January 1, 2001

A huge chunk of the external debt of African countries is composed of debt contracted in questionable circumstance. Two-thirds of Nigeria’s over $28 billion external debt was contracted between 1983 and 1998 when the military held sway.

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES

Africa’s journey towards underdevelopment dates from the 18th century. Since the 1884. Berlin Conference, Africa’s modern history has essentially been the history of the impact of European and American on the region.

It was in Berlin in 1884 that the continent was partitioned among European powers, which then proceeded to impose different regimes of colonial administration. Everything about the scramble for Africa is left to history, including all the attendant negative consequences, which remains the bane of development throughout the continent.

It is a story of how autonomous African people were forcefully divided and, or, merged into different political units without rational justification.

The result of the arbitrary partitioning, most people now agree, is that disparate units forced to be together are constantly at war. Prior to the attainment of independence from the 1950s, there were many bloody revolts against colonial oppression and racism.

It is also a story of the emergence of modern African states, and finally, a history of how African countries in the contemporary period have embarked on the search for a more equitable form of partnership with European, America and other industrialized countries of the world.

With this background and memories of the trauma of the slave trade perpetrated by the same Europeans and Americans for close to four centuries, we want to dispel the myth usually bandied by Europeans on the so-called backwardness of Africa being divinely ordained.

It is certainly not, but rather, it is the direct consequence of a deliberate policy adopted and practiced over half a millennium by virtually all European countries to degrade, depopulate and denude the continent for the benefit of Europe.

The period under review (1884 –1960) was when African colonies had no say in the determination of their own fate, no control over their own resources, and were obliged to live with whatever political institutions their political masters in Europe impose.

The worst aspect was that when there was war in Europe, Africans were drafted to fight without knowing exactly what it was they were fighting or dying for. And, when in the 1960s, most African countries began gradually to achieve their independence, they inherited severely depleted natural resources and monetarised economies that were contrived almost entirely for the benefit of the former colonial masters.

From the foregoing, the rebuilding and rehabilitation of Africans lies squarely on the shoulders of both the industrialised and developing worlds. Europe which devastated Africa must stand in for the in this crusade to transform the continent from poverty and degradation to wealth and prosperity.

Areas in which Europe’s intervention are urgently required include; addressing the low levels of literacy, inadequate healthcare delivery system especially in the area of preventive medicine; educational facilities, yawning for modernization and expansion; the severe pressure on national transportation and communication systems; the inability to generate enough employment for a rapidly expanding workforce and infrastructural development.

2. THE DEBT CRISIS

One major obstacle to Africa’s development is the crippling debt overhang. It has not been possible to speak of any significant measure of development for as long as Africans have had to allocate a lot of their lean resources to debt payments and servicing.

As a civil society group, we joined forces with our comrades the world over to confront the historical roots and structural causes of the debt problem, and to promote lasting alternatives of economic, social and ecological justice. We locate our struggle in the context of the myriad forms of resistance through which the majority of the World’s population (including Africa) now seek to achieve and defend their fundamental human and collective rights to a dignified life. Because the debt problem is not a financial or technical issue as the World Bank and the IMF are tempted to demonstrate. It is essentially a human, social and political problem. Debt service and its associated conditionalities have contributed immensely to the aggravation of poverty. Moreover, debt has been widely reimbursed for the past few years; Africa has been transferring more resources to developed countries than she receives even in squalid living conditions.

Despite the efforts of IFIs and the G8 in solving the debt crisis in Africa, there has been an insignificant reduction in the debt burden since Cologne 1999. Their programmes for easing the debt are based on conditionalities, and the imposition of structural adjustment frameworks that generate poverty.

There is therefore an urgent necessity to adopt new models of development. An important aspect of these is the total cessation of the logic of structural adjustment for African countries.

The New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) offers a germane model. Europe and other industrialized countries should allow NEPAD to work by not subjecting it to international conditionalities that will strangulate the initiative.

‘ODIOUS’ AND ILLEGITIMATE DEBTS

A huge chunk of the external debt of African countries is composed of debt contracted in questionable circumstance. These are the debts being paid for loans that went to projects destructive of people and of the environment, loans that went to propping up military dictatorships, and loans that were pocketed by corrupt officials and earned usurious interest rates.

In Nigeria as an instance, two-thirds of her over $28 billion external debt was contracted between 1983 and 1998 when the military held sway. Ditto for most African countries, where bulk of the countries’ loans were given to despots, against any common sense and logic.

INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION PANEL ON DEBT.

It is quite evident that current mechanisms for managing and negotiating the debt is unjust and unacceptable and over the years, civil society have sought to be directly involved in the negotiations between states on the question of debt.

An international arbitration panel on debt has been widely canvassed in both the North and the South as a most democratic mechanism for resolving the debt crisis. This is why we endorsed the Jubilee framework patterned after chapter 9 of the US legal code (which applies to government organizations like municipalities) or chapter 11 (which applies to corporations) as an appropriate model.

The framework if endorsed by Europe and the G8 countries will enable any indebted nation to file for a standstill on debt payments, or for her creditors to declare her insolvent. It will be a form of regulation of international capital flows; and will discipline both lax lenders and reckless borrowers.

The framework removes international creditors, like the IMF, from playing the role of plaintiff, judge and jury in the event of debt crisis and the criteria for petitioning will be determined by the debtor nation.

Central to the framework would be the independence of the insolvency court and the framework applies to all indebted countries not just those the IMF deems insolvent. The court, which may be an ad-hoc body, may not require an international treaty.

3. REPATRIATION OF STOLEN WEALTH VIS-À-VIS BLOCKING OF TERRORISTS ASSETS.

One major threat to world peace and development is the huge sums of money illicitly acquired by money launderers, public treasury looters and terrorists. Sadly the global financial system over the years provided safe heaven for the keeping of such dirty money.

Very much like the debt burden, the theft of huge sums of public funds kept in private bank accounts and off shore centers, has helped in the under development of Africa.

The campaign for the repatriation of stolen wealth launched by ANEEJ at its HIPC/ESAF review conference in Djregbe, Benin Republic in 1998 is interestingly a major issue in international for a on development.

The major obstacle to the success of the campaign is traceable to a seemingly international conspiracy to scuttle current efforts. European and American banks, for instance, have refused to cooperate with Nigeria and other African countries enmeshed in this crisis spanning three decade to trace, track and repatriate the loot. They usually cite the convenient doctrine of confidentiality as an obstacle. The fact, however, is that the banks which receive these stolen funds and the Nigerians or Africans who deposited these funds with them are equally guilty of an infringement of the law. Obviously, it takes two to tango in the vice of corruption.

It is in this regard that we have consistently called for an international convention on the stolen wealth as the most viable solution to the problem of money laundering. The convention is to ensure fairness, transparency and accountability with regards to due process of law.

Secrete out-of-court settlement with some of the corrupt persons which tend to cede better part of the stolen wealth to the Bank for International Settlement is certainly not a solution, but a deliberate ploy to further under develop Africa.

But on the contrary, when terrorists struck America in September 11, 2001, the United State and her European allies make tracking down terrorists and their funds a priority on the international agenda. Names are being published, accounts identified and assets frozen.

This is exactly the treatment we expected in the stolen wealth issue, which has enriched the North at the peril of the South.

The classification of illicit funds into political corruption and terrorist funds is merely for northern convenience. We expect both classifications to be given the same international treatment, because nobody knows if the huge illicit “political fund” of today could be transformed into a “terrorists fund” tomorrow. That is a likely or possible danger such funds pose.

Also, confidentiality of transactions between the depositor and the receiving bank has not prevented government and agencies of law enforcement from impounding and repatriating funds that are traceable to illegal drug dealings. Why the difference in the “political corruption loot”?

This is an unjust state of affairs for Africa, hence the need for an international convention on stolen wealth. Repatriation of such loot will give Africa a new lease of life.

At the G7 summit in Kyushu-Okinawa, Japan, July 21, 2000 the governments committed themselves to taking actions against abuse of the global financial system by stating in point 26 that; “we welcome and strongly endorse our G7 Finance Ministers’ report, published today on “Actions Against Abuse of the Global Financial System…”

The finance ministers’ report reads in part: “International money laundering has often been used by government officials to assist the clandestine diversion of public assets. The vulnerability of government institutions to such crime can be especially substantial in countries with emerging democratic systems and developing or transitional economies. We agree that it would be useful if we could take stock of existing legal tools and the agencies that administer them in each of our countries that would be available to identify, trace and seize such laundered assets, as a first step to enhancing international cooperation o the issue.”

This was the commitment made and we call on the G7 countries to live up to their commitment regarding the issue

4. TRADE IMBALANCE

There is an absurdity surrounding international trade. In a globalize world, trade is supposed to increase prosperity and circulate wealth, but the rules that govern world trade has increasingly favored the rich at the detriment of the poor.

There is an unquantifiable human cost of trade imbalance. In Africa and other ACP countries about 128 million people could be salvaged from the bondage of poverty if their share of world exports is increased by one percent, and this will have a multiplier benefit on health and health in which peoples of these regions of the world suffer greatly.

It is sad to not that when developing countries export to rich country markets, they face tariff barriers that are four times higher than those encountered by rich countries. These barriers cost the developing countries twice as much as they get in aid. Policies usually formulated by the rich countries of the world cast grave suffering on the poor people of the world.

Again while rich countries keep their markets closed, poor countries have been pressurized by the Bretton Woods Institutions – World Bank and the IMF to open their markets with devastating consequences. Many of the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) which borders on investment, intellectual property and services more often than not protects the interest of rich countries and powerful Transnational companies (TNCs), while huge cost are imposed on developing countries.

There is much injustice in world trade, which calls for fundamental reforms to reverse the imbalance.

v Essentially, the WTO need to be democratized to give stronger voice to poor countries.

v The World Bank and IMF must stop the use of conditions attached to their programmes to force poor countries to open their markets irrespective of its consequences on the people.

v The cycle of subsidized agricultural over-production and export dumping by rich countries should be stopped.

v Rules that force governments to liberalize or privatization of basic services should be abrogated.

5. MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

It is interesting to learn that all United Nations Member States have pledged to: eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; achieve universal primary education, promote gender equality and empower women, reduce child mortality, improve maternal health and combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases by 2015.

Other goals are, to ensure environmental sustainability and develop a global partnership for development. Lofty as these goals seem, one poser is; will the rest of the world attain them without Africa?

These goals are unrealizable for most African countries with the current external debt burden, huge sums of its assets looted and stashed in private accounts in overseas banks, trade imbalance that largely favours the north to the continued detriment of the south.

The rest of the world must have leverage Africa in the pursuit of the millennium goals by reversing these issues on debt, stolen wealth and trade. The industrialized countries will have to accede to the demand for 0.7 ODA being made available to developing countries without strings or conditions attached.

6. ANOTHER BERLIN CONFERENCE IS POSSIBLE

Looking at the plight of Africa since the first Berlin conference in 1884, it is only spiritually, emotionally, morally and ideologically logical for Europe and Africa to retrace their steps to where they first goofed.

Besides, we consider Germany, now reunified and economically strong, as strategic in Europe and the European union. It is also our belief that Europe’s response to Africa will depend on what Germany thinks and feels.

The idea or call for another Berlin conference was first muted by President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria on his visit to Germany shortly after he assumed office in 1999 and we agree completely with him.

We want this call to be an agenda in the next European Union meeting and let some indications to a possible convocation of another Berlin conference emerge from the next G8 meeting in Kanakaskis, Canada in June, 2002.

We want the future of Africa tabled. The suggestions and recommendations on Africa’s development challenges as outlined above need to be given a fair attention at such for a. Europe owes Africa a debt that is payable and another Berlin Conference can provide a platform for the settlement of such a debt which will bring lasting economic growth to Africa in particular and the world in general.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION.

The issues raised above represent the immediate and remote development challenges staring Africa in the face. To move forward, the following recommendations are expected of Europe and the G8 countries and governments:

(1) Total debt cancellation for African countries

(2) Institutionalization of a fair international arbitration process to resolve the debt problem to discourage lax lenders and irresponsible borrowing for future lending.

(3) Investigation, tracing, tracking and repatriation of all illicit funds kept in European and American private bank accounts akin to the measure on terrorist bank accounts and assets to check impunity risks on financial crime.

(4) The G8 plan of action should not emasculate NEPAD through conditionalities.

(5) 0.7 Overseas Development Assistance should be made available unconditionally to fight underdevelopment in Africa.

The march towards the millennium targets of the United Nations has just begun; doing it without the continent of Africa makes the plan a pipe dream.