Afrika tager i disse år vigtige skridt til i højere grad selv at kunne håndtere kontinentets problemer. Udfordringerne er store, men regionale fredsbevarende styrker sendes nu til konfliktområder, og der samarbejdes om økonomiske og politiske reformer. Danmark er parat til at støtte denne udvikling.
Det understregede udenrigsminister Per Stig Møller (K) i sin tale til konferencen den 8. marts i Rådet for Internationalt Udviklingssamarbejde (U-landsrådet) om god regeringsførelse i Afrika.
Talen gengives her in extenso som dokument under overskriften “Good Governance in Africa: Challenges for Regional Partners and Donors”.
Africa in the new Millennium stands at the brink of major change. I know the public image of Africa is often negative. Reports from bloody conflicts, human tragedies in the wake of the devastating AIDS pandemic and persisting pictures of famine fill our TV screens.
They paint a bleak image of Africa. But we have to try to go beneath the surface and also look at the positive trends that are emerging.
I am very encouraged that Africa has taken significant steps to curb conflicts. The African regional organisations are playing pivotal roles, in particular the AU and ECOWAS. African activism in peace processes are leading to results in some of the worst conflicts of the world.
In 2003, African regional organisations deployed four peace support operations and took action to revert three military coups. Most significantly, perhaps, the AU has taken first steps in building a comprehensive security architecture and has entered into new strategic partnerships with the UN, G8 and EU. These are very positive developments, and we warmly support them.
The launching of the NEPAD initiative in 2001 and the establishment of the AU in 2002 offer exciting promises. These two historic events show that Africa is taking leadership in its own development process.
They also show that the wave of democratisation, that was sparked in the 1990s, is now paying off. I see these developments as a sign that the democratic forces of the continent are now taking the helm. This is very encouraging and it provides a new framework for action.
The AU and NEPAD offer a holistic framework for development in Africa. But now the time has come to fulfil the promises. In NEPAD, Africas stated goal is to work its way out of abject poverty, underdevelopment and global marginalisation by significantly accelerating growth.
This will only happen if Africa can establish a radically new basis for economic development. This is why I strongly agree with NEPAD in emphasising the crucial link between peace, good governance and economic development.
Bad governance hampers economic development, increases poverty and often leads to conflict.
Without good governance, efforts at conflict resolution, debt relief or market access will not have the “booster effect” on economic development that Africa so desperately needs. Some of the countries with the richest resources are also those most affected by violent competition over access to them.
Corruption blocks growth, and corruption bars the private sector from playing the dynamic role in development it should. It fosters a “status quo” orientation, contributes to a negative image of Africa and scares off foreign direct investment. As such, corruption is a major constraint to economic development. The poor are the victims of poverty and corruption.
Breaking the vicious circle of bad governance, stunted development and conflict must therefore be an absolute priority for Africa.
This is why I am so encouraged by the decision to launch the “African Peer Review Mechanism” – the APRM. I set great hopes in it, but it will not be an easy task. I appreciate that good governance cannot be built overnight, but there has got to be real and measurable development in this direction. And the envisaged peer pressure and APRM action plans must be effective tools for this purpose.
Let me set out some challenges that I think Africa and the APRM face.
FIRSTLY, good governance is all about founding a real commitment to development and change. Regional organisations have a great responsibility in instituting a new culture of governance and in fostering a new and real commitment to development. There is an urgent need to change from a “look the other way” culture to actually doing something about governance.
SECONDLY, the APRM process must foster a greater internal accountability in member states. An important feature of the APRM is the fact that it provides greater transparency and “legitimises” debate about governance. It broadens the accountability of the African states that has been limited until now.
But in the APRM accountability is essentially regional – a relationship between a member state and the other member states. I think it is important that the mechanism contributes to spurring internal dialogue and increasing internal accountability between the state and its own citizens. This is the only sustainable basis for good governance in the long term.
THIRDLY, I think the fact that the APRM is an African mechanism based on “peer pressure” is vital, but it has got to be effective. Peer pressure is easy if the country in question is already committed to improving governance. It is quite another matter if in reality it is not.
There has got to be political commitment not to relent in the peer pressure on poor performers and regressive regimes. Otherwise, it just demonstrates to other regressive regimes that the mechanism and the process towards good governance is not a serious one.
I was pleased to see that the military coup attempts in Africa last year were countered by swift and effective peer pressure. But I also find it deeply worrying that the appalling situation in Zimbabwe can persist without firmer African reaction. Now we see signs that the same might happen in Namibia.
FOURTHLY, the process towards good governance in Africa has got to be broader. It is crucial that a majority of African countries join the APRM. John Donne once said that “no man is an island, entire of itself”. Bad governance in one country affects other countries negatively.
A general image of Africa as a continent of bad governance will hamper opportunities for those states that do improve governance. Bad governance is therefore a joint concern, if Africa is serious about accelerating growth.
This epitomises NEPADs dilemma. On the one hand it is a programme of the AU to spur continent-wide socio-economic development. But on the other hand membership is rather limited so far. Creating isolated “islands of success” is possible, but only to a certain extent.
The national focus on economic development has shown its limitations in terms of viability. African national economies and markets are too small and national solutions much too costly to foster real growth.
In order to accelerate economic development, Africa must focus much more on regional solutions exploring economies of scale and creating viable regional markets. For this to be possible, the drive towards good governance has to be pan-African.
FIFTHLY, the challenge is not only to strengthen political commitment to good governance, but also to build new and stronger institutions that can ensure it.
Even states that are committed to good governance may not have the resources to actually set in place strong regulatory and administrative frameworks that can curb corruption, foster confidence and provide long-term security of investments. This is exactly where regional support to individual countries can play an important role.
SIXTHLY, the information basis and transparency must be improved, because it is the only way to make the APRM viable.
Experience has shown that peer pressure is more effective when it can provide both qualitative and quantitative assessments of performance. In fact, peer pressure may have adverse effects if it is not supported by data and analytical knowledge.
The quantitative assessment is important for providing objective comparability among states and for measuring performance. The qualitative assessment is important for the dialogue with individual members to improve governance and in setting the country action plans that are foreseen under the APRM.
I think the “African Economic Outlook” on the economic performance of African countries is a promising first step in this direction.
These are but some of the challenges facing Africa in the struggle to improve good governance. There are others, of course.
DENMARK considers good governance crucial for enhancing the effectiveness of development cooperation. But what can we do as partners in development to improve governance?
Denmark is ready to support efforts to improve good governance at the national level in our partner countries. In particular, I think that strengthening the role of parliaments and political parties is important. So are building an effective judicial sector, fostering a strong civil society and nurturing a responsible independent press and media.
All of these efforts contribute to establishing the crucial accountability between the rulers and the ruled.
But there is much more that we, as international partners, can do. We need to take a close look at our own performance. There is considerable scope for improving coherence and coordination of development cooperation as well as harmonisation of donor procedures.
We therefore warmly welcome the decision to create a NEPAD-OECD “Mutual Review of Development Effectiveness” to start next year. At present, there is too much overlapping and working at cross-purposes. And just understanding the jungle of different procedures and rules that donors employ constitutes a major task for developing countries in itself.
We also have to allow real African ownership of development processes – this is the only way to improve sustainability. However, a key obstacle for trust and ownership is bad governance and widespread corruption.
We also have to recognize our own responsibility for conflicts in Africa. The worst conflicts have to do with the extraction of rich natural resources for use in the developed world.
We need to promote more regulation mechanisms such as the Kimberley Process for diamonds. And we have to look at how we can strengthen corporate governance and responsibility for our companies when they do business in Africa.
Let me end by saying that I am convinced Africa is moving in the right direction. I firmly believe that Africa is taking governance seriously. I put my confidence in the AU, NEPAD and the APRM.
I fully recognize that there are many challenges, but simply do not see any other way if Africa wants to create a basis for accelerated growth. I wish NEPAD and the regional organizations the best of luck in this primordial task. We are ready to support you in the process.
Kilde: www.um.dk
