The Ignatian Family Pre-World Social Forum seminar at Hekima College in Nairobi, 17^th to 19^th January 2007

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENDA

(International Jesuit Network for Development)

Global Trade and Development: An African Perspective

By Paul Odhiambo, SJ

“The international trade system today frequently discriminates against the products of the young industries of the developing countries and discourages the producers of raw materials.” (John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, No. 43)

“There is the desert of God’s darkness, the emptiness of souls no longer aware of their dignity or goals of human life. The external deserts in the world are growing, because the internal deserts have become so vast. Therefore the earth’s treasures no longer serve to build God’s garden for all to live in, but they have been made to serve powers of exploitation and destruction. The Church as a whole and all her Pastors, like Christ, must set out to lead people out of the desert, towards the place of life, towards friendship with the Son of God, towards the one who gives life, and life in abundance.” (Benedict XVI; Homily, April 2005)

Introduction

In the contemporary world, trade is a critical tool for development and growth. Since the end of the Second World War, trade has expanded rapidly. It is believed that trade has contributed to development and growth enormously between the developed countries of North America, Europe, Japan and Australia over the years. The value of world exports and imports equal more than US$ 13 trillion. This is estimated to be 42 per cent of the world’s combined gross domestic product (Buckman; 2005, 29). In 2002, the wealthy nations accounted for 63 per cent of the world’s exports while the developing countries accounted for only 32 per cent.

The share of the developing world has increased tremendously in the global trade as the portion of the manufactured goods has increased from 17 per cent in 1900 to 27 per cent in 2000 (Commission for Africa; 2005, 255). However, there is concern that Africa’s exports have dropped from 6.3 per cent in 1980 to 2.5 per cent in 2000 (Baraza; Daily Nation; April 13, 2005). What has led to this stagnation? Is Africa in a position to come up with effective strategies that could lead to more trade and sustainable development? To understand Africa’s place in the current multilateral trade system, it is imperative that we examine briefly the historical trade relations of the continent with the rest of world.

Pre-colonial and colonial Africa

Africa has been involved in global trade with the rest of the world since time immemorial. Trade route crossing Sahara desert from West Africa to the Mediterranean shows that there was connection between Africa and other continents before the sixteenth century (Buckman; 2005, 2). Key commodities traded through this route included gold, slaves and salt among other items.

Africa had contacts with Moslem traders for many centuries before the arrival of the Portuguese in the East African Coast in the fifteenth century. The struggle between Portugal and Oman for the control of the East African Coast played an important role in the development of trade in the interior part of Africa during the nineteenth century (Odhiambo; 1977, 81). Various people who were involved in trade at the East African Coast included Persians, Indians, British, French, Americans and Germans. Other nations that shared in the Indian Ocean included China, Malaysia, the islands of Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Egypt, other Arab states, Thailand and Burma (Were and Derek; 1996, 2-3).

When Seyyid Said was the Sultan of Oman and Zanzibar, he encouraged European and American business interests to trade in his sultanate (Odhiambo; 1977, 91). In the nineteenth century, Zanzibar became a flourishing centre for commerce and business in which imports were cloth, beads, brass wire, guns, gun powder while exports were slaves, ivory, rubber, cowrie shells, gum-copal, sesamum seed, maize and millet.

In the same century, Arab and Swahili merchants made contacts with African groups such as the Nyamwezi, Kamba and Yao who played a prominent role in developing and organizing long distance trade.

The cruelty of slave traders on the captors showed the ugly side of trade in which human beings were mistreated and sold as any other commodity of trade. Barrak Muluka captures the experience of the trade in pre-colonial and colonial Africa as the beginning of unfavourable world order that the poor nations still face up to today in the multilateral trade system:

This uneven exchange entered its most brutal and appalling phase with the advent of slave trade - an inequitable and iniquitous affair that saw Africans become not just traders but items of trade for close to six hundred years. Growth of plantations in the Americas saw Africans ferreted away…as live items of commerce. And so you read in some accounts that in exchange of human beings, gold, copper, ivory, skins and copal, Africa received cloth, glass ornaments, salts, beads and perfumes. (The Standard; March 5, 2005)

The trend of marginalizing Africa intensified during colonial era. The continent was merely seen as a place for extracting raw materials for Europe and other parts of the world. The notorious British colonizer Cecil Rhodes did not mince words when he said that, “we must find new lands from which we can easily obtain raw materials and at the same time exploit the cheap slave labour that is available from the natives of the colonies.”

Global Trade in Post-Colonial Africa

When the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and trade) was established in 1947, most territories in Africa were still under European colonial rule. On January 1, 1948 the GATT regime was ratified by 23 countries in Geneva. Southern Rhodesia (present Zimbabwe) and South Africa, that were under minority white rule, were the only African countries that signed the GATT system.

Though eight trade rounds were held under GATT from 1947 to 1994, the participation of young African states was very minimal even as their number increased in the multilateral trade arrangement. On the other hand, the rich nations entrenched their power and influence in the GATT negotiations especially in the eight rounds.

During the first six rounds of GATT, the focus was on the reduction of tariffs (Lal Das; 1999, 5). As many newly independent countries joined the GATT, it was felt that some special consideration should be incorporated within the GATT regime. As a result, Part IV on “Trade and Development,” was incorporated in the GATT framework in the early 1960s. Generally Part IV recognized that there was a “need for a rapid and sustained expansion of the exports earnings of the less-developed contracting parties (GATT 1947; Article XXXVI, 2). Further, there was a need for positive efforts designed to ensure that less-developed contracting parties secure a share in the growth in international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development (GATT 1947; Article XXXVI, 3). Did the incorporation of Part IV into the GATT framework address critical issues affecting the developing countries in the GATT negotiations?

Africa and the international trade regime

“…States cannot lawfully seek development of their own resources which bring harm

to other states and unjustly oppresses them” (John XXIII, Pacem In Terris, No. 92)

The WTO (World trade Organization) was established on January 1, 1995 and replaced the GATT that had been a global trade system for almost a half a century. Since the WTO was created, there have been six Ministerial Conferences namely; Singapore (1996), Geneva (1998), Seattle (1999), Doha (2001), Cancun (2003) and Hong Kong (2005). A Ministerial Conference is composed of representatives of the WTO Members, normally trade ministers. The Ministerial Conference is held at least once every two years (Marrakech Agreement; Article IV).

Africa’ stakes at the WTO negotiations

1. Agriculture

During the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in December 2005, the trade ministers and diplomats pledged that export subsidies will be eliminated by 2013 (Ministerial Declaration; No. 6, 2005). The wealthy nations are also expected to accelerate cuts to other forms of government farm support. It was also agreed in Hong Kong Ministerial that comprehensive draft Schedules based on modalities for the negotiations should be submitted no later than 31 July 2006. But this never happened due to the collapse of the talks in Geneva at the end of July last year. The main stumbling block has been the extent to which the major players (especially the US and EU) cut their agricultural protectionism.

Why was there disappointment in Africa after the trade talks collapse in Geneva last year? Agriculture still accounts for more than a quarter of Africa’s exports. In some African “countries commodity exports such as cotton, sugar and tobacco are the chief money earners” (Daily Nation, July 25, 2006).

The industrialized countries such as the US, Japan, Canada and the EU that maintain high protective barriers and subsidies are slow to liberalize agriculture trade because of strong agricultural lobbies in their countries (Lal Das; 1999, 228). Market access, domestic support and export subsidies continue to determine the negotiations on agricultural trade.

What are Africa’s fears in agriculture negotiations?

Farm subsidies and export support distort international prices of agricultural goods and this tremendously affects many African countries that rely on agricultural trade. Agricultural support in the developed countries also leads to dumping of cheap agricultural products into African countries. This results into loss of market to Africa’s agricultural exports and has also negative impact on food security. Jawara and Aileen Kwa explain this unfortunate scenario as follows:

EC and US agricultural subsidies and dumping have had a devastating effect on developing countries’ agricultural sectors. Subsidies lead to over production that is dumped on the world market, depressing world process, and these subsidized imports enter developing countries’ markets with lower tariffs as a result of the AoA and IMF and World Bank conditionalities. Farmers in developing countries cannot compete and go out of business, destroying local agricultural production… as imports of cheap subsidized food replace local production (Jawara and Kwa; 2004, 27).

Trade analysts also believe that the US Farm Bill 2002 might perpetuate agricultural support to US farmers thus leading to continued agricultural protectionism. It is high time trade diplomats and various stakeholders recognized that agriculture negotiations are crucial to the development, food sovereignty and the livelihoods of millions of Africans.

2. Non-Agriculture Market Access

The negotiations on NAMA (Non-Agriculture Market Access) are also critical to African countries in that the outcome of the negotiations will affect the industrial development in Africa and in the other parts of the developing world. Under the NAMA negotiations WTO members are expected to reduce and to eventually eliminate tariffs on industrial products. The developing countries are opposed to drastic removal of industrial tariffs as this might stall and reverse industrialization efforts in their countries. Removal of industrial tariffs could also erode government revenue base significantly (Ong’wen; The Standard, March 2, 2005). This, in turn, will undermine the government’s ability to provide basic services such as health, education, and transport infrastructure among others.

Analysts observe that infant domestic industries in Africa could collapse if rapid trade liberalization is “forced” on African countries through enhancing market access by removing import duties. Blatant opening up of Africa’s market could also lead to flooding of African countries with manufactured goods from developed countries. Kenya learnt the hard way a few years ago.

Due to rapid liberalization under the IMF and World Bank sanctioned Structural Adjustment Programmes in the late 1980s, a number of local factories collapsed in Kenya especially in the textile, clothing and leather sectors. When textile factories such as Kisumu Cotton Mill, Rift Valley Textiles, Raymonds, Kenya Textile Mills, and KenKnit among others collapsed, thousands of people lost their jobs hence exacerbating poverty in the country. The collapse of textile sector also affected hundreds of thousands of cotton farmers whose livelihoods were also put at risk.

Before the launch of the NAMA under the Doha Round, African countries such as Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Zambia submitted a joint a paper why they did not want NAMA negotiations to go on. They suggested a study process to be carried out on the impacts of the previous liberalization on domestic firms, employment, and government revenue. In addition, the study was also to look at the effect of tariff peaks and tariff escalation in the developed countries (Jawara and Kwa, 2004, 25). Despite the support these African countries received from their counterparts from the developing world, the industrialized countries were adamant and instead pushed for NAMA to be included in the Doha Round.

3. Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

The Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) were brought into the multilateral trade framework for the first time in the Uruguay Round (1986-1994) due to the pressure from the multinational corporations in the pharmaceutical and information technology industries from the major powers (Jawara and Kwa; 2004, 37). The firms claimed that they were having huge loses due to inadequate protection of their intellectual property abroad.

Several countries participating in the Uruguay Round initially objected to the inclusion of the IPRs in the GATT negotiations on the ground that the subject was covered by the World Intellectual Property Organization and because the GATT had jurisdiction in the field of trade (Lal Das; 1999, 355). Despite the protests from developing countries, TRIPs agreement came into effect in 1995. TRIPs agreement;

Sets high standards of protection for patents, copyrights, trademarks, and industrial design and licences, allowing patents to be granted on products and processes for twenty years, including on seeds, pharmaceuticals, genes and diagnostic tests… (Jawara and Kwa; 2004, 36).

One of the reasons why African countries have been against the TRIPs (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) agreement is its implications for access to medicines and public health. The monopoly of the pharmaceuticals in producing drugs have had adverse impact in fighting diseases such as malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS since these firms keep the prices of medicines expensive such that majority of people in Africa and in other developing countries are unable to afford them. Despite the resistance of African countries towards the introduction of TRIPs in the WTO, “a lot of behind-the-scene manoeuvres, pressure tactics and arm-twisting by industrialized countries” won the day as TRIPs agreement was brought on board (Mwaura; Saturday Nation, March 26, 2005).

While the WTO Members have some flexibility in adopting measures that are necessary to protect public health and nutrition; promote the public interest in sectors of vital importance to their socio-economic and technological development; to prevent the abuse of IPRs by rights holders; prevent resorting to practices which adversely affect the international transfer of technology (TRIPs Agreement; Article 8), some industrialized countries/multinationals have insisted on enforcement of patent laws that undermine the foundation of the flexibility measures.

Swiss pharmaceutical company Norvatis is challenging a public health safeguard enshrined within India’s Patent Act. If Norvatis succeeds in this case, then the era of India being a producer of affordable generic medicines could come to an end with regard to newer and future medicines. India’s affordable drugs are used in many parts of the developing world. In fact medicines such as the ARVs (Anti-Retrovirals) from India have been used for war against HIV/AIDS in Africa.

Norvatis is one of the 39 companies that took South Africa to court in 2001 in an effort to overturn the country’s Medicines Act that was designed to bring down drugs prices.

4. Trade in Services

The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) brings to the fore the service sector and opens up individual countries to a programme of progressive liberalization under the WTO framework (Institute of Economic Affairs; June 2005). The GATS covers twelve service sectors namely; business, communication, construction and engineering, distribution, education, environment, financial, health, recreation, cultural and sportings, travel and tourism and transport.

Article 1 of the GATS enumerates four modes of supply through which services may be exchanged:

i.) Cross-border supply not requiring physical involvement of supplier or consumer (e.g. telecommunication, internet services)

ii.) Movement of the consumer to the country of supply (e.g. tourist from abroad comes to Kenya and vice versa)

iii.) Services sold in the territory of a member of foreign firms that have established a commercial presence (e.g. Barclay Bank operating its branches outside the country of origin)

iv.) Provision of services requiring the movement of natural persons (e.g. Kenya doctors and nurses, engineers working in other countries)

Critics of GATS argue that opening up the trade in services and subjecting them to competition will not lead to greater equality among nations nor will it eradicate poverty in the South (Jubilee South; December 2005). Due to their overwhelming economic advantage, the rich nations stand to gain most from further liberalization of the service sector. The fact that the industrialized countries account for 70 per cent of world exports of services is an indication that they are capable of overrunning trade in services for their own good (Jawara and Kwa; 2004, 32).

Liberalization of the trade in services in areas such as health, education, water and electricity supply will make these services less accessible to the majority of Africans.

Africa and other developing countries are not ready to liberalize service sectors that are of interest to rich nations such as financial, professional, courier and transport services, while the developed countries are reluctant to open up sectors that are of interest to the developing countries such as allowing professionals from the South to work in the North. In fact the industrialized countries are tightening their immigrations regimes.

Enormous pressure on African countries to liberalize in many service sectors where they cannot compete effectively could destroy infant local service industries hence undermining their development objectives.

5. Cotton

The Ministerial Declaration (No. 11, 2005) at the end of Hong Kong meeting stated that the rich nations must eliminate all forms of export subsidies on cotton in 2006. Further, the developed countries will give duty and quota free access for cotton exports from the LDCs from the commencement of the implementation period. Members also agreed that the trade distorting domestic subsidies for cotton production be reduced more ambitiously.

The cotton subsidies have depressed international cotton process rendering cotton farmers in West and Central African countries of Mali, Benin, Bukina Faso and Chad very poor (Kathuri; The Standard, April 14, 2004). The US uses over $4.2 billions annually to support its cotton producers. EU and China also offer huge support to cotton farmers in their countries.

Cotton is not only an issue in West and Central Africa but also crucial to East Africa where thousands of farmers have been depending on cotton farming until the cotton industry declined in late 1980s. Kenya was a major exporter of cotton in the 1970s and 1980s (Oyuke; The Standard, December 13, 2005). The removal of government support to cotton sector due to the SAPs, decline of world cotton prices and high costs of inputs among others led to the collapse of the textile industries thus undermining income and livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of cotton farmers in the country. This scenario was witnessed in the neighbouring countries too.

It is therefore imperative that the commitment made by the WTO Members to eliminate cotton subsidies is actualized by the big players who have a long history of subsidizing their cotton farmers so that cotton farmers from Africa could benefit from cotton production.

6. Development issues

The WTO members pledged to promote trade and economic cooperation with the LDCs in order to integrate them into the global trade system. Both developed and developing countries also promised to implement duty-free and quota-free market access for products originating from the LDCs (Ministerial Declaration, 2005, No. 47).

In summary, Africa needs better terms of trade, more access to world market, a stable price structure of commodities, and better transfer of appropriate technology (Sebunya; The Monitor; March 30, 2005).

Other issues of concern for Africa in the WTO

“There is a need to establish a greater justice in the sharing of goods, both within national communities and on the international level. In international exchanges, there is a need to go beyond relationships based on force, in order to arrive at agreements reached with the good of all in mind. Relationships based on force have never in fact established justice in a true and lasting manner…” (Paul VI, Octogesima Adveniens, No. 43)

A. Transparency problems

i. Green room meetings: They are small group meetings occurring during the WTO negotiations that tend to make key decision for the trade talks. Several NGOs working on trade justice issues have questioned the rationale of using the Green Room forum since it is seen to violate the spirit of international cooperation and undermines the democratic principle of the WTO. In theory, the WTO is a democratic institution based on the principle of consensus and one member over and a neutral Secretariat. However, the practice of inviting a few WTO members to the Green Room meetings affects balanced and fair decision-making in the WTO since it is exclusionary and unrepresentative.

ii. Mini Ministerial conferences: These are informal meetings of the trade ministers arranged by specific countries before WTO meetings. They can be crucial in determining positions and alliances before major WTO meetings. For example, a mini ministerial was held in Mombasa, Kenya in March in which several NGOs leaders championing trade justice were arrested for organizing a parallel forum that was meant to voice the concern of ordinary people on the on-going trade negotiations under the WTO framework.

The most influential WTO members such as the US, EU, Japan and Canada always attend the Green Room meetings and Mini Ministerials. Other members are only invited if they represent a strategic alliance of other countries. Critics of the major powers in WTO argue that these fora are used to influence countries to take the position of the Quad and its allies on critical matters during the negotiations.

The use of exclusionary forum to build consensus among a few members that later on is presented to the majority is undemocratic and violates one-country-one vote and consensus system of the WTO (Marrakesh Agreement; Article IX). Several NGOs have urged the developing countries to reject the use of unofficial, secretive and illegitimate fora such as the Green Room and Mini Ministerials in making decisions that mainly serve the agenda of the powerful nations.

B. Politics of “carrots and sticks”

i. Bullying and arm-twisting tactics: The Quad and other developed countries are major players in the WTO and therefore can use their greater political and economic muscle to enhance their interests in the trade negotiations by either providing or withholding technical assistance, financial aid, debt relief, and preferential trade deals from the developing countries (Jawara and Kwa; 2004, 149).

ii. Threat against ambassadors: Several countries have trade diplomats in Geneva, which the headquarters of the WTO. The ambassadors work on WTO matters regularly. Before, during and after the Doha ministerial conference, Geneva-based ambassadors from the developing countries who took radical position opposed to the rich nations faced threats and intimidation from the major players. Some ambassadors were removed from Geneva after the Doha Ministerial because their position was ‘unpopular’ with the US.

During critical WTO meetings, the major powers are fond of phoning to various capitals as a way of influencing governments to agree to their positions. Sometimes, the governments are urged to prevail upon their ‘stubborn’ trade diplomats to accept the position of the rich nations even if it is contrary to the interests of majority.

iii. Preferential trade agreements: Bilateral trade arrangements such as AGOA (Africa Growth Opportunity Act) and ACP-EU are sometimes used to induce or to force developing countries to toe the line of the US or EU in the WTO negotiations.

iii. Ministerial conferences: The process and rules of procedure for ministerial conferences should be established and agreed upon in advance. There is also a suggestion that all consultations and meetings organized by various chairs should be announced well ahead of time go give ample time for preparations by all the WTO members (Jawara and Kwa, 2004).

It is also highly recommended that negotiations during the ministerials should not take place throughout the night since it minimizes effective participations. Continuous negotiations for 30 to 40 hours should be discouraged as it constraints the participation of African countries with few delegates.

The WTO Secretariat should also remain neutral and impartial. There have been instances where delegates from developing countries claim that the Secretariat is siding with the position of major powers.

Finally, there is also a suggestion that negotiations for the preparation for the Ministerial conferences should remain at the Geneva level where delegates are in a better position to deal with technical issues.

Way forward for Africa in trade diplomacy

“It is desirable, for example, that nations of the same geographical area should establish of cooperation which will make them less dependent on more powerful producers; they should open their frontiers to the products of the area; they should examine how their products might complement one another; they should combine in order to set up those services which each one separately is incapable of providing; they should extend cooperation to the monetary and financial sector.” (John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, No. 45)

We have seen how power relations between the developed and developing countries affect the international trade regime. While it is true that power politics and brinkmanship carry the day most of the time, African countries and the rest of the developing world have to organize themselves and address internal factors that inhibit their competition in trade both at regional and international levels.

1. Solidarity and collective bargaining

African countries should continue to negotiate at the WTO as one bloc. They should also work closely with other developing countries in order to increase their bargaining power. Recent experience at the fourth ministerial conference in Cancun, Mexico shows that collaboration among the developing countries led to the collapse of the talks. As a result, the rich nations dropped out three Singapore issues from the Doha Round during the July 2004 negotiations in Geneva. African countries should strengthen G20, G77 and other developing countries’ lobby groups that could be instrumental for their collective bargains at the trade talks.

It is also critical that intra-trade be enhanced between developing countries. This could mainly materialize if trade barriers are removed and their capacity to trade is also nurtured. There should be capacity building programmes for African trade ministers, diplomats and other members of delegations in order to strengthen their negotiating skills. Collaboration between the governments and NGOs working on trade justice is also paramount.

2. Regional integration

Regional integration has been a top agenda for the continent since the formation of Organization for African Unity (OAU) in 1963. Article 1(2) of the OAU Charter states that the continental body could achieve its purposes through political, diplomatic, economic, educational, cultural, nutritional, technical and scientific cooperation. In 2001 the African Union (AU) replaced the OAU and put a lot of emphasis on integration of the continent. One of the objectives of the AU is to “accelerate the political and socio-economic integration of the continent (Constitutive Act of the AU; Article 3c).

More than two decades ago, African governments had recommended that African Economic Community would be in place by 2000 in order to “ensure the economic, social and cultural integration of the continent” (Lagos Act of Plan, No. 250). Though the formation of African Common Market has not yet materialize, there are prospects of achieving such a goal sub-regional bloc are moving into deeper stages of regional integration. At the moment, there are two customs union in Africa; Southern African Customs Union (South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland and Namibia) and East African Community Customs Union (Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya). Rwanda and Burundi became Partner States of the East Africa Community in November 2006.

Other sub-regional blocs that have planned to form customs union are COMESA (Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa) and SADC (Southern African Development Community). ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) is also a promising regional bloc in West Africa. It is important that African countries avoid overlapping membership in the blocs especially when they are engaging into deeper regional integration processes.

It is hoped that the regional blocs such EAC, COMESA, SADC, ECOWAS will enhance intra-Africa trade as trade barriers and non-trade barriers will be reduced or eliminated altogether. Such a move could lead to the actualization of an African Common Market in future.

3. Development of infrastructure

African countries need to have better and reliable transport and communication infrastructure. Poor roads, unreliable ports, weak rail system and underdeveloped water transport system increase costs for trade hence discourage investors and other business people. African states should strive to work collectively on transport and communication infrastructure. It is also imperative that energy infrastructure is enhanced in the continent. There is a lot of energy potential but many African governments are reluctant to exploit these resources. Frequent power failure hinders industrial development that is critical to trade. It is a challenge to the governments and private sector to put in place reliable and viable infrastructure.

4. Increase Africa’s capacity to trade

One of the main problems most African countries face is their weak capacity to trade (Commission for Africa; 2006, 259). In order for African countries to compete effectively in global trade there is a need to improve policy and governance; invest in infrastructure; invest in health and education of the people in our countries. Political stability, peace and security are also crucial for providing enabling environment for trade. A vibrant private sector is also essential for effective trade. Other factors that could enhance Africa’s capacity to trade include a stable and reliable economic framework, well-managed local authorities, effective public administration and service delivery, an enabling regulatory and legal environment (Commission for Africa; 2006, 259)

5. Effective war against corruption

Most African countries have potential to develop faster but entrenched corruption in public sector hinders development. Government officials loot public coffers indiscriminately while majority of the citizens remain poor. Corruption has great impact on trade in the sense that business people have to give kick-backs (pay bribes) in order to do meaningful business. Deep-rooted corruption contributes to abject poverty as the wealth is in the hands of a few people who most of the time invest or keep their ill-gotten wealth in foreign countries while majority of people do not have purchasing power. Such scenario impacts negatively on trade. It is the responsibility of the governments and non-state actors to fight graft genuinely and effectively.

Our social call to advocate for trade justice

“Today, whatever our ministry, we Jesuits enter into solidarity with the poor, the marginalized and the voiceless, in order to enable their participation in the processes that shape the society in which we all live and work.” (GC 34, No. 548)

The fourth characteristic of our way of proceeding, “In solidarity with those most in Need,” captures the foundation of our involvement in the social sector. The Church also singles out preferential option for the poor as taught by Christ (Matthews 25:40). It is our duty as Christians to show solidarity and compassion to the poor. In a deeper way, we are called to examine how policies made by governments, international organizations or any other authority affect the most underprivileged in our society.

In the context of global trade, we are called to scrutinize the international trade policies and their impact on the poor. We have a social call to show solidarity with the poor farmers who are condemned to marginalization and dire poverty due to unjust global trade policies. It is our responsibility to challenges unfair laws that consign millions of people suffering from HIV/AIDS, malaria, TB to untold suffering simply because the pharmaceutical companies are protecting their profits. We must stand up and protect infant industries in Africa from rapid liberalization of markets. It is therefore, fitting for us Jesuits and others Christians and many other people of goodwill to advocate for international trade justice that benefits all people.

Involvement in trade justice advocacy

“Let justice descend, O heavens, like dew from above, like gentle rain let the skies drop it down. Let the earth open and salvation bud forth, let justice also spring up.” Isaiah 45:8

As a member of staff at the Jesuit Hakimani Centre (Nairobi) between March 2004 and June 2006, I was involved in the trade justice advocacy. Trade justice is a key issue for most African countries. As the staff of JHC, we found it relevant to partner with the Catholic Economic Justice (CEJ), a network of several religious congregations (Comboni missionaries, Salesians, Missionaries of Africa, Consolata Missionaries, Sisters of Mercy, Society of Jesus, Association of Sisterhood of Kenya-Justice and Peace Commission), Catholic institutions (Tangaza College, Catholic University of Eastern Africa, Catholic Justice and Peace Commission-National office, Chemchemi ya Ukweli), and lay people who are committed to economic justice advocacy. This joint venture of several religious congregations under CEJ is in line with Fr. General’s desire of forming “partnership among religious” in the social ministry (Kolvenback; 2006, 11).

The CEJ collaborates with other faiths (Hindu Council of Kenya, National Council of Churches of Kenya-Justice and Peace Commission and Supreme Council of Kenyan Muslims) and several civil society organizations such as ActionAid, Oxfam GB Kenya, Cordaid, Kenya Human Rights Commission, SEATINI-Kenya, Heinrich Boll Foundation, Institute of Economic Affairs, Kenya Debt Relief Network, EcoNews Africa, and Bridge Africa.

The CEJ together with the above-mentioned faiths and civil society organizations have been involved in various campaigns and advocacy for fair and just global trade policies through community-based conscientization programmes, workshops, public forum, processions, and publications of trade issues in various newspapers and magazines. In our advocacy and lobby for fair international trade system, the civil society organizations, social movements, faith-based organizations, community-based organizations have got tremendous support from like-minded groups from the industrialized countries. However, a lot of challenges have to be tackled so that more people become aware of their global rights and own the process of changing the world for the common good.

As faith-based groups, social movements, NGOs, Community-based organizations and various people from all walks of life gather here in Nairobi for the World Social Forum, it is a moment to ask: What went wrong with the so-called Doha Development Round? Is there hope to jumpstart the trade talks? Martin Luther King Jr. continues to remind us: “The Christian ought to be challenged by any protest against treatment of the poor” (Carson; 1998, 21). We have an obligation in our own ways to lobby and advocate for a better trade pact. It is through our commitment for a noble cause that we can truly say: “Another world is possible.”

References

Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization (known as Marrakesh Agreement) at www.wto.org/English/docs_e/legal_e/04-wto_e.htm

Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights at
www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/doc/uruguay/finalact.htm

Ayang’, Peter Nyongó, etal (eds) (2002). New Partnership for Africa’s Development NEPAD: A New Path? Nairobi: Heinrich Boll Foundation.

Baraza Lucas, “Bishops oppose unfair rules,” in Daily Nation, April 13, 2005.

Benedict XVI (2005). First Messages of His Holiness Benedict XVI. Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa.

Buckman, Greg (2005). Global trade: Past Mistakes, Future Choices. London: Zed Books.

Carson, Clayborne (ed) (1998). The autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. New York: Abacus

Commission for Africa, “Our Common Interest: Report of the Commission for Africa” at www.commissionforafrica.org

Constitutive Act of the African Union at http://www.dfa.gov.za/for-relations/multilateral/treaties/auact.htm

Documents of the Thirty-Fourth General Congregation of the Society of Jesus. St. Louis: The Institute of Jesuit Sources.

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947) at http://www.jurisint.org/pub/06/en/doc/05.htm

Institute of Economic Affairs, “The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS): Rules Vs National Policies,” Issue 13, June 2005

Jawara, Fatoumata and Aileen Kwa (2004). Behind the Scenes at the WTO: The real world of international trade negotiations, the lessons of Cancun. London: Zed Books.

John XXIII, (1963) Encyclical Letter, Pacem in Terris (On Peace On Earth). Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa.

John Paul II, (1987) Encyclical Letter, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (On Social Concern). Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa.

Jubilee South

Kathuri, Benson, “Poor countries to gain more from new trade pact, says EU,” The Standard; March 5, 2005.

Kolvenback, Peter-Hans, “Sharing what we believe… Jesuit-Lay Partnership,” in Promotio Iustitiae, No. 92 2006

Lagos Plan of Action for the Economic Development of Africa 1980-2000 at
www.uneca.org/adfiii/riefforts/ref/other2.htm

Las Das, Bhagrath (1999). The World trade Organization: A Guide to the Framework for International Trade. London: Zed Books.

Ministerial Declaration after the Hong Kong Meeting in December 2005 at
www.wto.org/English/thewto_e/minist_e/min05_e/final_text_e.htm

Muluka, Barrak, “Can trade talks be beneficial to poor nations of the world?” The Standard; March 5, 2005.

Mwaura, Peter, “WTO policy is a blow to anti-Aids drive,” Saturday Nation; March 26, 2005

Odhiambo, Atieno E.S. etal (1977). A history of East Africa. London: Longman

Ong’wen, Oduor, “All eyes are now on the new trade talks in China,” in The Standard; July 13, 2005.

Ong’wen, Oduor, “In trade talks Kenya keeps receiving bad cheques,” The Standard; March 2, 2005

Ong’wen, Oduor, “It’ll take eons for trade talks to benefit the Third World,” in The Standard; April 12, 2006

Organization for African Unity (OAU) Charter at http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/specialprojects/african-union/charter.htm

Oyuke, John, “Cotton farmers banking on State, WTO to revive sector,” The Standard; December 13, 2005

Paul VI (1971). Apostolic Letter, Octogesima Adveniens, (On the New Social Problem). Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa

Sebunya, James, “Africa standing outside world’s global village,” in The Monitor; March 30, 2005

The New Partnership of Development (NEPAD) at
www.africainformation.net/nepad.htm

Were, Gideon and Derek A. Wilson (1996). East Africa through a thousand years. London: Evans Brothers Limited

Zinkuratire, Victor and Angelo Colacrai eds. (1999). The African Bible. Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa.