| Summary: | This study deals with relations between the member states of the European Community and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries all of which are signatories to the Lome Convention. It traces the origins of Eurafrican association to the relations which existed between France and her colonies and Britain and the Commonwealth. It then examines ACP organs and EEC institutions for negotiation and policy implementation but focuses on the ACP countries. The thesis aims principally to determine the appropriateness of ACP diplomacy to the objectives of ACP-EEC cooperation and theoretical concepts pertaining to group diplomacy, coalition formation, influence, conflict and cleavages are used to analyze the procedures involved in the negotiation of common ACP positions. The thesis is based on the consideration that cooperation between developed and developing countries can neither be ignored nor avoided and that, judging by the historical fact of interdependence among states, it is reasonable for the ACP countries to attempt to maximise the benefits of their EEC connections. The investigations in this study suggest that as a result of the underdeveloped economic and political potentials of the ACP countries, ACP diplomacy is essentially reactive especially over bread-and-butter issues such as aid and trade cooperation with the EEC. These issues, incidentally, are at the fore of ACP-EEC relations. However, there is also evidence that ACP diplomacy can be dynamic where life-and-death issues such as toxic waste dumping and environmental degradation in Africa are concerned. ACP-EEC cooperation has so far failed to meet the ultimate aim of redressing development problems in the ACP states. But, the ACP-EEC relationship is in fact a model representation of general North-South relations and this failure should be placed in that context. However, an exception is taken to the line of argument in development theory which puts all blame on the North for the inability of the South to achieve economic success. The argument reinforces the notion of incapacity on the part of the ACP countries to find solutions to their own problems and inappropriately takes away blame, as well as responsibility for policy implementation and economic development, from the ACP countries. An alternative view is adopted that the quest for a panacea to the social, economic and political problems of the ACP countries should be conducted from within the ACP group with improved and strengthened institutions and the postulates of such a search should help shape ACP positions in ACP-EEC cooperation.
|
|---|
