CHAPTER 4: The Economic Community Of West African States (ECOWAS)

Transcription

1 CHAPTER 4: The Economic Community Of West African States (ECOWAS) ECOWAS is the major regional economic unit of Sub-Saharan Western Africa and the focus of this work. The region encompasses 15 nations of which one member is an island state. ECOWAS constitutes a total landmass of 5,112,903 square miles and a population of approximately 251,646,263 people with a combined gross domestic product of just over Billion USD (CIA: The World Factbook, 2004). Though rich in history, tradition, and natural resources, ECOWAS represents a mass of peoples long plagued with defining their place in an ever changing, turbulent world. Unfortunately, today s ECOWAS has been steadily sidetracked from its main objectives through seemingly insurmountable problems including, civil conflict, mismanagement of natural resources, corruption, poor healthcare, inadequate education, lack of development, lack of modern infrastructure and interference from former colonial powers to name only a few of its major problems. This chapter will explore ECOWAS briefly from three perspectives: 1) a historical synopsis of its inception and the events around that time; 2) the organizational framework of ECOWAS and the functions of each level in the hierarchy; and 3) the evolution of the organization from 1975 to 2003 including several revisions to its structure and mandate including pivotal points of reference. 4.1 Establishment of ECOWAS The Economic Community of West African States was established on the 28 th of May, 1975 in Lagos, Nigeria. The original fifteen West African signatories of the ECOWAS Treaty were Dahomey 1, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togolese Republic, and Upper Volta 2. In 1976, the Island Nation of Cape Verde joined ECOWAS as its sixteenth member and Mauritania left the organization in The organization is headquartered in Abuja, Nigeria and was the outgrowth of a movement for West African self-reliance, as a reaction to the collapse of colonialism in Africa (see illustration 3, page 46). The work of Ewing (1967) argues that, while 1 Dahomey officially changed its name to the Peoples Republic of Benin in Upper Volta officially changed its name to Burkina Faso in

2 independence had been the primary goal, African frontiers were largely an artificial by-product of the colonial scramble 60 to 70 years prior, that many African countries were too small to be economically viable, and that to transform political into economic independence necessarily required concerted action. The drafters of ECOWAS knew how important the organization was to their individual nations and declared very plainly the need for such an organization as stated in the ECOWAS Treaty preamble: CONSCIOUS of the overriding need to accelerate, foster and encourage the economic and social development of their states in order to improve the living standards of their peoples; CONVINCED that the promotion of harmonious economic development of their states calls for effective economic co-operation largely through a determined and concerted policy of self-reliance; RECOGNIZING that progress towards sub-regional economic integration requires an assessment of the economic potential and interests of each state Post colonial 1970 s West Africa had been going through a series of dramatic changes through independence and sovereignty. With these new self-governing powers also came great responsibilities for future development and finding a place in the global economy. Several significant events that affected the formation, cohesion and stability of ECOWAS include: the tours of Asia and Africa, including pivotal visits to China and Russia, by then United States President and Mrs. Richard Nixon in 1972; strong rivalries between Francophone and Anglophone blocs in West Africa; the consolidation of Europe through the European Economic Community, now the European Union; and, twenty West African Coup d etats occurring in eight of the fifteen ECOWAS member states between 1960 and 1975 (F.A.S.T., 2003). West Africa was somewhat wedged into decision-making: the ties of colonialism versus independence versus the ideals of communism versus aspirations of democratization versus internal tensions versus regional integration. During the Cold War the legitimate and understandable aspirations of Africa were very often misunderstood and misinterpreted in the light of East-West conflict (Asante-Darko 34

3 1999). On the world stage, the United States wanted a capitalist West Africa for reasons of trade and political influence. The Soviet Union also wanted a communist West Africa for primarily the same reasons 3. The heightened cold-war rivalry between the major powers bred tensions and much mistrust among West African leaders. Simply put, if a neighboring nation was leaning towards communism while your nation maintained strong historical and economic ties with the capitalist west, the hopes of meaningful regional integration would be difficult. Furthermore, the absence of colonial rule created a power vacuum throughout the region of which military leaders, burgeoning politicians, and technocrats quickly rushed in to seize. The immense natural resources of West Africa was a major attractant for opportunistic business groups as well. Through these aforementioned tensions, post-colonial Africa became a powder keg of instability spewing Coup d etats, civil uprisings and economic mismanagement. For all these reasons, the creation of a unified economic community was ever more important to buttress the effects of politico-economics tearing away at the cohesion of the Independent Africa movement of the 1960 s. A staunch proponent of the ECOWAS movement was the late President William V.S. Tubman of Liberia. He envisioned the organization in the 1950 s when Africa s independent nations were limited to Liberia, Ethiopia and Egypt. While most of Africa was still locked in colonialism, President Tubman worked tirelessly to promote the ideals and fundamental framework of not only ECOWAS, but also the draft charters of the Organization of African Unity (OAU, now the African Union AU) and the Africa Development Bank (ADB). In addition to these, President Tubman was quite influential in a number of continental and regional speeches and meetings on the collective efforts of achieving both independence and economic integration throughout the continent (Eastman 2006). In February of 1965, President Tubman led the precursor to regional economic integration in West Africa, through a formal agreement signed between Liberia, Ivory Coast, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. This Free Trade Area was received well, yet the four signatories were each unprepared to undertake such broad based economic reforms needed at the time (Stubblefield 2004). 3 In 1960's West African history, the US and USSR were adamant about easy access to West African markets and resources, previously dominated by Europe. 35

4 Unfortunately, much of President Tubmans dream was not realized by the time of his death. In 1971, Tubman s then Vice President and successor, William R. Tolbert, Jr. took the helm and had an active interest in the concretization of ECOWAS and other sub-regional bodies. President Tolbert called a series of pivotal meetings with his counterparts throughout the region in Sierra Leone, Guinea, Nigeria and the Ivory Coast. Part of his efforts were specifically to address the rivalries brewing between the economic strength of the Ivory Coast as leader of the Francophone bloc and the shear size and prowess of Nigeria, the Anglophone behemoth. Other efforts were to actively diffuse tensions between Guinea and Senegal, and the Ivory Coast and Guinea, which each historically had territorial, ethnic, and ideological disputes. It is said that the key to President Tolbert s successes were his personal friendship with late Ivorian President Felix Houphuet Boigny and his diplomatic ability to calm sub-regional tensions. Nonetheless, President Tolbert was quite instrumental in the actualization of ECOWAS and many regional and continental leaders were inspired by Liberia s creation of a customs union with Sierra Leone (the Mano River Union or MRU) in October of 1973 (Stubblefield 2004). This customs union promoted the free movement of goods and people between the two nations. The organization was important because it spurred the cooperation of nations across colonial blocs and in 1980 Guinea joined as the third member of the MRU. Having said this, ECOWAS was formed and for good reason at the right time. West Africa was the source for substantial amounts of the industrialized world s raw materials, yet the region lagged dramatically in terms of infrastructure and sustainable development initiatives. The crafters of ECOWAS realized this and sought ideally to promote value creation of the regions natural wealth. as the ultimate objective of their efforts accelerated and sustained economic development of their states and the creation of a homogenous society, leading to the unity of the countries of West Africa, by the elimination of all types of obstacles to the free movement of goods, capital and persons (ECOWAS Treaty 1975). Based on the ECOWAS Treaty of 1975, the primary objectives of ECOWAS were to promote cooperation and integration, leading to the establishment of an economic 36

5 union in West Africa. This aimed, to raise the living standards of its people, ensure economic growth, foster relations among Member states and contribute to the progress and development of the African Continent (ECOWAS Treaty 1975). The organization sought to achieve its major goals of progress and development through: harmonizing and coordinating national policies; promoting integration; the establishment of joint venture enterprises; establishing a common market; establishing an economic union; the creation of a single monetary zone; strengthening relations; and, promotion of the flow of information among populations, organizations, media, business people, workers and trade unions. While much of this is excellent in theory, actualizing these objectives has been difficult and even the development of the European Union has been diverted between policy objectives and community realities. 4.2 Organizational Framework The organizational framework of ECOWAS was initially set up not truly as a regulatory body for the region but more as a guideline of prescriptions. The goals of the organization were integration and development based on the situations and political matrix of West Africa at the time. The organization set out to achieve very broad and far-reaching goals and in turn built its institutions around these goals in order to first create a platform and then effect meaningful change. The original institutions of ECOWAS were: The Authority of Heads of State and Government; the Council of Ministers; the Defense Council; the Executive Secretariat; the Tribunal of the Community; and six Technical and Specialized Commissions including: the Trade, Customs, Immigration, Money and Payments Commission; the Industry, Agriculture and Natural Resources Commission; the Transport, Communications and Energy Commission; the Social and Cultural Affairs Commission; the Defense Commission; and the Administration and Finance Commission (see illustration 4, page 47). The Authority of Heads of State and Government: the highest authority of ECOWAS, which meets at least once a year, has binding authority on all ECOWAS matters and determines its own procedures. The authority elects a Chairperson from its own ranks 37

6 yearly to convene over ECOWAS matters. Council of Ministers: consists of two representatives from each country; a chairperson is drawn from each country in turn. It meets twice a year, and is responsible for reviewing the functionality of the Community in accordance with the treaty, making recommendations to the Authority, giving directions to all subordinate institutions and overseeing the operations of the Community. The Defense Council: consist of Ministers of Defense and Foreign Affairs of member states of which there is an internally elected chairman and an appointed Force Commander in the event of armed conflict. The Defense Council meets on the convocation by its Chairman to prepare the items for the Agenda of Sessions of the Authority dealing with defense matters. In case of armed intervention, the Defense Council assisted by the Defense Commission shall supervise with the authority of the State or States concerned all measures to be taken by the Force Commander and ensure that all necessary means for the intervention are made available to him. The actions of the Force Commander shall be subject to competent political authority of the Member State or States concerned. The Executive Secretary: elected for a four-year term that may be renewed once only. This position is the principle executive officer of the Community and is assisted by two Deputy Executive Secretaries and a Financial Controller, all appointed by the Council of Ministers with leverage for additional appointments if deemed necessary. The Executive Secretary is responsible for the day-to-day administration of the Community and all its institutions and makes regular reports to the Council of ministers and the Authority. The Community Tribunal: the Conference of Heads of State and Government determine The Tribunal s composition and competence. The Tribunal interprets the provisions of the treaty and settles disputes between member states that are referred. Specialized Commissions: comprised of one representative from each member state accompanied by an adviser. Specialized commissions may be created or discontinued based on the approval of the Authority in consultation with the 38

7 Executive Secretariat. Each commission is required to submit periodic reports and recommendations through the Executive Secretariat to the Council of Ministers either upon the commissions initiative or by request. The councils are subject to directions as given by the Council of Ministers and meets as necessary for the proper discharge of its functions. The six original commissions include: 1. The Trade, Customs, Immigration, Monetary and Payments Commission; 2. The Industry, Agriculture and Natural Resources Commission; 3. The Transport, Communications and Energy Commission; 4. The Social and Cultural Affairs Commission; 5. The Defense Commission; and 6. The Administration and Finance Commission. While vague in their descriptions and overall functions, the original crafters of the ECOWAS treaty were trying to ratify a treaty of wide ranging cooperation. By establishing a regional body, while allowing freedom of interpretation of the guidelines setup in the treaty, they promoted a non-constricting power base for the relevant political stakeholders. As stated in earlier sections of this chapter, postcolonial Africa was facing a myriad of choices within self-governance and that is clearly seen in the loose design of the original ECOWAS treaty. Much of the document left loopholes, ambiguities and room for each member state to interpret its responsibilities to the larger body while maintaining focus on achieving internal [superseding] goals. To further elaborate on some interesting stipulations of the Treaty, Article 10, lines 1 and 2 state: 1. There shall be an External Auditor of the Community who shall be appointed and removed by the Authority on the recommendation of the Council of Ministers. 2. Subject to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the Council of Ministers shall make regulations governing the terms and conditions of service and powers of the External Auditor. This rule for creating an external auditor is quite interesting because, while an external body would be beneficial to observe and critique the on-goings of the organization, that body is set in place by the Authority and is given absolute direction 39

8 from the Council of Ministers who are also appointed by the Authority. This situation leaves very little room for a transparency since the auditing body s contract is dependent upon the primary stakeholders of the organization. Furthermore, there are no guidelines for the findings or presentation of reports of the auditor whose report may or may not be considered fair or admissable based on these stipulations. Second, the treaty allows for a Tribunal of the Community in Article 11, however this body is appointed and completely directed by the Authority leaving very little chance for unbiased delegation of rules since the primary stakeholders are the beneficiaries and losers of any and all decisions made by the court. In the following section, this paper will explore the evolution of ECOWAS and the overall framework of the organization as it ages. While several of the institutions and guidelines of the original Treaty remain in place, the totality of the document morphed. The revised Treaty of 1993 went further to incorporate several features unique only to West Africa based on the complex history and interactions of its nation states. 4.3 Evolution of the Organization As with any regional organization, a period of evolution, and revision of objectives, goals and actions must be in order if not to cope with assured interactions with the extra-regional world, then to accommodate the changing needs of the intra-regional populace. As ECOWAS, and Africa as a whole, became more matured in European- Western style democracy, the economic-politico framework of the region began to shift. ECOWAS evolved from merely promoting trade, free movement, and policy harmonization, to becoming concerned with conflict resolution, environmental issues, enforcing international laws, promotion of small and medium scale enterprises, labor unions, education initiatives, gender equality, and humanitarian projects. In July 1993, a revised ECOWAS treaty was ratified. The revised Treaty was both a testament to the willingness of the community to make good on its goals and a signal that the original agreement was lacking in several areas. Much of the activities of ECOWAS were [and to some degree still are] overshadowed by political and security concerns of the sub-region. Furthermore, the lack of success in several of ECOWAS' 40

9 aims has built a self-fulfilling prophecy of reluctance towards regional commitments. In particular, the existence of numerous other intergovernmental organizations in the region, including the rival francophone West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA), and a sincere lack of government policy implementation at the national level have hampered the progress of the community. Not merely expressions of noncompliance, governments also fail to provide the agreed financial resources and there is the absence of national links with the Executive Secretariat. These two principal problems, namely the lack of resources for financing regional integration programs, prompted a need for revision of the ECOWAS agreement. In addition to the aforementioned tensions of the region, there were other events of the late 1980 s and early 1990 s that prompted changes in ECOWAS. Several pivotal moments in history include the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which meant the end of a bipolar world and the establishment of a single [American] super state. The 1990 invasion of Liberia by Charles Taylor sparked more than just a war in Liberia but the first active conflict resolution initiative of a regional body. The 1991 establishment of the African Charter on Human and People s Rights and the African Economic Community that same year also added to the commitments of ECOWAS and pushed for realization of its objectives. Finally, the ratification of NAFTA between the United States, Canada, and Mexico meant that even large, robust economies were hedging to maintain dominance in geo-economics. Notwithstanding the challenges faced, ECOWAS chose to revise its agreement and upon first inspection there are dramatic enhancements. For instance, the original treaty of 1975 had a total of 65 articles spread across 14 chapters. The revised treaty of 1993 encompasses 93 articles within 22 chapters. Upon closer assessment, the revised treaty is far more detailed in all aspects and clearly defines the powers of ECOWAS officials and makes distinct rules for many points of operation. Through a number of protocols and periodic assessments, the revised ECOWAS treaty stresses key areas of improvement and acts more as a regulating agreement than loose guideline. Without explaining each of the systemic changes within ECOWAS up to the revised treaty, this paper will briefly list select protocols and specialized commissions: 41

10 1981 Ratification of a defense protocol, which allowed for legitimate intervention in internal affairs of member states, unlike the non-intervention clauses of the United Nations and Organization of African Unity charters; 1984 Establishment of the Organization of Trade Unions of West Africa; 1987 Establishment of the West African Youth Association; 1987 Establishment of the West African Universities' Association; 1987 Establishment of the West African Women's Association; 1987 Establishment of the West African Health Community; 1991 Activation of the regional intervention mechanism for conflict resolution through the ECOWAS Cease-Fire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) to restore peace and order to Liberia; and 1992 Establishment of the West African Monetary Agency (previously the West African Clearing House), responsible for administering an ECOWAS exchange rate system and single monetary zone. Each of the previously mentioned enhancements to ECOWAS was poignant because each appeared as the needs of the community changed. Furthermore, through the apparent disparity in realized development of each of the member states, systems to standardize community initiatives were necessary. For example, the inaccessibility of adequate healthcare facilities for West Africans has been [and still are] a serious problem. Also, civil conflicts in Liberia spilled over to Sierra Leone, Guinea, and the Ivory Coast putting a heavy burden on economy building as nations shifted to wartime economies. These realities were just two reasons for ECOWAS to streamline its initiatives regionally and garner political support. At the meeting of Heads of State that signed the revised treaty of 1993, there were four new permanent institutions created including: The Community Parliament; The Economic and Social Council; The Community Court of Justice; and The Fund for Co-Operation, Compensation and Development. The Community Parliament: A consulting body composed of a cross section of representatives from each member nation. It is vested with the power to create institutions; modify strategies to accelerate economic integration; define fundamental principles for accounting and financial management; promote cooperative links 42

11 between nations; ensure human and people s rights; promote democratization; and, ensure equitable distribution of the benefits of economic integration to all member states. The Economic and Social Council: Created to perform an advisory function to the Council of Ministers, it is embodied by a cross section of representatives from each member state from various categories of economic and social activity. The Community Court of Justice: Comprised of legal experts and laureates within the region, this court addresses complaints from member states and institutions of ECOWAS, as well as issues relating to defaulting nations. The court has a president, chief registrar and seven judges and all judgments of the court are binding. This court is the official and permanent replacement of the Tribunal of the Community. The Fund for Co-Operation, Compensation and Development: The fund is administered by a Board of Directors and has a chief executive who is the Managing Director. The Managing director has a renewable term of four years and a staff of approximately 100 persons (see illustration 5, page 48). In addition to the four new permanent institutions, the revised treaty also established seven new commissions. In actuality, five of the original six commissions were divided and reorganized to create seven newly fashioned commissions. Albeit, many of the new commissions have broader scopes while others have succinct mandates. ECOWAS now has eight Specialized Technical Commissions including: - The Food and Agriculture Commission; - The Industry, Science and Technology, and Energy Commission; - The Environment and Natural Resources Commission; - The Transport, Communications and Tourism Commission; - The Trade, Customs, Taxation, Statistics, Money and Payments Commission; - The Political, Judicial and Legal Affairs, Regional Security and Immigration Commission; - The Human Resources, Information, Social and Cultural Affairs Commission; and, - The Administration and Finance Commission. 43

12 Since the ratification of the revised treaty in 1993, there have also been numerous protocols and augmentations to the agreement. This paper would like to point out several of the most relevant protocols, which include: The Moratorium on the Importation, Exportation and Manufacture of Small Arms; 1998 Introduction of the ECOWAS Traveler s Check; Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution, Peace and Security; 1999 Establishment of the Council of Elders and the Security and Mediation Council; 1999 The restructuring of the Executive Secretariat s Office including the dissolution of the post of financial controller and creation of two positions of deputy executive secretaries for economic co-operation and policy harmonization respectively; 2000 Introduction of the ECOWAS passport. Of all the changes within the evolving ECOWAS, the greatest and most disheartening was the 1999 decision of Mauritania to leave the organization. While the actual reasons for the split were difficult to trace, information about the country has suggested its reluctance to integrate its armies and the removal of borders and tariffs (African Union, 2004). According to Garba Diallo of the Nordic Africa Institute, in his July 2 nd, 2004 article on Mauritania, Mauritania Neither Arab nor African, he states: [ ] it is difficult to understand why the Mauritanian President, Colonel Sid Ahmed Ould Taya, decided to leave ECOWAS, especially at a time when Mauritania's relations with its traditional allies - the Arab world and France - are at their worst. Ould Taya's stated reason for leaving ECOWAS was the organization's decision to establish a common currency by 2004, for which the regime is not ready to give up its own currency, the Ouguiya. However, the real problem is that Mauritania has no intention to integrate or have an open-border policy with black Africa. Mauritania has not paid its membership contribution 44

13 to ECOWAS for the last 16 years, since Colonel Ould Taya seized power through a coup. Through deeper inspection of the geography and history of Mauritania, it must be mentioned that the nation straddles the border of black [Sub-Saharan] Africa and the Arab North. Mauritania marks the cultural divide and suffers from a serious identity crisis (Diallo 2005). Since 1984, Mauritania has been a one party state and has the distinction of being the last place on earth to officially abolish slavery in While the population is a mere 2.5 million people, Mauritania is comprised of 45 percent Haratine (Black Africans), 25 percent Moor (White Arabs), and 30 percent Moor/Haratine mix. In practical terms, the small Moor population controls over 80 percent of the economy and still hold fast to the traditions of slavery. According to Nordic Africa Institute, [ ] white Moors' survival depends on their black slaves [...] the slaves are frequently offered as wedding presents, they do not even have the right to marry without permission, and any refusal to obey the commands of the masters can result in tortures. Because President Taya is a Moore and strong advocate for the traditional laws and norms of the Islamic Moore clans, fermenting meaningful integration with the rest of West Africa may have contradicted the societal values of Mauritania s elite. 45

14 Illustration 3: Map of Western Africa, ECOWAS Region 46

15 Illustration 4: ECOWAS Organization Chart of

16 Illustration 5: ECOWAS Revised Organization Chart of