What future for the ACP-EU relations beyond 2020

1. What future for the ACP-EU relations beyond 2020? Joint EU-ACP Parliamentary Assembly. Political Affairs Committee, Horsens, Denmark, 26 May 2012 Geert Laporte, Deputy Director, European Centre for Development Policy Management

2. Independent foundation working on ACP-EU for more than 25 years: 1. Non-partisan facilitation of dialogue among ACP and EU 2. Practical and policy relevant analysis 3. Systematic linking with key players in the EU and the ACP through networks and partnerships 4. Capacity building in the ACP to bring more balance in the partnership ECDPM Page 2

3. The rapidly changing global, EU and ACP landscape and the impact on ACP-EU relations Building blocks for renewed common interests between the ACP and the EU beyond 2020 The way forward: promoting a constructive and open debate Structure of presentation Page 3

4. 1. THE RAPIDLY CHANGING GLOBAL, EU AND ACP LANDSCAPE Page 4

5. Alternative to traditional partners (EU) New opportunities for investment, trade and technical assistance Pragmatism: effective and quick delivery, less strings attached Overall positive vision on potential of ACP/Africa Suspicion: focus on access to raw materials, less on long term sustainable development vision No clear interest in the ACP as a Group Emerging players: between new hopes and…suspicion? Page 5

6. Ambition to become a more prominent polictical player at global level… but… …declining influence because of economic and financial crisis Less importance given to the ACP Group in the EU’s external action EU ambition to build relations with homogenous regional groupings and to develop regional strategies The EU Post Lisbon Page 6

7. “Post-colonial configuration with lack of internal coherence” “Overly dependent on EU aid” “No political weight at global level” ACP: between negative perceptions…. Page 7

8. Strong growth in many ACP countries ACP (sub) regions and countries with growing influence More open debates on internal weaknesses of the Group Willingness to tackle longstanding issues affecting credibility (e.g financing of the Group) …and recent positive changes Page 8

9. Perception of a “donor-recipient relationship” predominantly focused on aid Increasing tensions between ACP and EU (EPAs, perception of paternalism and double standards) Few examples of EU and ACP acting together as coherent groupings in multilateral fora ACP-EU Partnership under stress Page 9

10. 2. BUILDING BLOCKS FOR RENEWED COMMON INTERESTS BETWEEN ACP AND EU Page 10

11. 40 years of unique contractual partnership, common values, joint institutions and dialogue,… Shared concern over need for “humanisation’’ of globalisation Size matters: potentially strong diplomatic capital at global level (80 + 27 =117 countries) What do ACP and EU have in common? Page 11

12. Strengthen value added of the ACP as a Group (e.g climate change, trade and regional integration,…) Demonstrate that ACP Group is the “best vehicle” to defend the interests of its members in clearly defined areas Reduce dependency of the EU and move into a political partnership of peers based on real common interests How to strengthen the relevance of the ACP Group in a multi-polar world? (1) Page 12

13. Expand relations beyond the EU (BRICS, South-South,…) Become a recognised global player with representations in different parts of the world Strengthen internal capacities and finance own institutions Move beyond political correctness and be as realistic as possible How to strengthen the relevance of the ACP Group in a multi-polar world (2)? Page 13

14. EU in economic crisis might have an interest to keep up a unique partnership with a large group of countries (80 ACP + 27 EU = more than half of all countries worldwide) Balance of power and interests could change between now and 2020 Why could/should the EU remain interested in the ACP Group? Page 14

15. Several future scenarios have been launched First things first: need for a solid political economy analysis based on a clear articulation of interests and demonstration of tangible results of 40 years of partnership How relevant are initial scenarios for the future of the ACP and the ACP-EU Partnership? Page 15

16. 3. THE WAY FORWARD: PROMOTING A CONSTRUCTIVE AND OPEN DEBATE Page 16

17. ACP Ambassadorial Working Group on future perspectives in Brussels (+ ACP/UNDP study) DEVCO-EEAS Working Group Initial reflections in individual EU member states Civil society (CONCORD) Joint Parliamentary Assembly The debate has started at different levels Page 17

18. Start prospective thinking on Post 2020 now while making the best out of Cotonou Make an analysis of EU strategic interests Post Lisbon and of emerging ACP strategy Define complementarity ACP with AU/RECs Take stock of perspectives in the ACP and the EU member states (beyond Brussels involving also non-official perspectives + parliaments) Elaborate realistic scenarios for future ACP-EU relations after having completed a solid political economy and results analysis Some suggestions for follow-up of the process Page 18

19. Thank you! www.ecdpm.org gl@ecdpm.org  Page 19