Is Africa getting a good deal from AGOA?

Editor, RE: “Unlocking Africa’s trade potential” (The New Times, August 24). The issue with AGOA (African Growth Opportunity Act) is that it has strings attached; it is more of a political instrument. Beneficiary status can be granted, or withdrawn, at the discretion of the US President and sub-Saharan African countries have no recourse to dispute decisions. If the US is keen on supporting trade with sub-Saharan Africa, then the best way to do it is by removing agriculture subsidies. US subsidies, like the recently updated Farm Bill, are driving down Africa’s agricultural competitiveness and as long as subsidies are in place African products won’t be able to compete agriculturally with the US even when the tariffs are removed. The major problem with US trade deals is that they aim to interfere, subvert national policies of the host countries, therefore undermining state sovereignty. Take the case of TPP and TTIP deals for example. The content of these trade deals is still a secret. The limited indiscretions around them indicate that they would transfer regulations of corporations to corporations themselves, and away from democratically elected governments. Regulation of working conditions and of the environment, as well as of product-safety including toxic foods and poisonous air and other consumer issues, would be placed into the hands of panels whose members will be appointed by large international corporations. Their decisions will remove the power of democratically elected governments to control these things. These deals constitute an attempt to escape the jurisdiction of national courts and bypass the obligation of all states to ensure that all legal cases are tried before independent tribunals that are public, transparent, accountable and appealable. Leaked details show that the TPP has provisions that indicate that: favouring local ownership is prohibited, corporations must be paid to stop polluting, and three corporate lawyers will decide who’s right in secret tribunals, corporate interests come before national ones… Then, there’s a sixth basic provision: to “prohibit governments from requiring that a foreign investor be under any obligation to serve the host country’s people or national interest.” Alfred De Zayas, the chief UN official responsible for “reporting” on proposed international-trade treaties, decried these deals by highlighting that these trade-deals would produce “a dystopian future in which corporations and not democratically elected governments call the shots.” De Zayas further explained, “I am concerned about the secrecy surrounding negotiations for trade treaties, which have excluded key stakeholder groups from the process, including labour unions, environmental protection groups, food-safety movements and health professionals”. Ndoli Sabi

Opinions

Is Africa getting a good deal from AGOA?