islam and Christianity are the largest, the region is one of great diversities. More often than not these diversities have been captured by ethnic, political and religious elite to destabilise social relations and drive conflicts in the region. Ethnic tensions and at times violence have been hallmarks of election campaigns in countries such as Kenya where elections are won on the basis of ethnic bargaining rather than due democratic practices.

  • UNECA: Building Trading capacities for Africa’s Transformation: A critical review  of Aid for Trade, UNECA, Addis ababa, 2013

 

Economic Policy and Opportunity:

Tanzania has maintained a stellar economic growth, posting an average of 6%- 7% and low single digit inflation rates between 2015 and 2019. On July 1st of 2020, Tanzania was ranked by the World Bank as Lower Middle Income (LMIC) status. However this growth is inequitably distributed and could face significant shock backs if some governance deficits are not addressed.

According to the World Bank, Tanzania’s gross national income (GNI) per capita increased from $1,020 in 2018 to $1,080 in 2019, exceeding the threshold for lower-middle income status. This places Tanzania as the second middle income status country in East Africa after its neighbour Kenya. The World Bank announcement demonstrated that the Country’s economic fundamentals have been well managed and with a projected growth of 6% to 8% in 2021-2025, Tanzania wants to sustain this status.

However, Tanzania government and World Bank reports show this growth has been inequitably distributed and some policy gaps to ensure the benefits fully trickle down exits.

Youth budge, unemployment and limited opportunities

Over the past decade the levels of population growth in Tanzania and the region has increased. In Tanzania the population growth rate increased from around 27 Mln in 2000 to 43 Mln in 2013 and it is estimated to double by 2030. The overall projections are that over 60% this population will be comprised of young people. Also significantly over 30-40% this population will be unemployed and living below the poverty- line. 

These projections therefore call for radical policy measures which will promote resource mobilisation, improved social service delivery, entrepreneurship and investment to create jobs to absorb this population. Currently investment as percentage of proportion of GDP remains at 12% which is low by African standards. As Tanzania stands at the brink of the Millennium it is imperative to encourage more robust private sector investment. Mobilising citizens and private to participate and influence government policy decisions and process is core to achieving these targets

Under this program we tackle

  • Policy frameworks and achievements
  • Economic Marginalization and equity (How economic policies are affecting specific segments of the population, youth, women etc)
  • Monitoring resource Allocation- Tax advocacy, Budget Analysis work
  • Expanding Opportunity-Business and Entrepreneurship
  • Trade and Investment- (International trade documents, regional trade flows etc)

Work in this area includes

  • Analytical policy briefs
  • Specialised public dialogues and convenings
  • Training & awareness raising
  • Advocacy

More about this can be read via our latest news, reports and publications sections.

  • Ndulu B, J and Mutalemwa K. Charles:  Tanzania at the turn of the Century; Background papers and statistics; Unleashing the private sector development for Tanzania’s development
Regional Economic Cooperation and Diplomacy.

At national level the governance structures are weak and prone to systemic abuse by unresponsive political elite. At international level the government’s commitment to national and regional governance standards has been modest. Tanzania and a number of East African countries have signed up to a number of regional economic and governance commitments.

Tanzania is a member of the East African Community (EAC) and South African Development Community (SADC). Under the EAC framework the government has committed itself toward entering into a single customs territory, as a mechanism of increasing regional trade. Tanzania is also a member and signatory to a number of African Union protocols

Despite the entering in action of EAC Common Market Protocol in 2010, number of issues under the protocol are still not yet implemented. This is also built on the fact that the Customs Union protocol of 2005 is not yet fully fledged. Tanzania has been on constant blame by other EAC members that it is reluctant in implementing the signed commitments. 

Commitment to regional governance standards and norms such as AU’s African Governance Architecture (AGA)

The African Governance Architecture (AGA) is an AU mechanism or framework for dialogue between stakeholders that are mandated to promote good governance and bolster democracy in Africa. According to the AU so far by end of 2018 a total of 45 Countries had signed the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (ACDEG). Out of these 30 member states have ratified and deposited their legal instruments with the AU and hence effectively domesticating AGA-ACDEG implementation in their countries.  Only 8 member states have not signed and not yet ratified ACDEG. 

Tanzania is one of the 8 African states and only East African states that has not signed nor ratified and deposited the instruments in recognition of ACDEG. Yet Tanzania is high ranking member of the AU and has constantly reiterated its commitment to the AU’s visions and aspirations of a prosperous African continent by 2063.

Tanzania participated in the 14th -16th African Heads of state summits and endorsed the decision to establish ‘Pan African Architecture on Governance. The outcome of which was the African Governance Architecture. It also took part in the decisions that aligned key AU instruments such as the ACDEG and African Charter of Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) in line with the AGA. 

Tanzania is host to the African Court of Human and People’s rights based in Arusha, a key institution in the realisation of AGA and ACDEG’s aspirations.  It is therefore imperative that Tanzania signs and fully ratifies the ACDEG. The AGA and ACDEG provides a framework for raising the governance and human rights standards in the Country and Citizens participation in building, promoting and monitoring these standards, and the broader AU vision and aspirations. The reasons for failure to sign and ratify are not given although the relevancy for the ratification for ACDEG and implementation of its standards in Tanzania is vivid.

We support, promote and advocate for compliance to regional mechanisms that promote good governance, regional cooperation and peace

 

  • The actual number of signatories and ratifications changes from time to time as new signatories and ratifications are made and deposited at the AU. But regular updates  one can visit: http://aga-platform.org/about