Connect with us

Africa

The Contours of China-Africa Relations

Published

on

Among the fulcrum points of contemporary international affairs, the relationship between China and the more than fifty countries that make up Africa is among the most closely watched. Critics and defenders alike cannot say enough about Beijing’s ties with the mysterious continent.

Contemporary realities and prospective gains are what drive a state’s foreign policy. Thus, while it may have been a different set of motives that drove Africa and China to one another between the 1960s and 1980s (this interesting history and its impact on the relationship today will be returned to at a later section), to students watching and studying the relationship between China and African countries, there are three main motives to Beijing’s interest in Africa today. Firstly, there is the oft-stated prospect of natural resources on which most critics tend to end their analysis. Secondly, there are the opportunities to be gained in the vast markets in Africa’s growing middle class. Thirdly, there are political considerations that Beijing has as its main aims and tries to hasten at all times; chief among these is its being recognised as the “one China” instead of Taiwan by African states and, some argue, the alienation of the west within Africa in a battle for economic frontiers and political allies.

Likewise, Africa has a set of its own motives in engaging with China. A cursory look at the African Union’s Vision 2063 will reveal these in depth. But very briefly, we can state here that they include funding for its initiatives to do with industrialisation, infrastructure, as well as education and healthcare in face of the structural adjustment programmes which prescribed austerity measures such as cutting government spending beginning in the 1980s under conditional aid and loans from Bretton Woods institutions.

The relationship between Africa and China has so far not been particularly perfect and harmonious. The most salient example of this is perhaps the reality that China has tended to export more to the continent than the other way round. Even though there are more than fifty African countries, the balance of trade is tipped in favour of China. Looking at the characteristics of the trade, an even more oblique picture emerges as it is clear that China mainly imports mineral resources (timber and forestry from Gabon, copper from Zambia, cobalt from the Democratic Republic of Congo, and oil from Angola to mention a few) and in turn exports into the continent manufactured textiles and technologies which, because of their affordability, tend to bring about a crowding-out effect on the continent’s domestic producers. In fact, trade unions have been at the forefront of attempting to curb China’s access to African markets. The Congress of South African Trade Unions in South Africa launched a “buy local” campaign that was motivated by a perceived threat posed by China in 2012. Moreover, more jobs have allegedly been threatened in the West African coast by alleged illegal fishing by Chinese nationals. Furthermore, less than optimum conditions in Chinese-owned factories in Zambia led in 2004 to the death of close to 40 employees in an explosion. And throughout the window period in which African countries were given access to US markets by the American Growth Opportunity Act, Chinese companies allegedly took advantage of that and set-up and registered businesses in Africa so as to gain access to the US market for themselves.

Facts and allegations such as these have become ready points to those who claim that China is neo-colonial in its relations with continental Africa. According to the view, the lopsided and imbalanced trade is reminiscent of the “scramble for Africa” which characterised the colonial relations between the Western European states and their African colonies. In what has been termed the “New Scramble for Africa”, China is cast as the new colonial power in the continent taking advantage of the continent’s citizens and taking away valuable commodities in exchange only for trinkets. Yet, this is a view of the relationship that is grossly over-simplistic. The nuances are not completely appreciated. For example, the risks that China has taken in taking over tottering projects in the continent (Nigeria’s oil sector, and Sudan after allegations of terrorism sponsoring, for example) are overlooked. Overlooked too, are the billions of aid that the People’s Republic gave without conditions to the continent while it was itself still a developing entity in the twentieth century, and even today. The high watermark of Africa and China’s relationship has been formed on the back of these contributions. The People’s Republic also has as one of its claimed principal aims the improvement of the relations into a win-win scenario.

Despite claims to do with China’s “neo-colonialism”, China has differentiated itself from the West by being avowedly non-interfering in internal African governance issues. This has been its niche. But some scholars read into this a lack of long-term orientation in Beijing’s interest in Africa. In other words, China seems to be only – and temporarily so – interested in extracting resources to complete its developmental project. Otherwise, the critics claim, she would be much more interested in improving Africa’s polities as a sign of long-term orientation.

On the other hand, some argue that China is fostering good governance in a manner that is both prudent and organic. As one Chinese government-associated scholar, He Wenping, sees it, “the fact is China is striving to develop economic and trade cooperation in Africa, helping African countries in large scale infrastructure development, raising people’s living standard, reducing poverty and vigorously developing African personnel training programs, which are all helping to build an economic and human resources foundation for Africa to realize democracy and good governance.” Under this view, China may be, coincidentally or otherwise, promoting (at least the conditions for) democratization through bringing in social and economic development and therefore – if democratization theorists are to be believed – will create a middle class that is capable of bringing about democratic change. Economic development also means a rooting out of “careerism” in African politics; alternative forms of enrichment apart from politics in the private sectors improves governance and leads to declines in corruption. Furthermore, according to a Brookings Institute report, China has not been a funder of unscrupulous dictators as is nominally argued. The greatest volume of China’s investment, the report states, is concentrated in democratic or semi-democratic states – Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia. And South Africa, largely considered the most democratic state on the continent, is China’s largest trading partner on the continent.

The earliest contact between China and Africa can be traced to the Han dynasty around 200 BC and more sporadic contacts between then and the seventeenth century when the Qing Dynasty famously began an inward turn and the Emperor banned all outside visitation and either burned sea-going vessels or let them rot without maintenance. But no understanding of the current set of relations between the two entities could be proper without appreciating the immense impact of the Cold War era between the late 1940s and 1980s in which so much of the present world order was forged. It was in these years that USSR-aligned China sponsored and even trained communist and other left-leaning movements in Africa. After the outright break with Moscow, China went on its independent, and in many ways more successful tirade to win allies on the continent by sponsoring those independence and revolutionary parties that were not only anti-West but also not yet in cooperation with the Soviets. The most noteworthy among these movements was perhaps Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) and its encompassing Zimbabwean African National Liberation Army (ZANLA) which was fighting a bush war against Ian Smith’s regime in Rhodesia and went on to become the ruling party of independent Zimbabwe. The great result of this being that the relationship between the two countries is extremely positive today. China also has close relations with Angola and Mozambique for almost similar, though perhaps more controversial reasons.

Other outcomes for the present relations between Africa and China were not entirely positive. Due to its zeal for funding and aiding particularly leftist parties in Africa, in the throes of the Cold War, China may have also alienated some African countries who were pro-West – Cameroon, whose President Ahidjo at the time (1963) stated that “China is one of the states supporting terrorism in Cameroon. We have proof, for Cameroonian terrorists are in Communist China,” is a particular example. Perhaps because of this, Cameroon was among the last African countries to recognize mainland China over Taiwan as the One China. Still, China and Africa share a common and painful history of sufferings under colonial invasions. Today in the modern era, they also share the goal of common development for survival and development in a self-consciously Western-dominated international order.

The almost exponential spike in Chinese investment in Africa occurred in the years succeeding 2000. It cannot be coincidence that this is the year in which the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation was established. To date, there have been five such meetings between Chinese and African statesmen. A cursory look at each of these fora will reveal the extent to which they have been a launching ground for initiatives that have gone a long way in pushing African development further.

The first conference, which took place on Chinese soil, passed the Beijing Declaration of the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation and the Programme for China–Africa Cooperation in Economic and Social Development which has laid the basis of future forums and engagement. The second conference, which took place in Ethiopia, saw an increase in attendance and awareness as more than 70 ministers from China and 44 African countries attended the conference. The Conference passed the Addis Ababa Action Plan (2004-2006) which had among its declarations both entities’ plans for further trade plans as well as debt relief and development commitments. In the third conference, which returned to Beijing in 2006, PRC President Hu Jintao and heads of state from 35 African countries were in attendance. President Hu rolled out $5 billion worth of concessionary loans to Africa during the summit. As one of the “Eight Measures” for Sino-African relations, President Hu announced the creation of the China-Africa Development Fund to further Chinese investment in Africa with US$1 billion of initial funding with its fund expected to grow to US$5 billion in the future. On the fourth conference, held in Egypt, there was a great deal of introspective reviewing of the Forum and in addition to this, A $10 billion low-cost loan was announced on November 9, 2009, double the $5 billion loan announced and implemented at the 2006 Beijing Summit. Furthermore, Wen announced that China will write off the debt of some of the poorest African nations. He said China will construct 100 new clean-energy projects on the continent covering solar power, bio-gas and small hydro-power and gradually lower customs duties on 95 percent of products from African states with which it has diplomatic ties. He also stated that China would undertake 100 joint demonstration projects on scientific and technological research, receive 100 African postdoctoral fellows to conduct scientific research in China and assist them in going back and serving their home countries. The number of agricultural technology demonstration centres built by China in Africa will be increased to 20. Likewise, 50 agricultural technology teams would be sent to Africa and 2,000 agricultural technology personnel would be trained for Africa, in order to help strengthen Africa’s ability to ensure food security. China also would provide medical equipment and antimalarial materials worth 500 million yuan to the 30 hospitals and 30 malaria prevention and treatment centres built by China and train 3,000 doctors and nurses for Africa. It was further stated that China will build 50 China–Africa friendship schools and train 1,500 school principals and teachers for African countries and increase the number of Chinese government scholarships to Africa to 5,500 by 2012. China will also train a total of 20,000 professionals of various fields for Africa over the next three years. Already, Africa, as a result of these initiatives, became the second largest engineering services contract market for China. Statistically, there are nearly a million Chinese in Africa, with 1,600 Chinese enterprises doing business on the continent.

The presence of China in Africa, and particularly the creation of the Forum has proven effective in ways that could not have been predicted. It has made other entities ever more willing to reconsider their relationship with the continent. In what economists term the “crowding-in effect” the United States under President Obama in particular set itself on a new, China-like path in the wake of the Forum. In what Lauren Dickey, writing for The Diplomat in 2014, labelled the US’s “belated beginning” in “its treatment of Africa as a strategic continent,” the country launched in 2014 the US-Africa Leaders’ Summit in Washington; historically, marking the first time a sitting American president had invited all the leaders of Africa to a single event to discuss regional issues and the macro US-Africa relationship (a la FOCAC). If indeed emulation is the highest form of flattery, then FOCAC must rightfully exalt at its exemplary stature. In the meeting, promises were made by President Obama of, amongst others, a $14 billion commitment by U.S. companies for investments in Africa’s construction, manufacturing, energy, finance, and technology sector. With President Donald Trump’s unpredictable administration, we cannot yet say for certain whether this reconsideration of the relationship will continue, but so far there has been evidence that it may not, as the budget for international aid, for example, got considerable cuts proposed (at the time of writing, US Congress was opposing the motion, however).

Nevertheless, regarding the prospect of a far-reaching full win-win relationship, usage of the Forum beyond just as an aid-granting and investment platform must involve tackling other implicative and negative issues. The Forum, for example, has spoken very minimally on perhaps one of the most important issues facing Africa today: climate change. This, no doubt, would be a major bone of contention as Beijing is one of the leading polluters in the world today. But the Forum cannot be said to be living up to its mandate if it fails to delve into potentially polarizing issues of the contemporary age. But it may not be, as shown in an article in Modern Diplomacy, China is ready to be the leader of the clean energy revolution; and even a cursory look at China’s current Five-Year Plan for the years between will reveal quite the extent to which Africa is crucial to China’s aims and will thereby paint a clear picture of the Forum and its significance. The list of the aims include economic growth with a “medium-high” GDP target of 6.5 percent; double GDP and per capita income by 2020 from the 2010 base; foreign investment increase; yuan convertibility by the year 2020; and increase in welfare as well a relaxing of the One Child policy to a Two Child policy all show just how crucial it is for China to have as many economic partners as attainable and Africa, as a source of both natural resources and market frontiers, is indispensable to the rising giant. The Forum, while far from perfect, has an important and increasingly central role to play in harmonising the gains between China and Africa.

Continue Reading
Comments

Africa

AMU’s failure: Morocco and Algeria disagreement

Published

on

To the most people who believe in the vision of rivalry and dreamt of regional power within their spheres of influence, the best idea of being a regional hegemon is creating a region union over a neighboring country. Meanwhile, AMU, in general, can bring North African countries altogether as one unified Arab regional power.

Almost 30 years from its creation of AMU, the Arab Maghreb Union was born in 1989 in Marrakech, Its creation was one of the most important integrations Arab regional Union. Its members are aimed to work together in order to enhance their common cooperation in term of security, social, economic and geopolitical. Yet, this idea of building this regional integration union at the beginning is to enforce regional cooperation and strengthen neighboring relations, At the same time; the geopolitical issues among neighboring countries such as Algeria, Morocco, Mauritania, Libya, and more importantly Western Sahara issue lead to different perspectives and interpretations of the continuation of AMU which undermine some AMU’s member foreign policy.

So far the issue of Western Sahara also played a very crucial issue in making AMU shakable and unsustainable. Therefore, if Algeria and Morocco would stand together to make their issues away of AMU then, the Arab regional union would dawn again.

Due to this, the significant failure of the Arab Maghreb Union is surely based on Morocco -Algeria conflictual relations. The Kingdom of Morocco pushed and tired harder several time to dissolve and evaporate their traditional dispute through sending dozens of diplomatic invitations to settled down for a real dialogue in order to overcome their issues concerning Western Sahara and territorial borders.

First of all, let’s make a short briefing about this regional conflict in the Arab Maghreb Union. this AMU was built weak and will die weak and feeble. After several calls from Morocco to Algeria, the Algerian government rejected Moroccan initiative letters to dissolve issues but Algeria made it clear for not collaborating or even though willing to respond, that means Algeria merely responsible for not cooperating to resolve regional issues as one of AMU members as well its one of the reasons through failure of Maghreb Union. Secondly, other AMU members felt that Algeria went far to help in sustaining AMU work effectively as it was built for, because most of the five Maghreb members are going to switch their ways to solve their issue by its own or seek for other African countries to cooperate with for example: currently Morocco start cooperating and connecting deeply with other African countries such as Ecowas regional group. In addition, Morocco, along with Tunisia and Mauritania which are seeking to follow Moroccan vision into Africa in order to diversify their national interests. However, Libya it’s an isolated case in AMU member because Libya currently live a very chaotic civil war and it’s hard to be seen more stable or peaceful in the upcoming years so far. Therefore, Algeria would remain itself isolated and unique.

The lack of regional cooperation and ineffective integration among non-Maghreb countries would cost less economic collaboration. Some recent statistics show the Maghreb region loses approximately 500 billion US dollars every year as a result of mismanagement of trade restrictions and legislative. The absence of commerce and trade marketing supplementary, the reflecting similarities in the frames of trade marketing and low export variety have also had great negative collisions on intra-Maghreb trade marketing. For instance, the supplementary of Libyan and Algerian exports with the imports from other Maghreb states is still very down. The kingdom of Morocco and Tunisia act actively much better as they are more advanced in the field of exportation than their neighbors which depend on products related on mineral and hydrocarbon.

As noted. despite economic bilateral relations between the Kingdom of Morocco and Tunisia stays low potential, the scope of their under trading progress has decreased. The Agadir free trade regional agreement has improved ease up trade and opened opportunities for trading investment even though the benefits from this expansion still low. Comparing with the rest of the Maghreb region, this slow improvement in trademarking and commerce moves the Moroccan and Tunisian proficiency experience in profitable level. So far the trademarking rolls between Libya, Mauritania, and Algeria are inconsiderable. Their substantial dependence on raw material, natural resources, and hesitation to involve in intra industry trade make it more complicated to increase trade marketing share among them even if they are willing to.

In term of trade marketing, Libya Mauritania and Algeria show the least their moves into regional commerce. Algeria’s trading with the rest of AMU members stays very low and weak, with its imports and exports reaching only 25 percent and 12 percent of their potential. In contrast, the Kingdom of Morocco has increased its export and import potential to all Maghreb states, except Algeria where Morocco ‘s exports have extended approximately 4 percent of their potential in the year 2015. additionally, Algeria’s exports to the Kingdom of Morocco have not reached 10 percent of their potential. Basically, the kingdom of Morocco is not willing to rely on Algerian extensive hydrocarbon products in which the kingdom needs to turn its pure phosphate into fertilizers.

This is quite superficial regarding the AMU failure and Western Sahara dispute forms the major impediment to the creation of AMU. It highlights the lack of sufficient cooperation between Morocco and Algeria since the so-called “Sand War” to put an end to their intricate relations. Western Sahara dispute basically pushes both states into regional rivalry and also represented a good political opportunity for Algeria and Morocco to set up their regional and superintendence supremacy.

Yes, as the King of Morocco pointed out in his last annual speech in African Union Summit: the failure of AMU is a tremendous failure of entire Arab Maghreb countries, also he noted ” we are very disappointed to see that the Maghreb Arab Union is the least integrated region in the African continent, if not in the entire world.” Hespress Newsmedia. If we do not immediately act, by following the example of neighboring African sub-regions, the Maghreb Union will destroy in its chronic insufficiency to reach up to the spirits of its creation.

The rise of Islamist groups in the Maghreb region made Morocco and Algeria rethink about their political strategy and reshape their foreign policy errors. Back to Algeria’s civil war in (1992-3) which dive Algerian society into a huge disaster, pushed it away from the Western Sahara conflict. In Morocco, the Islamic political Justice and development party (PDJ) rising success because of its great social interaction in Moroccan society.

Literally, the rise of Islamic groups, therefore, highlights the emergence both of plural political speech and awareness of states and arrival of violence, in the form of non- state actor or extremist acts, laid by the failure of political communities.

According to this, the western Sahara issue can’t be taken as the main interpretation of the failure of the regional integration strategy project in North Africa. Indeed, it declares the inefficiency of the countries in the region to set up a regular structure in sense of accumulating shared interests and collective profits.

In the end, Algeria’s deficiency holds serious security indications and suggestions for EU and the US. if it is incapable in doing many necessary reforms, it may give opportunities for extremists groups and non state actors to undermine the country, it’s hydrocarbon supplies to the Mediterranean countries, and safety of foreign investment in the region. Even though this might be a big loss at the current time. In fact, Algeria’s lack of political reforms has an influence on the other members of AMU in their efficiency, capacity, and productivity to promote mutual economic strategies. Thus, the International observers noticed by a terrorist threat and energy insecurity increasing Arab regional integration in North Africa, as its pushing the AMU’s foreign partners to cooperate and work hard through that case.

The real challenges to the AMU in the upcoming decades, the Kingdom of Morocco will sustain and upgrade its existence in the regional organization until finding its new partners across the AMU and develop its measured political and economic capacity out of unified Maghreb Union.

Continue Reading

Africa

South Sudan-India: Diplomatic Relations and Economic Partnership Potential

Abraham Telar Kuc

Published

on

During the Sudan civil wars in fifties, sixties, seventies, eighties and nineties India maintained some kind of unofficial diplomatic relations with the Southern Sudan region; when His Excellency President Fakruddin Ali Ahmed the President of Republic of India visited in 1975 what was then the regional and the current capital of Republic of South Sudan, President Fakruddin was welcomed by the entire population of Juba city whom turn up in thousands for his reception. The Indian President addressed then Southern Sudanese citizen, Southern Sudan regional’s government officials, communities’ leaders, non-state actors and the members of People’s Regional Assembly based in Juba.

Although India did not take a side in supporting anyone from the warring parties of Sudan civil wars and despite not having any formal diplomatic presence in then Sudan’s southern region; but there was unofficial diplomatic communication between India and then Sudan People’s Liberation Army and Movement in eighties and nineties during the civil war era, through its diplomatic missions in D.R. Congo, Kenya, Uganda and other African’s countries India manage to establish a good impression among South Sudanese leaders and citizens which currently led to a very smooth ties with no any kind of  political and  ideological differences from the past.

As one of the world new emerging powers India showed its interest on developing diplomatic and economic ties with South Sudan long time ago; in 2005 Honorable Edappakath Ahamed the Indian Deputy Minister for External Affairs attended the signing ceremony of peace agreement between the Sudan warring parties in the Kenyan capital Nairobi, two years later in October 2007 the Indian government opened its Consulate in Juba which making it one of the first foreign diplomatic missions in the regional government capital. India welcomed South Sudan referendum results and recognized the independence of Republic of South Sudan and sends to Juba a very high level delegation led by His Excellency Mohammad Hamid Ansari the Vice President of India to attend the 9th July Independence celebrations and followed by the upgrading of Indian Consulate in Juba to the Embassy level after seven month of the Africa and world’s newest independent state.

South Sudan, Indian relations did not only end in their bilateral ties; but India extended its bilateral engagement with South Sudan to its role within the international community and the United Nations in particular where its participated in the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) by the biggest and largest contingent plus civilian officials, police officers and personnel and other civilian contractors.

With India willing to have a positive influence role in South Sudan; the Indian government’s Ministry of External Affairs been providing a good number of fully sponsored scholarships for South Sudanese undergraduate and postgraduate students in Indian universities and other higher learning institutions for the past years offered by the Indian Council of Cultural Relations; the commitment of India in helping and enhancing the specialized profession skills for South Sudanese staffs and employees both in government, independent public and private sectors through the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) which is also a government  fully funded training programs under the Indian’s Ministry of External Affairs in collaboration with the Indian Embassies around the world, and the program aims is to provide capacity building and enhancing skills for developing  and under developing countries around the globe in different Indian higher learning, institutes, training centers and government institutions, hundreds of South Sudanese benefited from Indian’s ITEC training program and I myself am one of the beneficiaries of Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation program where I was offered a diploma of Development Journalism from Indian Institute of Mass Communication sponsored by Indian’s Ministry of External Affairs and facilitated by the Indian Embassy in the Republic of South Sudan.

There is no clear statistics and records on trade exchange and economic partnership between South Sudan and India. India is investing limitedly in South Sudan oil sector through India’s Oil and Natural Gas Commission and it’s largely involving in importing oil, teak and timber from South Sudan which is also exporting consuming stuffs, food items, household goods, medical and pharmaceuticals, electronics and other needs from India. Some Indian bossiness persons and private sector are operating different size companies involving in printing, internet providing, construction, borehole drilling, oil sector consultancy and services, own hotels and supermarkets and other form of bossiness; despite the trade and economic engagement between the two countries, but bilateral commercial exchange between them can be describe as a poor comparing to other countries investments including some Asian nations.

More recently in the international order and relations between nations the diplomatic and political influence on commercial relations, trade exchange, economic partnership and international trade in general is gaining more acceptance in direct foreign investments as an impact of diplomatic, bilateral and multilateral relations. With the two countries developing a deeper diplomatic ties and seem to be moving slowly to some level of diplomatic and political cooperation for more economic strength which could have a positive impact on South Sudan and India bilateral trade; Indian companies in the ICT, pharmaceuticals and medical serveries, oil and gas, finance and banking, housing and construction sectors like Reliance Industries, Tata Group, Bajaj Group, Bharti Airtel Communications and other investment corporates, the mentioned Indian companies, corporate and sectors has the potential and good investments opportunities in South Sudan as a result of strong diplomatic ties between the two countries.

Therefore South Sudan and India should use their good ties on boosting and strengthens economics of the two countries for more common economic benefits through exploring new economic partnership potentials.

Continue Reading

Africa

Influential Opportunities for South Sudan Diplomacy

Abraham Telar Kuc

Published

on

Since its exiting in the international relation system; diplomatic approaches plays a very unique and crucial role in nations’ efforts to achieve their political agenda and goals and to promote the countries’ image, conducting and managing state relationships within the international arena. Diplomacy as a practice of human interaction has been an historic channel of conducting dialogue between civilizations, countries and their neighbors, allies and other independent political and economic bodies and entities.

After the independence the Republic of South Sudan became the United Nations and African Union newest member in 14 and 28 July 2011 respectively; currently South Sudan has secured its membership in all UN agencies or UN affiliated organizations and other international bodies, in the regional level South Sudan is a member of Intergovernmental Authority on Development known as (IGAD), the International Conference of the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR);and regardless of its  recent membership in the East African Community; South Sudan is either applied or is in the process of applying to the former British colonies union known as the Commonwealth of Nations. and  as a result of Egypt, Morocco, Gulf states and  some Arab countries encouragement;  the government of South Sudan recently admitted  that it has applied for observer status in the Arab League based in Egyptian capital Cairo; and despite being non majority Muslim country South Sudan is maybe seeking the membership of  Organization of Islamic Cooperation( OIC) based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia where Uganda, Mozambique and other twenty seven African nations are member states out of it fifty seven members; adding to all this international and regional ambitions South Sudan have the intention for applying for a very important regional organization which is non-other than the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa or COMESA which is s the largest regional economic group in Africa with 19 member states including many bordering countries to South Sudan  and the headquarter of the organization is based in Lusaka, Zambia.

The grouping between countries and geographical regions by political, economic or trade criteria have been a strategic tool for countries to handle some social-economic, trade and developmental challenges or issues that are facing them in different aspects. Political and economic or trade regional blocs benefits are not limited in its great role in enhancing the self-reliance and economic growth to the members state; but it has a very tangible benefits in term of political and diplomatic influence. In the modern international relations countries joins regional blocs and groups as a geopolitical struggle for political and economic influence which aim to achieve national agenda and boost their economic and other national interests and to increase their political and economic influential role in the international affairs.

South Sudan diplomacy should use and take advantage of the strategic geopolitical location of the country being a member state of different international and regional political cooperation and economic integration blocs as well as bordering physically or geographically and by economic status some powerful and strongest regional blocs; South Sudan also has other advantages like been a Multilanguage country as South Sudan bordering  English, French, Arabic and Kiswahili speaking countries which should give the country a very effective diplomatic strength in it regional and international engagement through bilateral, regional and multilateral relationships. butting in consideration the foreign policy goals  of South Sudan government; there are many regional economic integration and political cooperation blocs that are potential institutional network can be use as influential tools to implement and achieve South Sudan’s diplomatic agenda and national interests; There are six economic integration, trading area, customs union, common market, economic and monetary union and political cooperation blocs that South Sudan should bea very effective member state to benefit from its economic and trading powers and take advantage of its diplomatic and political influential role in national, regional and international affairs; and this major regional organization which South Sudan could emerge to be the strongest members in it are:

1-The International Conference of the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR)

Is an inter-governmental organization of the countries in the African Great Lakes Region, was established on the recognition to political instability and conflicts in this region and the blocs aim to promote regional integration, security, sustainable peace, political stability and  economic development in the African Great Lakes Region.

With its headquarters based in Burundi capital Bujumbura, The organization is composed of twelve member states, namely: Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Republic of South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania and Zambia.

2-The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)

Was created in 1996 to replace the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development that was founded in 1986 to deal with issues related to drought and desertification in the Horn Africa, The main aims is to assist and complement the efforts of the member States to achieve strategic goals through increased cooperation, food security and environmental protection, peace and security, economic cooperation and integration in the region.

The member States of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development are: Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan and Uganda.

3-The East African Community (EAC)

Is a regional intergovernmental organization of six partner States: the Republics of Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, the United Republic of Tanzania, and the Republic of Uganda, with its headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania; And it’s considered as one of the fastest growing regional economic blocs in the world, the EAC is widening and deepening co-operation among the Partner States in various key spheres for their mutual benefit. These spheres include political, economic and social integration.

4-The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)

Was formed in December 1994 to replace the former Preferential Trade Area (PTA) which had existed from the earlier days of 1981; the main focus of (COMESA)is to form a large economic and trading union that is capable of overcoming some of the barriers that are faced by its individual states.

COMESA is formed by  twenty one member states which are Tunisia, Eswatini (Swaziland), Rwanda, Burundi, the Comoros, Libya, Seychelles, Somalia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Sudan, Zambia and Zimbabwe, Eretria, Ethiopia, DR Congo and  Mauritius.

5-The Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS)

Is an organization for promotion of regional economic co-operation in Central Africa region, and it aims to achieve collective autonomy raises the standard of living of its populations and maintains economic stability through harmonious cooperation. Its initial goal is to promote exchange and collaboration among the members and give an institutional and legal framework to their cooperation.

ECCAS is made up of Gabon, Cameroon, the Central African Republic (CAR), Chad, Congo Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Rwanda, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Angola and the island nation of Sao Tome and Principe.

6-The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI)

An intergovernmental partnership of  Nile basin countries established on 22 February 1999, to provide a forum for consultation, coordination and cooperation among the Nile basin States for the sustainable management and development of the shared Nile basin water and related resources. The Initiative is composed of eleven countries namely Burundi, DR Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda. With Eritrea participates as an observer.

Economic integration and political cooperation grouping between countries in a certain region and the world became a very important channel and tool   to build partnerships, relationships and influential diplomacy regionally and internationally; with diplomacy as key player in building, maintain and benefiting from this initiatives and blocs. South Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation has a very crucial role in making up a foreign policy that focusing on securing national interests to pursuit the economic strength and political influence within these regional blocs.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy