Time for Africa to have a parallel summit to the G8
Jun 29, 2010
THE world’s most powerful leaders including US President Barack Obama, Germany’s Angela Merkel, France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, Britain’s David Cameron, Japan’s Naoto Kan, Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi, Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev and Canada’s Stephen Harper came to Toronto this past weekend for
THE world’s most powerful leaders including US President Barack Obama, Germany’s Angela Merkel, France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, Britain’s David Cameron, Japan’s Naoto Kan, Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi, Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev and Canada’s Stephen Harper came to Toronto this past weekend for the G8 and G20 summits to talk about world affairs with special focus on world economic downturn.
They agreed among other things to cut their deficits by half by 2013, and stop spending on stimulus programmes. Yet, despite these outcomes from the inner sanctum of world power, all the media would talk about was the protesters who came by the thousands on Saturday and Sunday to walk the streets of Toronto to demand attention for a variety of causes, including ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, world poverty, women’s rights to control their reproductive lives, and many others.
The Saturday afternoon demonstrations turned the usually quiet Toronto streets into battle zones with militant protesters torching police cars, breaking windows and blocking streets. Hundreds of heavily armed police girded in riot gear responded with a few rubber bullets, teargas and hundreds of arrests.
Already many commentators have condemned the level of violence, hooliganism and vandalism that these violent protesters brought to the streets. Indeed, their actions not only damaged property but put many lives at risk. Now, whether one agrees or not with their violent tactics, at a completely different level, the protesters achieved what they set out to do, namely to steal some of the spotlight away from the world leaders, and focus it on their issues.
These tactics have followed every power summit over the last decade including the World Trade Organisation summits in Seattle (1999) and Geneva (2009). What these protesters signal is that there are alternative voices that must be heard. Their biggest problem is that the violent tactics they choose tend to overpower the message they are attempting to deliver.
Nonetheless, when it comes to putting issues in the forefront, without glorifying or emulating the violence, African leaders could learn a thing or two from the protesters. This is because on matters about Africa, the G8 has dictated what it sees as good for the continent. Take, for example, this past weekend’s summit which produced the declaration entitled “Recovery and New Beginningsâ€.
In the declaration, the G8 leaders commit to continue working with African partners “in support of African-led efforts to build a more stable, democratic and prosperous… †The leaders also commit to reducing infant mortality, maternal health and ensuring food security. Now these are all worthy goals to be supported, however, what stood out from the beginning of the G8 summit of these seven powerful men and a woman was that the G8 leaders were keen to be seen to be doing something about Africa.
And although the Heads of State of Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia (as Chair of the NEPAD Heads of State and Government Orientation Committee), Malawi (as Chair of the African Union), Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa were invited to the G8 in Muskoka, the unshakable impression is that the superpowers already knew beforehand what Africa wants, and how to respond to those African needs.
In reality though, each of the G8 nation chooses the kind of project that it will fund and those it will not. Moreover, the G8 nations are not accountable to the pledges they make as part of the photo-ops at these summits. At the 2005 G8 Summit at Gleneagles, Scotland, for example, the leaders pledged to “increase aid to developing countries by around $50b a year by 2010â€, at least $25b going to Africa.
To date, the G8 nations have not kept their pledges which have so far reached only about $20b, of which Africa barely received a trickle. The excuse is that there is lack of accountability on the part of Africans leaders, which is true enough. But one suspects also that these goals have not been met because the members of the G8 themselves lack transparency and accountability.
On the one level, they want the world to believe that there is a concerted effort to eliminate world poverty. But at another level, they do not want to be held accountable to the commitments they made toward reaching those goals.
To be able to get the G8 leaders to begin to speak about issues that African leaders feel should be talked about will require them to stage alternative summits to the G8 and G20. Such a summit could be called the G53, and it would coincide with the G8/20 summits, perhaps held just a few days before the G8/20 summit. The summit would focus on specific areas such as the economy, and articulate the priorities of Africa to spur development. This also would be the forum to speak about a single African currency which is more feasible today than it was five decades ago when Kwame Nkrumah dreamed of a united states of Africa.
The forum would address issues of trade between nations, how to buy from Africa before venturing out there to look for expensive goods from the developed nations. Now, while such a summit need not follow the raw and violent tactics used by the protesters this past week in the streets of Toronto, it could nonetheless force African leaders to look for solutions to Africa’s problems from within their ranks. Furthermore, it could force the developed nations to stop and listen to what Africa really wants.
Of course, the G8/20 leaders would not willingly give up the spotlight, but when the African G53 summit takes root, the power dynamics would change from a bunch of beggars waiting for handouts to a strong collective with the power to make things happen.
Opiyo.oloya@sympatico.ca
They agreed among other things to cut their deficits by half by 2013, and stop spending on stimulus programmes. Yet, despite these outcomes from the inner sanctum of world power, all the media would talk about was the protesters who came by the thousands on Saturday and Sunday to walk the streets of Toronto to demand attention for a variety of causes, including ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, world poverty, women’s rights to control their reproductive lives, and many others.
The Saturday afternoon demonstrations turned the usually quiet Toronto streets into battle zones with militant protesters torching police cars, breaking windows and blocking streets. Hundreds of heavily armed police girded in riot gear responded with a few rubber bullets, teargas and hundreds of arrests.
Already many commentators have condemned the level of violence, hooliganism and vandalism that these violent protesters brought to the streets. Indeed, their actions not only damaged property but put many lives at risk. Now, whether one agrees or not with their violent tactics, at a completely different level, the protesters achieved what they set out to do, namely to steal some of the spotlight away from the world leaders, and focus it on their issues.
These tactics have followed every power summit over the last decade including the World Trade Organisation summits in Seattle (1999) and Geneva (2009). What these protesters signal is that there are alternative voices that must be heard. Their biggest problem is that the violent tactics they choose tend to overpower the message they are attempting to deliver.
Nonetheless, when it comes to putting issues in the forefront, without glorifying or emulating the violence, African leaders could learn a thing or two from the protesters. This is because on matters about Africa, the G8 has dictated what it sees as good for the continent. Take, for example, this past weekend’s summit which produced the declaration entitled “Recovery and New Beginningsâ€.
In the declaration, the G8 leaders commit to continue working with African partners “in support of African-led efforts to build a more stable, democratic and prosperous… †The leaders also commit to reducing infant mortality, maternal health and ensuring food security. Now these are all worthy goals to be supported, however, what stood out from the beginning of the G8 summit of these seven powerful men and a woman was that the G8 leaders were keen to be seen to be doing something about Africa.
And although the Heads of State of Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia (as Chair of the NEPAD Heads of State and Government Orientation Committee), Malawi (as Chair of the African Union), Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa were invited to the G8 in Muskoka, the unshakable impression is that the superpowers already knew beforehand what Africa wants, and how to respond to those African needs.
In reality though, each of the G8 nation chooses the kind of project that it will fund and those it will not. Moreover, the G8 nations are not accountable to the pledges they make as part of the photo-ops at these summits. At the 2005 G8 Summit at Gleneagles, Scotland, for example, the leaders pledged to “increase aid to developing countries by around $50b a year by 2010â€, at least $25b going to Africa.
To date, the G8 nations have not kept their pledges which have so far reached only about $20b, of which Africa barely received a trickle. The excuse is that there is lack of accountability on the part of Africans leaders, which is true enough. But one suspects also that these goals have not been met because the members of the G8 themselves lack transparency and accountability.
On the one level, they want the world to believe that there is a concerted effort to eliminate world poverty. But at another level, they do not want to be held accountable to the commitments they made toward reaching those goals.
To be able to get the G8 leaders to begin to speak about issues that African leaders feel should be talked about will require them to stage alternative summits to the G8 and G20. Such a summit could be called the G53, and it would coincide with the G8/20 summits, perhaps held just a few days before the G8/20 summit. The summit would focus on specific areas such as the economy, and articulate the priorities of Africa to spur development. This also would be the forum to speak about a single African currency which is more feasible today than it was five decades ago when Kwame Nkrumah dreamed of a united states of Africa.
The forum would address issues of trade between nations, how to buy from Africa before venturing out there to look for expensive goods from the developed nations. Now, while such a summit need not follow the raw and violent tactics used by the protesters this past week in the streets of Toronto, it could nonetheless force African leaders to look for solutions to Africa’s problems from within their ranks. Furthermore, it could force the developed nations to stop and listen to what Africa really wants.
Of course, the G8/20 leaders would not willingly give up the spotlight, but when the African G53 summit takes root, the power dynamics would change from a bunch of beggars waiting for handouts to a strong collective with the power to make things happen.
Opiyo.oloya@sympatico.ca