The ACPs mobilise in the interests of their mineral resources

On one hand, countries engaged in a race for technology are in urgent need of sometimes rare metals. On the other, developing countries with ‘scandalously’ rich mineral deposits, suddenly finding themselves in a position of strength, often adopt protectionist measures to promote their own industrialisation. This is true of China which as an emerging country, has a foot in both camps. Its decision to limit exports of rare minerals, which are so vital to new technologies (from the iPad to wind turbines), has angered industrialised countries, first and foremost the US and Europe. Along with Japan, they have lodged a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The African ‘Vision’

For their part, the ACP countries have been trying for several years to establish, if not a common strategy then at least a framework for priority fields of action. This is especially true of Africa, which in February 2009 adopted a ‘Mining Vision’ that was ratified by the heads of state and government of the African Union (AU). The thinking behind it was to abandon the usual approach dictated by maximum profit in favour of a policy to both meet the increased demand and permit real development by creating an industrial fabric as mining countries. Their frame of reference? Major mining nations such as Canada or certain Scandinavian countries that “have been able to diversify their economies and take the path of more sustainable development”, as the Mozambican Antonio M.A. Pedro, director of mines with the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), explained in Brussels on 14 December.

Mining regimes

Using mining resources for development means meeting a series of considerable challenges, such as putting into place transport infrastructures and the technical facilities with which to process minerals on the spot, rather than exporting them in an unworked form without added value. As Antonio Pedro stressed, this also implies strengthening institutions and boosting capacity so that the mining states can negotiate as equals with “international mining companies that are better endowed with resources and skills.”

This presupposes an ad hoc fiscal regime. As Antonio Pedro stated, the Mining Vision also proposes “innovative licensing systems, such as auctioning”. These proposals should normally be ratified by the AU ministers at their second meeting, scheduled for the second half of 2011.

EPAs and protectionism

Another measure envisaged is to levy export taxes, a subject of disagreement between the ACP and EU states in their negotiations to conclude Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). “These agreements, as well as the WTO agreements and bilateral treaties, have reduced the margins for manoeuvre when using instruments for industrial diversification,” stressed the ECA representative. “Clearly this issue, first perceived as technical, in fact has wider political and strategic implications,” was the response of the Mauritian, Isabelle Ramdoo, expert with the ECDPM (European Centre for Development Policy Management) think-tank. “Although fair commercial practices are a necessary condition for fluid trade, the conditions linked to development are equally important, especially for developing countries.” She appealed to the latter, as did ACP Group Secretary-General Ibn Chambas in his introductory speech, “to participate fully in the negotiations and ensure that the results reflect their interests and concerns.”