LETTERS

THIS MONTH'S PRIZE LETTER

Fair Trade

ACT AGAINST SUBSIDIES

I have to agree with the statements regarding the need for increased trade made in Anver Versi's editorial "Open the gates for African Trade" in the July issue of African Business.

Business Credit Solutions

• Get a Credit Report
• Get a D&B D-U-N-S Number
• Monitor My Business Credit - FREE TRIAL!

Business Credit Advice

• Business Credit Basics
• Build My Business Credit
• Extend Credit to Customers
• Use My Credit to Get Loans

Although a lot is said about the need to eliminate subsidies, not much is being done in the EU and the US to do so. The recent US Farm Bill is a good example of where subsidies were increased rather than reduced. In addition, the announcement of an agreed reform of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) will leave a sour taste in many African farmers' mouths because the level of subsidies are not reduced, only the way in which it is paid to EU farmers.

Next year the EU will pay their farmers Euros40bn ($45.3bn) rising to Euros45bn ($51bn)in 2007. Wheat and maize will be subsidised by Euro 63 ($71) per ton!

I believe the actions of the US and EU are a clear indication that their governments are not serious about subsidy reductions and are only looking for ways to disguise these payments. Multilateral discussions at the WTO to reduce subsidies should continue, but rather than wait until these subsidies have totally destroyed Africa's agriculture, African governments should act in a decisive way and address the problem directly.

Measures such as the introduction of higher import tariffs, a moratorium on the phasing out of tariffs and import bans on certain products should be taken to support African farmers. This would send a clear message to the EU and US that their subsidies are to the detriment of our farmers and will not be tolerated anymore.

The US and EU are quick to take action to support their farmers, so they have no ground to stand on when African governments introduce measures to support their own farmers and agro-processors. Their farmers would quickly complain when their export markets dry up, and then maybe the US and the EU would start to reduce their subsidies!

Heinrich Stevens

Pretoria

South Africa

PRIZE LETTER

WIN A FREE ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION!

African Business will award a free one year subscription to the reader whose letter is chosen as the Prize Letter for that month. (Existing subscribers will receive a free annual renewal). Your views on Africa and matters affecting Africa are very important to this publication. We encourage you to share them with thousands of our readers in Africa and all over the world. Please address your comments to: The Editor, African Business, 7 Coldbath Sq. London ECIR 4LQ, UK.

All letters must bear the writers name and address, although you can ask for your name to be withheld.

Open letter to George Bush

POWER AND RESPONSIBILITY

Dear President Bush:

As your plane touched down in Dakar, Senegal, we welcomed the opportunity of your visit to examine the US-Africa relationship and to establish ties that are based on honesty, respect and a clear commitment to removing the structural obstacles that impede Africa's development. We would have liked to raise the following issues for your consideration. They are not new ones, but there was an opportunity, with your visit, to act decisively and change the image and relationship of your administration with Africa.

The visit to five African countries was scheduled to clash with the second African Union (AU) Heads of State summit meeting, in Maputo, Mozambique. It is unclear how the administration could have been so out of step with Africa's continental institutions not to have sought to attend this important meeting. Regrettably, your visit served as a distraction to the AU meeting.

We notice that your planning team omitted those countries like Tanzania and Kenya that have suffered directly from terrorist attacks against US interests and citizens. This is odd given the tremendous cost that these countries have borne and continue to bear as a result of their relationship with the US. Furthermore, the highly selective programme excluded civil society and the business communities who could have offered constructive and prepositional conversation around US foreign policy, aid and trade. As constructed, the agenda appeared to offer little else than a series of photo opportunities, starting with Goree Island and ending in a Ugandan AIDS clinic, with shots of our Presidents in between.

This trip may have boosted the Republican campaign image among the African-American community before elections. However, it did very little to boost confidence on the continent that this was a working visit which afforded the time and space for Africans to share their aspirations, and engage the US administration on the need for it to change its policies and practices toward Africa. The most important issues we needed to raise were:

1) Delivery, not spin, on HIV/Aids.

Two-thirds of the 25m people who have died are Africans. There is no doubt this is one of the gravest issues confronting the continent, yet the Global Health Fund is short on resources. While welcoming the public pledge of $15bn to a unilateral US Global AIDS programmes, we note your administration's request for 2004 is a miserly $450m. Where is the $15bn that you have promised to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean? Show us the money!

The quality of US health programmes have suffered from the reliance on patented drugs and the restriction of health programmes that promote abstinence from sex rather than safe sex. We call on you to heed the demand of African leaders and women's organisations for a change in these policies and those promoting health cut backs. The demand for the right to import and manufacture generic drugs is a moral imperative. This trip would have been an opportunity to express your support for Africans to have access to cheap generic drugs and to promote women's rights to control their own fertility.

2) A decrease in unilateral militarisation, and the facilitation of regional peace-keeping.

Several African conflicts are leading to the deaths, displacement and impoverishment of millions of African women, men and children. African leaders have tried individually and collectively to respond to these conflicts despite the debilitating effects of structural adjustment policies (which the US supports) and debt servicing.

The US needs to provide adequate logistical and financial support for peacekeeping, peace-making and peace-building in Sudan, Liberia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Burundi. It can do this through co-operation and collaboration with existing efforts such as the ECOWAS-sponsored peace conference on Liberia being held in Ghana, the South African-led peace efforts in Burundi and the United Nations and French-led operations in the DRC.

At the same time, civil society organisations in Africa would like to register their unequivocal opposition to the further militarisation of the continent by the proposed setting up of new military bases in Africa as well as the expansion of others, i.e. Djibouti. We are not unmindful of the past US military role in Africa. In fact a number of Africa's civil wars are products of US military support, including Liberia, the DRC, and the recently ended Angolan war. The move to militarise the continent cannot be justified by US economic interests in our oil or in protecting Africa from terrorism.

We call on the US to roll back the current plans to create "forward operating bases" on African soil and desist from promoting bilateral agreements that exempt both US and African citizens from prosecution under the International Criminal Court. With great power comes responsibility for one's actions. This should also apply to the US.

3) Why is Iraq's debt different from Africa's?

It has long been established that Africa's debt burden is a major obstacle to Africa's development objectives. The servicing of Africa's debt has made it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the continent to invest in the productive sector, health and education.

Will you announce US support for the unconditional cancellation of Africa's debt? If Iraq's debt can be cancelled, then surely there is nothing to stop you from doing the same for Africa.

4) Dumping is not Fair Trade

In your pre-visit media briefings, you made reference to free trade and AGOA as a panacea for Africa's economic woes, yet your administration practices protectionist policies, offers tremendous subsidies and is aggressively promoting patents on all living and non-living resources. Agriculture is Africa's competitive advantage and the only form of livelihood for 70% of its population. Africa's poverty is the direct consequence of the inability to export agricultural commodities at fair prices and to access US technologies.

We call on you to announce a moratorium on subsidies to US farmers, desist from championing risky GM products and to take measures that will enhance market access for Africa's agricultural products.

5) Democracy is a principle, not a matter of expediency

African people across the continent are establishing and holding accountable democratic governments. In these cases, US support like elsewhere in the world is welcome. The practice of externally induced 'regime change' as we have seen in the recent past is not welcome. Africans reserve the right to elect and/or recall their leaders through democratic processes. We view with deep concern, the pressure that is placed on African governments to adopt laws that contravene national constitutions and to act in a manner that strips their citizens or residents of their fundamental freedoms and access to the rule of law such as the recent case of four Moslems in Malawi suspected of being linked to Al Quaida. This divides Africa along racial and religious lines.

We would have liked an opportunity to express these thoughts more directly and hear your responses. However we note with concern that the space for civil society in the US to comment on and/or criticise your administration policies has shrunk considerably. We are not surprised that civil society in Africa as well did not feature in your itinerary.

We deeply share the pain and suffering of Americans resulting from September 11 events and the sense of urgency to bring this insecurity to an end. However, we think that US-Africa relations cannot be driven by the US's 'War Against Terrorism", nor the US interest in Africa as an emerging market or as supplier of 15% of US oil.

We make these appeals because we believe there are obligations that come with being the world's only super power.

Furthermore, the people of the US and Africa have a history that is intertwined. Crimes against African humanity were conducted during slavery and during the cold war. In that sense the US has an ethical burden to act in ways that exude justice, human rights and a genuine respect for democracy. We ask not for charity, we seek justice. We look to you to act decisively and change the image and relationship of your administration with Africa.

Yours truly

Helen Wangusa - coordinator, African Women Empowerment Network (AWEPON), Uganda Patrick Craven - Congress of South African Trade Unions, South Africa.

Muthoni Wanyeki - executive director, African Women Development and Communication Network (FEMNET), Kenya.

Oduor Ong'wen - director, Econews Africa, Kenya.

Ezra Mbogori - executive director, Mwelekeo wa NGO (MWENGO), Zimbabwe.

Endorsed by:

Emira Woods - Co-director, Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies, US.

Salih Booker - executive director, AfricaAction, US.

Bill Fletcher - president, Transafrica, US.

Leon Spencer - executive director, Washington Office on Africa, US.

Njoki Njoroge Njehu - director, 50 Years Is Enough: U.S. Network for Global Economic Justice, US.

Kumi Naidoo - secretary general, Citizens World Alliance, South Africa.

c.c. Hon. Colin Powell, US Secretary of State, Hon. Andrew Natsios, administrator, USAID.

Nigeria

OBASANJO'S TOP PRIORITIES

Aman does not chase rats when his house is on fire. This proverb applies to President Olusegun Obasanjo's zealous chase for international reputation when he has a huge stable to clear at home.

After almost five years in office, he is yet to convince Nigerians of his credibility at home. In his first electoral term, it was estimated that he spent nearly 300 days abroad on missions to woo foreign investors in an attempt to improve Nigeria's image overseas.

Yet, despite the President's globetrotting, Nigeria's economy is no better than when he took office in 1999.

At his inauguration in May 1999, the retail price of petroleum products were reasonably affordable to every Nigerian, but one of his major economic 'reforms' is to continually raise the price of fuel by nearly 100% on a yearly basis. He tells Nigerians that the country spends N250bn (about $20m) on importing petroleum products yearly - to a country that is reckoned to be the eighth largest exporter of crude oil in the world!

He finds it Very difficult' to effect the turn around maintenance (TAM) of our three major refineries, but finds it appropriate to build a multi-million dollar stadium at Abuja while the national stadium in Lagos is gradually dilapidating. What a misplacement of priority!

Obasanjo blames the increased price of petroleum products on cross-border smuggling, indirectly telling Nigerians that he is unable to secure the country's borders from external invasion. In its response to the fuel price hike, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) initiated a protest strike. More than 10 people were shot dead in Lagos demonstrations. Obasanjo only compromised slightly in the imposition of a fuel price increase, leaving ordinary Nigerians to shoulder the heavy burden.

Any country that neglects its education has a bleak future. Obasanjo's administration has not put the educational infrastructure to the top of its national priorities. The universities are in ruins, and the position of other higher educational institutes are no better. This situation has ignited a series of strikes by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU). In fact it has become a yearly routine for ASUU to take industrial action, leaving the student body in limbo. But instead of restructuring the already existing higher institutions, Obasanjo prefers to build a National Open University to provide a 'quality workforce' for the economy.

One of the Obasanjo administration's problems is that it has strictly followed the directives of the World Bank and IMF in its economic reforms yet has very little to show for it.

Unfortunately for the administration, the IMF is questioning Nigeria's suitability as a principal partner of the regional Economic and Monetary Union, EMU, because of its "poor fiscal policy management - as evidenced in expansionary spending policies under both the military and civilian governments - and an unhealthy reliance on crude oil exports". Though a farmer, Obasanjo is now afraid of tilling the soil. He tells us almost daily is that "we're still learning democracy". But what I and many others say is that Nigeria must solve the problems it is now confronted with.

Chijioke Ndukwe

Lagos Nigeria.