|
|
|
|
|||
TradeLast updated June 2009 Trade represents a key element in U.S. policy toward Africa. Although successive U.S. administrations have promoted trade as the engine of African growth, the reality is that the United States continues to pursue trade policies that are antithetical to Africa's interests. U.S. trade policies have tended to perpetuate Africa's role as a source of raw materials and cheap labor. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) was approved by Congress in 2000 and extended until 2015 in December 2006. AGOA was intended to offer incentives to African countries to open their markets, but has brought very little benefit to a few countries and has not promoted sustainable economic development. Heightened U.S. interest in Africa's oil supply has increased the continent's strategic importance to the U.S. and its future energy policies. As a result, U.S. trade with Africa is highly concentrated on a small number of major oil producers: Nigeria, Angola, Algeria and Gabon. The United States is the world's largest oil consumer in the world, using about 20 million barrels a day. It is also the world's largest importer of petroleum. The African continent is a relatively untapped source of these resources, though it only accounts for about 9% of the world's proven petroleum reserves. A U.S. Department of Energy report projected that African oil production will rise 91% between 2002 and 2025, and as a result, the U.S. has become increasingly interested in buying from African countries. By 2015, the U.S. will have to import over 60% of its total crude oil needs, and a rising percentage of that oil is African. In 2006, 22% of the US total crude oil imports were from Africa, a 200% increase since 2002. This newfound interest in African oil reserves has made the area of strategic national interest for the United States; as a result, United States African Command (AFRICOM) was established to maintain a military presence on the continent and help train and arm African national militaries. The command became operational in October 2008. However, according to the commander and deputy commander of the operation, one of the primary missions of AFRICOM is to protect unfettered access to oil and other resources. In order for trade to boost African growth, the U.S. must look beyond oil and its accompanying militarization to focus on policies that will benefit African economies instead of paving the way for the easy extraction of Africa's resources. It must commit to simplifying expanded market access for African goods and ending the double standard in international trade rules. This will require dismantling trade barriers that severely restrict access for African products to U.S. markets. It will also require reducing subsidies that hinder African exports, especially in the agricultural sector. The debate over agricultural subsidies led to the breakdown of the 2003 World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial in Cancun, Mexico. This meeting was meant to establish global rules to achieve the objectives outlined by the Doha WTO round in 2001, such as fairer international trade rules. In 2005, at WTO talks in Hong Kong, the year 2013 was set as a deadline for the elimination of unfair agricultural subsidies. Little progress has been made since then, and negotiations have yet to resume since their collapse in July 2006. The failure of the Doha round has starkly illustrated the lack of political will among wealthy nations to seriously address the gross imbalances in the current global trade system. The June 2007 communique produced by the G8 summit in Heiligendamm, Germany reflects a similar attitude. Instead of offering concrete new proposals, the G8 has chosen to rehash empty rhetoric while ignoring the exploitative trade initiatives its members are pursuing individually. Restrictions on African access to U.S. markets, combined with agricultural subsidies to U.S. agribusinesses, undermine Africa's competitiveness and continue to constrict the continent's trade-related development. For example, U.S. cotton subsidies reached almost $5 billion in 2005, in violation of WTO rules, lowering global prices and harming the livelihoods of more than 20 million cotton farmers in Africa. Ignoring the false comparative advantage produced by subsidies, it costs three times more to produce one pound of cotton in the U.S. than in Burkina Faso. According to the 2005 U.N. Human Development Report, the U.S. and other rich countries pay their farmers $1 billion in subsidies per day. President Barack Obama initially proposed a cut in farm subsidies that would have saved $9.7 billion in April 2009, but was defeated by agricultural interests in the House and Senate. Increased globalization brings about complex discussions about intellectual property and access to medicines as an aspect of trade relations. Specific actions that President Barack Obama and the U.S. Congress could take to ensure that trade concerning these two aspects benefit those who are most in need would include: promoting the availability of affordable life-saving medications and protect public health in developing countries, promoting innovation to develop and distribute new, effective medicines that address essential health needs without limiting access to existing or future medical products, respecting the rights of all government to regulate pharmaceutical markets and ensure equitable access, and finally, promoting transparency and the integration of public health interests with trade policy. These actions would open up developing markets, including African ones, to medicines from abroad, but also from those manufactured in developing countries to cut the cost of saving lives. By maintaining the supremacy of intellectual property in developing countries deprives struggling countries with the largest disease burdens of affordable medications. Making medication easily available and affordable, by producing generic versions or by allowing developing countries to produce their own generic versions would make health the priority over intellectual property rights, as it should be. African countries remain over-dependent on primary commodities and are extremely vulnerable to swings in market prices. An enhanced economic partnership between the U.S. and African countries requires more than just expanded trade. The insistence of the U.S. on free trade and free market solutions to Africa's development challenges fails to address the structural sources of the continent's poverty. While trade is certainly one important pillar within the framework of United States economic cooperation with Africa, it is not sufficient to bring about economic development. Investment, 100% debt cancellation for all African countries and development assistance should also be essential components of a just economic relationship between the United States and Africa.
LinksTens of Thousands of Schoolchildren Nationwide Will Protest Poverty and Child Labor-Tainted Cocoa during Third Annual Reverse Trick-or-Treating this Halloween
Tens of Thousands of Schoolchildren Nationwide Will Protest Poverty and Child Labor-Tainted Cocoa during Third Annual Reverse Trick-or-Treating this Halloween
'Owning up to Africa': Gerald LeMelle on Sirius XM Satellite Radio
"U.S. works to rebuild ties with South Africa" -L.A. Times
Secretary of State Clinton Begins Tour of Seven African Countries, Civil Society Responds
Media Briefing Booklet: President Barack Obama's Visit to Ghana July 10, 2009
U.S. Civil Society Platform on Trade-Related Intellectual Property and Access to Medicines Issues
AGOA Homepage
The G-8 Announcement: Great Expectations Betrayed
The Economics of Failure: The Real Costs of ‘Free’ Trade for Poor Countries
The Walking Zombie of the WTO
International Trade Policy: Violently Intent on keeping us in Poverty
Make Trade Fair
U.S. & Nigeria: Thinking about Oil
U.S. Oil Politics in the 'Kuwait of Africa'
Statement on U.S. Economic Cooperation with Africa
NAFTA for Africa
WTO Food and Agriculture Rules: Briefing on Critical Issues
|
|