Suchergebnisse

There is profound concern in large circles in Africa that the Cotonou Agreement obstructs African governments from supporting domestic production, and that the EU is splitting Africa in two by striking separate deals with different African regions. These perceptions are important considerations for those involved in the upcoming negotiations to replace the existing agreement.

With the Cotonou Agreement due to expire in 2020, formal negotiations towards a new partnership agreement between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states began in September 2018. Based on the acceptance of the EU's negotiating mandate, the new arrangement will be primarily organised via three specific regional protocols with each of the ACP regions. Meanwhile, the Joint Africa-EU Strategy (JAES) launched in 2007, has seen the African Union (AU) gain increased prominence as an institutional partner of the EU. Given its ambitious pan-African agenda, it adopted an alternative 'African' vision for future EU-ACP relations, to the mandate agreed by the ACP states and expressed a willingness to become directly involved in the negotiations. This article contributes an important new case-study to the existing literature on 'African agency' in international politics by considering the scope for Africa to exert agency within the post-Cotonou negotiations, given the negotiation of a specific regional compact with Africa. It adopts a structurally embedded view of agency, based on Cox's understanding of historical structures, as a fit between institutions, ideas and material relations. The central argument is that, in comparison to the negotiation of the Cotonou Agreement two decades ago, there is greater scope for African agency. However, both the ideational and material aspects of Africa's relationship with the EU, condition the limits to how effective such agency might be. Moreover, tensions at the institutional level between the ACP and AU further undermine the potential for effective African agency.

The present study analyses the use of the political instruments for the protection of Human Rights, democracy and the rule of law under the Partnership Agreement between the European Union (EU) and the African-Caribbean–Pacific (ACP) countries embedded in the Cotonou Agreement: the consultations under article 96, intensified and regular political dialogue. It briefly outlines the legal provisions of the revised treaty, reviews recent practice, and looks into the involvement of civil society and parliamentary bodies in the political dialogue.

The negotiation of post-Lome economic cooperation arrangements between the European Union and the African-Caribbean-Pacific Group ended its first phase in February 2000 with the signing of the Treaty of Cotonou. For Caribbean actors, the Cotonou negotiations marked a significant watershed in the adaptation of their foreign policies and diplomatic strategies to cope with a globalized international environment. The issues and themes addressed in Cotonou demonstrate the collision of development concepts forged in the 1970s with the Neoliberalism of the 1980s and 1990s. Cotonou symbolizes the transition from one economic order to another. Its negotiation involved the establishment of new diplomatic and administrative structures in the Caribbean and the participation of many interest groups not previously involved in such diplomatic activity. It became the forerunner to even more complex negotiations in the World Trade Organization and the free Trade Area of the Americas. This paper explores the Caribbean role and experiences in the negotiation of the Cotonou Treaty and the lessons of this diplomatic exercise for future multilateral trade negotiations. Resumen: Tocando en la misma cuerda: La diplomacia caribeña y el acuerdo de CotonouLa negociación de los acuerdos de cooperación económica tras los acuerdos de Lome entre la Unión Europea y el Grupo África-Caribe-Pacífico concluyó su primera fase en febrero de 2000 con la firma del Tratado de Cotonou. Para los participantes caribeños, las negociaciones de Cotonou señalaron un importante y crítico momento en la adaptación de sus políticas exteriores y estrategias diplomáticas para funcionar en un ambiente internacional globalizado. Los problemas y temas tratados en Cotonou reflejan el choque de conceptos de desarrollo forjados en los años setenta, con el neoliberalismo de los años ochenta y noventa. Cotonou simboliza la transición de un orden económico a otro. Su negociación implicó el establecimiento de nuevas estructuras diplomáticas y administrativas en el Caribe y la incorporación de muchos grupos de interés que no participaban previamente en esas actividades diplomáticas. Se convirtió en el precursor de negociaciones todavía más complejas en la Organización Mundial del Comercio y el Área de Libre Comercio de las Américas. En este artículo exploramos el papel y experiencias del Caribe en la negociación del Tratado de Cotonou y las lecciones aprendidas en este ejercicio diplomático para futuras negociaciones comerciales multilaterales.

On June 23, 2000, after eighteen months of negotiations, the European Union (EU) and its Member States signed a new partnership agreement with the African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) states in Cotonou, Benin, called the Cotonou Agreement. This twenty-year partnership agreement with seventy-seven ACP states replaced the Lome Convention, which had provided the structure for trade and cooperation between the ACP states and the EU since 1975. The Cotonou Agreement focuses on poverty reduction as its principal objective, which will be achieved through political dialogue, development aid, and closer economic and trade cooperation. This Note discusses the structure of the Cotonou Agreement and analyzes the various effects the Agreement will have on the ACP countries, particularly, the countries of the Caribbean. It concludes that, despite its objectives, the Agreement will likely contribute to a decline in the economies of the ACP nations.

The EU is currently negotiating a successor to its Cotonou Agreement of year 2000 with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states. The political and economic con­text has changed enormously over the past two decades, with trade relations between the EU and the more developed ACP countries now largely regulated by bilateral and regional Economic Partnership Agreements. Since 2015, in line with international sustainability targets, social and environmental aspects must be taken into account in international treaties, while in 2018 the African Union (AU) agreed to establish an African Continental Free Trade Area. A successor to Cotonou offers an opportunity to modernise the rules on issues including investment, services and migration. This could also generate greater interest in the talks in Germany and the EU. But the cooperation need to be placed on a new foundation and the African states will have to decide whether they want to negotiate together, as a continent.

The Cotonou Agreement is the European Union's most important legal measure in the field of development assistance covering 79 developing countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP countries). It empowers the European Union to sanction 'serious cases of corruption' where this corruption is related to economic and sectoral policies and programmes to which the European Union is a significant financial partner. During the negotiations leading to the adoption of the Cotonou Agreement the ACP countries strongly objected to the inclusion of the possibility of sanctioning corruption. In practice the European Union has only sanctioned one single case of corruption under the provision, however. Whereas this does not necessarily mean that the sanctioning clause is without an impact, the fact that sanctions have been imposed in only one situation is a strong indication that its impact is rather limited. It is suggested that more effective means of preventing corruption are considered.

The role of the Cotonou Agreement during the negotiation of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States has been well studied. This paper analyses the inverse of this relationship, namely the legal and political implications of different possible outcomes of the upcoming post-Cotonou negotiations on the EPAs, following the expiry of the Cotonou Agreement in 2020. The EPAs include several cross-references to provisions in the Cotonou Agreement on development and human rights. This paper analyses the legal and political implications for the EPAs of possible negotiation outcomes, including combinations of regional or non-legally binding cooperation agreements. Its main conclusion is that a decision not to renew the Cotonou Agreement would have significant political implications but, contrary to the views of some EU stakeholders, limited legal implications for the EPAs.

Introduction: This paper attempts to discuss the EU's external relations with the Developing World within the context of the Cotonou Agreement and the CFSP. While CFSP and Cotonou operate formally under distinct and autonomous mechanisms, it is argued here that despite this pillarisation of policy spheres and the narrow definition of EU foreign affairs, development policy forms a core element in EU foreign policy and is linked, consequently, to a broader understanding of CFSP. The paper falls into two parts: one locating the context within which EU development policy might be discussed; the other discussing the actual development policy reforms since 2000. Part one addresses a series of questions. First, the appropriate theoretical context for discussing EU development policy is debated. Second, the linkages between development policy and CFSP are examined. And third, the very basis of an EU development policy is considered in relation to the principle of subsidiarity. Part two examines the motivations behind the reform of EU development policy, discusses the central policy innovations proposed, and concludes by exploring the potential areas of future policy conflict that might arise. Undoubtedly, these are ambitious objectives in such a limited space: however, only by marrying the wider perspectives of CFSP, integration and subsidiarity with an empirical analysis of the Cotonou Agreement, can the topic be adequately contextualized. As the paper concludes, development policy does not stand in splendid isolation, but is part of the network of integration processes that shape EU policy and decision-making.

Document de recherche - DR LEO 2004-19 ; National audience ; The Cotonou agreement is a turning point in the relations between E.U. and ACP countries. This partnership tended to support development by using the classical means of financial assistance but also with commercial tools. The arbitration of the banana crisis by the WTO's dispute settlement mechanism in 1997 has led to the termination of the non-reciprocal preferences which benefited to the ACP countries. The debate on EU\'s financial cooperation scheme takes place in a context of international reflexion about the conditionality of official development assistance, in its contents and proceedings. The EU could also loose its originality and become a simple actor of a new international consensus managed by the Bretton Woods Institutions (new strategies for aleviating poverty) and the United Nations System (millenium goals). ; L'accord de Cotonou marque un tournant dans les relations entre l'Union européenne et les Etats ACP. Ces relations étaient caractérisées par la volonté des Etats européens d'aider les Etats ACP aussi bien par le moyen classique de l'aide au développement qu'en utilisant l'outil de la politique commerciale. Les vives contestations des exportateurs de bananes sud-américaines devaient conduire, après la condamnation de l'Union européenne par l'Organe de Règlement des Différends de l'OMC en 1997, à une remise en cause de la discrimination commerciale positive des pays ACP. Pour sa part, le débat sur l'aide au développement de l'UE s'inscrit dans la perspective d'une réforme de la conditionnalité de l'aide internationale aussi bien dans son contenu que dans sa mise en oeuvre. Sous cet aspect, l'UE pourrait également perdre en originalité et simplement devenir un des acteurs du nouveau consensus orchestré par les institutions de Bretton Woods (stratégies de lutte contre la pauvreté) et le système onusien (objectifs du millénaire).

Document de recherche - DR LEO 2004-19 ; National audience ; The Cotonou agreement is a turning point in the relations between E.U. and ACP countries. This partnership tended to support development by using the classical means of financial assistance but also with commercial tools. The arbitration of the banana crisis by the WTO's dispute settlement mechanism in 1997 has led to the termination of the non-reciprocal preferences which benefited to the ACP countries. The debate on EU\'s financial cooperation scheme takes place in a context of international reflexion about the conditionality of official development assistance, in its contents and proceedings. The EU could also loose its originality and become a simple actor of a new international consensus managed by the Bretton Woods Institutions (new strategies for aleviating poverty) and the United Nations System (millenium goals). ; L'accord de Cotonou marque un tournant dans les relations entre l'Union européenne et les Etats ACP. Ces relations étaient caractérisées par la volonté des Etats européens d'aider les Etats ACP aussi bien par le moyen classique de l'aide au développement qu'en utilisant l'outil de la politique commerciale. Les vives contestations des exportateurs de bananes sud-américaines devaient conduire, après la condamnation de l'Union européenne par l'Organe de Règlement des Différends de l'OMC en 1997, à une remise en cause de la discrimination commerciale positive des pays ACP. Pour sa part, le débat sur l'aide au développement de l'UE s'inscrit dans la perspective d'une réforme de la conditionnalité de l'aide internationale aussi bien dans son contenu que dans sa mise en oeuvre. Sous cet aspect, l'UE pourrait également perdre en originalité et simplement devenir un des acteurs du nouveau consensus orchestré par les institutions de Bretton Woods (stratégies de lutte contre la pauvreté) et le système onusien (objectifs du millénaire).

This paper aims to examine and evaluate the relationship between the EU and ACP countries from the Lomé Conventions to the current Cotonou Agreement, and, in particular, the new Economic Partnership Agreements which will affect the ACP countries by far more than the European Union. This paper is structured as following: At first, a short overview about the development of the trade relations between the European Community and later on the European Union and the ACP-countries will be shown. Further on, the main reasons for the changed development policy will be shown as well as the success of the Lomé era will be evaluated. In the fourth and fifth part the current situation of the trade negotiations, i. e. trade relations under the Cotonou Agreement, and the future Economic Partnership Agreements as well as their expected impact on the ACPs seen from the different perspectives views and expectations expressed by the European Union on the one hand, and by the Non-Governmental-Organizations (NGOs) and the ACP countries on the other hand - will be examined and evaluated as far as possible at the moment.

The European Union is currently negotiating free trade agreements, called Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), with African countries as part of the Cotonou Agreement between the European Union and African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. The paper empirically assesses the impact of the EPAs on trade flows and government revenue for 14 West African countries. The results indicate that the decline in import duties due to the preferential tariff elimination might be of some cause for concern and that complementary fiscal and economic policies have to be implemented before or at the time the EPAs come into force.

Negotiations on Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the EU and African governments have dragged on since 2002. They were confined by the framework of the Cotonou Agreement, a cornerstone of ACP–EU development cooperation on the one hand and limiting WTO rules on the other. The EPAs were meant not just to liberalize trade but also to promote development in Africa. However, high-flying expectations of creating a win-win situation in a partnership of equals were apparently dashed. Agenda-setting by Brussels left it with grandiose declarations about partnerships between equals , development orientation, promotion of inclusive growth and regional integration with due attention to WTO-compatible regulations. According to the EU's Roadmap 2014 to 2017 (EU 2014), all this should be realized by 2017 by way of exemplary EPAs. The major issues at stake have been especially pronounced in the ongoing negotiations on West African EPAs. Contentious issues were legion.

Signé entre l'UE et le bloc ACP en 2000, l'Accord de Cotonou arrive à son terme en fin 2020 et de fait soulève inévitablement de nombreuses interrogations du fait qu'après 20 ans, les intérêts des parties sont de plus en plus divergents. L'UE par exemple envisage aujourd'hui de traiter directement avec les pays africains séparément du bloc ACP et vice versa. Alors, quelle structure doit avoir le nouvel accord ? Quelles sont les modifications à apporter ? Quels facteurs doivent être pris en compte ? En essai de réponse à ces questions, cette étude se propose de réaliser une évaluation des piliers fondateurs de l'Accord de Cotonou (Aide, Coopération Commerciale et Coopération Politique) sur ses 20 années d'exercice dans le but de déterminer l'écart réel entre les objectifs fixés et ceux atteints. Mais aussi d'examiner les facteurs qui l'ont influencé pour parvenir à souligner les défis à relever dans le cadre futur de la coopération UE-ACP; Abstract: Signed between the EU and the ACP bloc in 2000, the Cotonou Agreement expires by the end of 2020 and indeed inevitably raises many questions because after 20 years, the interests of the parties are increasingly divergent. The EU, for example, is now considering dealing directly with African countries separately from the ACP bloc and vice versa. So, what structure should the new agreement have? What changes need to be made? What factors need to be taken into account? In an attempt to answer these questions, this study attempts to carry out an evaluation of the founding pillars of the Cotonou Agreement (Aid, Trade Cooperation and Political Cooperation) over its 20 years of operation in order to determine the real gap between the objectives set and those achieved. But also to examine external factors that have influenced it in order to highlight the challenges to be met in the future framework of EU-ACP cooperation; Resumo: Assinado entre a UE e o bloco ACP em 2000, o Acordo de Cotonou expira no final de 2020 e, de facto, levanta inevitavelmente muitas questões porque, passados 20 anos, os interesses das partes são cada vez mais divergentes. A UE, por exemplo, está agora a considerar tratar diretamente com os países africanos separadamente do bloco ACP e vice-versa. Que estrutura deverá ter o novo acordo? Que mudanças precisam de ser feitas? Que fatores devem ser tidos em conta? Numa tentativa de responder a estas questões, este estudo propõe a realização de uma avaliação dos pilares fundadores do Acordo de Cotonou (Ajuda, Cooperação Comercial e Cooperação Política) ao longo dos seus 20 anos de funcionamento, a fim de determinar o verdadeiro fosso entre os objetivos estabelecidos e os atingidos. Mas também para examinar os fatores que a influenciaram a fim de realçar os desafios a enfrentar no futuro quadro de cooperação UE-ACP.