Contributions from
the Column
Focus
A model for other world regions – progress in Europe

New consensus

The view from Paris. What the French government thinks of co-ordination

“Contribute at the global level” – ideas and priorities of accession countries

“More of the same” is not an option: putting support for ACP countries on a new base

For NGOs, support from Brussels means a lot of money – and a lot of work


12/2005 		 

The view from Paris

Mandates for the European Union and its member states should be defined clearly, according to the French government. In its view, Europe must speak with one voice on vital issues. On the other hand, French politicians do not want to see reduced their leeway to pursue national interests – such as promoting Francophony.


[ By Nathalie Gillet ]

For some time, EU member governments have been working on an amendment of the Joint Declaration on development of 2000. There has been much debate on the issue, with the main question being: “What kind of European development cooperation do we want?” The French government had a lot to contribute in this context.

As one French diplomat in Brussels puts it, “there are very few differences of opinion between France and the European Commission when it comes to development issues, compared with other areas of EU policy”. Ever since Louis Michel, a Belgian Politician, took office as EU Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, both sides have been of the opinion that the Commission should not act like it was the Union’s 26th donor. Instead of identifying predominantly with the amounts of money spent, the Commission should come up with a common European vision, based on values shared throughout the EU, and speed up the development debate in general.

The Commission wants a wider mandate in order to become more effective (Baum, 2005). While the French government does support this approach in principle, it also has some reservations. “We want the EU to move beyond merely proclaiming grand principles such as support for the fight against poverty and for human rights. We want to create a common thematic framework,” the French diplomat explains. For instance, environmental affairs should be added to the list of issues that the Commission handles.

However, as is the case in most European countries, French politicians do not intend to see their own leeway restricted. They are closely monitoring “expansive tendencies” inside the Commission. The conventional wisdom in the French Foreign Office is that the Commission should not coordinate bilateral politics, even though it is considered essential that it complement focal activities. In other words, the French authorities believe that the core responsibilities of the Commission need to be defined precisely.

“The Commission is the main financer of infrastructure. Some countries want the EU to spend more on healthcare and education, but we urge for caution,” says Jean-Michel Sévérino, director of the French development bank Agence Française de Développement (AFD). In his view, African transport infrastructure is especially important.


Migration control and
development

The French believe that a new common vision is necessary because the world has changed since the year 2000. The terrorist attacks on 11. September 2001 have had an impact on international relations. And even before rioting began in the suburbs of Paris and later all over the nation in autumn, it had already become clear that the challenges that migration poses for Europe are even greater than imagined so far.

While the French government emphasises that development must remain an independent field of policy, it also argues that development policy-makers should take account of security matters and not go against the grain of foreign policy. It is considered self-evident that there can be no security without development. Development experts warn that development programmes must not be made subordinate to other areas of policy or instrumentalised by other governmental departments. In that sense, checking migration is not a goal of development policy.

Nevertheless, a number of French politicians do link the two issues. For instance, Brigitte Girardin, who is in charge of development affairs as Junior Minister (Ministre Deleguée) in the Foreign Office, said in September that, “by reducing poverty, we also reduce uncontrolled migration”. Shortly after, Nicolas Sarkozy, Home Minister and Chairman of the governing party UMP, stated: “We have to find a way of controlling the number of immigrants.” He went on to say that “promoting development will restrict the number of people who want to migrate”.

Nonetheless, development banker Sévérion says: “Security issues do not determine development policy. One of the basic elements of our relationship with Mediterranian countries, however, is the awareness that tension and conflicts will result if the economic gap becomes too great.” He accordingly considers cooperation with the countries on the southern shore of that sea a “vital issue in our direct zone of contact with the Global South”. Unsurprisingly, a third of AFD funds are devoted to Northern Africa.

The French government endorses the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy and believes it should pass the international test and promote common European interests. One starting point could be development cooperation, as differences of opinion in this field hardly lead to quarrels among EU members. A consistent approach to development would also enable the EU to gain more say inside multilateral bodies. The French government believes that Europe should propose its own ideas and play a larger role, for instance, by speaking with one voice on the boards of the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund.


Tried and tested institutions

France’s many decades of experience in Africa and the success of its own implementing agencies (like AFD, for example) give the country a certain amount of self-confidence. As the second largest donor nation in the EU after Germany, France is not afraid of strong European cooperation. Sévérino calls for a division of mandates across member states and the EU, and sees common ground with Germany’s KfW development bank in this respect. In his view, the Commission should serve a political function and leave policy implementation to the member states’ organisations. Commission programmes would then be carried out by AFD, KfW, and other national actors with their well-known efficiency. Sévérino does, however, admit that coordination and harmonisation remain difficult and, in the case of his institute, generally add up to cooperating with institutions as KfW or the European Investment Bank (EIB).

Of course, there are some objections among EU members to thus “nationalising” programmes. But Sévérino sees no reason to worry: “Everyone involved in development can take part. It’s not a question of how big you are. For instance, Luxembourg’s development aid is organised very well.” Agencies from the various member states could also bundle their activities and pool their funds.

At any rate, France seems somewhat skeptical of the Commission working through its own implementation agency. As Jacques Godfrain, a Member of Parliament for UMP and a former Ministre Delegué for Development, puts it, “we have to make sure that we do not create redundant structures”. AFD head Sévérino believes that the Commission could foster its own implementation body (for instance, by expanding EuropeAid). However, that agency would have to act independently with its own staff and according to its own rules – as opposed to being under the yoke of the bureaucracy in Brussels.

When it comes to finances, French officials emphasise the need for greater transparency in EU affairs. In their view, the European Development Fund (EDF) should be integrated in the EU budget. Ever since it was founded by the European Community, the EDF has been funding former colonies of member states in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific (ACP). The EDF is financed through voluntary contributions from member states and makes up more than a third of the EU’s total official development assistance. “The EDF is a complete anachronism,” states a high-ranking official at the French Foreign Office. In light of its history and its interest in Africa, France provides the largest share of EDF funds (some 24 percent in 2004). By doing so, France has traditionally made sure that its former sphere of influence receives some basic support. Today, however, French diplomats believe that consensus is firmly in place in the EU that Africa is a priority for all development efforts. Therefore, they feel that the EDF can be integrated in the EU budget without any detrimental effects for Africa.

Régis Mabilais of Coordination Sud, an association of non-governmental organisations, however, claims that the wish to reform the EDF stems from other motives than only the desire for greater efficiency. If the EDF were integrated into the EU budget, France’s share would just make up around 16% whereas the British share, for instance, would increase. France agrees that the burden should be shared equitably. The funds the nation would save in its multilateral commitments should thus be used for bilateral efforts.


French initiatives
To address the challenges of the Millennium Development Goals, French President Jacques Chirac has proposed introducing innovative financing mechanisms – with some support from other leaders, including Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. Today, the European Union is discussing imposing a new tax on airline tickets to generate additional development funds.

France also has some goals of its own. They include the defence of cultural diversity as well as Francophony, and a keen interest in regional integration. For instance, France supports efforts in western Africa to create common legal norms. Doing so would not only stabilise business relations, but also strengthen continental European standards in the tradition of the Code Civil as an international alternative to Anglo-Saxon conventions.

French diplomats also come up with answers to the question of coherence between various EU policies, such as development, trade and agriculture. They argue that poor countries already have free access to EU markets thanks to the “Everything but Arms”-initiative. They maintain that Europe’s agricultural subsidies do not affect these countries, but are rather directed against potential competitors such as Australia and Brazil, which is nothing to be ashamed of. AFD head Sévérino explains that, “it was a lot of hard work” to reach an agreement among Europeans last year to reform agricultural policy. “But before the ink had dried, the Trade Commissioner called everything into question again at the World Trade Organisation. Why do we even get together to coordinate things in advance?” When it comes to agricultural issues, the French government should be expected to only accept compromise when absolutely necessary.


Nathalie Gillet
is a freelance journalist based in Paris. For many years, she was an Africa editor at the journal Marchés Tropicaux.
nat_gillet@yahoo.fr


Reference:
Alexander Baum, 2005: A stepchild of integration.
D+C/E+Z, October, p. 380 – 381