Brown snubs EU/Africa conference

Brown has snubbed the EU/Africa conference which is bringing together 27 EU and 53 African nations together for the first time since 2000. Baroness Amos, an former cabinet minister, is standing in for PM Brown.
The move has been criticized by EU leaders and his own political party. Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, cited that the conference gave the oppurtunity for the EU to 'raise all our criticisms about the disaster in Zimbabwe'. Bertie Ahern, the Irish leader, said that the boycott was an 'total waste of time' and Levy Mwanawasa, the Zambian preisdent and chairman of the Southern African Development Community of 14 nations said 'The solution cannot be to boycott Zimbabwe.

So why did he do it?
Gordon Brown made the move as an protest against Mugabe's extremely poor human rights record and the poor way he has run the economy where inflation has gone through the roof. Mirek Topolanek, the Czech leader, is the only other EU leader to pull out the conference.

What was the main aim of the conference?
Portugal came up with the idea, it feels strongly that the colonial relationship between the two continenents should be broken and allow for more international trade and development to allow Africa to prosper. Portugal wants the EU and afirca to forge new ties in trade, the economy and culture. Obviously there is also the Chinese question, as the EU fears that Chinese influence is winning over the Africans.

What is the level of Chinese involvement in Africa?
China has been an powerful force in Africa ever since 1960, when it attempted to secure diplomatic goals. It started building infrastructure such as stadiums and schools. Sino-African has caused an boom, growing to 700% during the 90's, last year it reached $63 billion. China's foreign direct investment in Africa represented $900m of the Continent' $15 billion total in 2004. China's GDP growth has averaged 9% per year for 20 years and it has been the world's second largest oil consumer sice 2003. Wealth and energy demand has led China to deeper involvement in Africa. China has offered trade and aid to 26 African countries. Angola exports 25% of it's oil to china, and beijing has pledged an $2 billion package of loans and aid. Official figures show there were 82,000 Chinese workers in 2005, 40,000 more than in 2004. China has also an large stake in providing weapons for warring nations, such as Ethiopia and it's hostile neighbour Eritrea, China has provided an estimated $1 billion of weapons before and during their border war from 1998 to 2000. China has also cancelled $10 bullion in bilateral debt from African countries, sent almost a thousand doctors to treat Africans across the continent and hosts thousands of African workers and students.

What is Europe doing in Africa?
The Eu has been Africa's largest donor and as an bloc the continent's biggest economic and trade partner. EU imports form Africa reached $184million in 2005 whilst exports reached $184million. Development aid in 2006 totalled $70 billion. Responding to China's growing influence, the EU has moved from a strategy "for Africa" to an political partnership "with Africa". The new plan involves:
* Increasing development aid
* Closer ties between commercial and cultural institutions
* African union intergration, allowing the EU to treat 'Africa as one'

Half of all EU imports come from Africa and are energy products. The EU will develop Africa's energy industry, creating closer political tis and the chance for European companies to work in Africa. The Clean Development Mission will promote an partnership on climate change and create new markets for European technology and expertise. There's also plans to join political institutions at several levels including:
* Dialogue between the EU parliament and the Pan-African parliaments and the EU and African Union commissions
* Jointly developed approaches to global affairs

Mugabe's involvement in the conference
It is widely known that Mugabe has an awful human rights record, so the question is asked 'why is he in the EU?" An attempt to hold an summit, similar to this year's, fell through with questions being raised over Mugabe's presence. Although Mugabe, and 130 members of his regime, are banned from the EU, there has been an exception made for international conferences. He was never invited by name, but Portugal have written him an VISA. Many ask why other African leaders have supported Mugabe and strong democracies such as South Africa haven't got involved with taking him down. The answer is simple, the leaders of the African nations, don't want to be seen to be siding with the 'white colonists in the EU' and Mugabe is reknown as one of the heroes who led his country to freedom against white rule, hence why few African leaders dare to criticise him.
However, although Britain and the Czech Republic are the only countries to pull their leaders out of the conference, there is still a lot of content. The Spanish foreign minister Miguel Angel Moratinos said he did not want Mugabe to attend and the Portuguese Foreign Minister Luis Amado said it would be 'preferable if he was not there'. The chairman of the AUC, Alpha Oumar Konare, said that Mugabe's attendance was an matter of principle.

What does Mr Brown's boycott of the conference highlight about his foreign policy?
Downing Street says he is taking a stand on a matter of principle by not going. However, he does look like he has no avid interest in foreign affairs, an contrast to Tony Blair, and he is a lot more keen to stay at home rather than make trips to international conferences. Next week he may miss the signing of the new EU treaty because of an diary clash. Downing street said that his appearance before a committee of MPs in Westminster was more important than his attendance at the EU/African summit.

Should we be fearful of China in Africa?
Yes and No. From 2002 to 2003 china's involvement in Africa is not what it was back in the 60's and 70's, where it was trying to gain political leverage to win over communists states. However, the Chinese African trade market seems more appealing to the Africans than the European. However, the EU is a lot more concerned for African development and infrastructure, whilst China seems to be the complete opposite selling military aircraft to war-torn Sudan and Zimbabwe. However, the money coming out of China does give the money to African states that need it and so does the cancellation of debts, but the question is in terms of Somalia and The Sudan, whose pocket is this money going to? Same can be said about the EU, but not to such an high degree. Again, Africa has fallen under an 'cold' battlefield over materliastic goods such as Oil and precious stones. The only loser is the African's who die daily because of this greed.