Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T00:38:04.968Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Lomé Convention: inching towards interdependence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Isebill V. Gruhn
Get access

Extract

The European Common Market and forty odd African, Caribbean, and Pacific States (ACP) signed a trade and aid Convention in February 1975. The negotiations leading to the Lome Convention and the provisions of the Lomé Convention constitute an instructive vehicle for an examination of North-South bargaining. The organization, tenacity, and skill of the ACP states, as well as some re-thinking regarding their own situation on the part of European states produced some innovative and groundbreaking moves toward more equitable trade and aid relations. But even the most innovative components of the Lome Convention, STAB EX, sugar indexing and focus on industrial development, are perhaps less significant for their short-term economic effects than they are for a general understanding regarding the structure of North-South relations.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , Spring 1976 , pp. 241 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a recent statement of this theme which is characteristic of the meager literature in this area see: Kothari, Rajni, Footsteps into the Future (New York: Free Press, 1974)Google Scholar.

2 For a cogent and timely discussion of these issues see Lewis, John “Oil and other Scarcities and Poor Countries,” World Politics Vol. 28, 10 1974, No. 1Google Scholar.

3 Azar, Edward E., Probe for Peace: Small State Hostilities (Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Co., 1973)Google Scholar; Baehr, Peter “Small States; A Tool for Analysis,” World Politics Vol. 28 No. 3, 04 1975Google Scholar; East, Maurice A. “Size and Foreign Policy Behavior: A Test of Two Modes,” World Politics Vol. 25, 07 1973CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fox, Annette Baker, The Power of Small States Diplomacy in World War II, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1959)Google Scholar; Keohane, Robert O., “The Big Influence of Small Allies,” Foreign Policy, Spring 1971: 161–82Google Scholar;Keohane, Robert O., “Lilliputians, Dilemmas: Small States in International Politics,” International Organization, Vol. 22, Spring 1969: 291–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rothstein, Robert L., Alliances and Small Powers (New York: Columbia University Press, 1968)Google Scholar; Singer, Marshal, Weak States in a World of Powers: The Dynamics of International Relationships (New York: Free Press, 1972)Google Scholar; and Vital, David, The Inequality of States: A Study of the Small Power in International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967)Google Scholar.

4 Baehr, “Small States.”

5 Nye, J. S., “UNCTAD: Poor Nations' Pressure Group,” in Cox, Robert W. and Jacobson, Herold, eds., The Anatomy of Influence: Decision Making in International Organization (New Haven, 1973)Google Scholar; Walters, Robert S., “International Organizations and Political Communication, The Use of UNCTAD by Less Developed Countries,” International Organization, Vol. 25, No. 4, 1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 For detailed discussions of the history and development of African EEC Association see: Zartman, William, The Politics of Trade Negotiations between Africa and the European Economic Community: The Weak Confront the Strong (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1971)Google Scholar, Okigbo, Pnc, Africa and the Common Market (London: Longmans Green and Co., 1967)Google Scholar.

7 K. Nkrumah as quoted in Zartman, ibid., p. 215.

8 Nye, Joseph Jr, Pan Africanism and East African Integration (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See especially Chapter 7.

9 Philip, Kjeld, etc., Intra-African Economic Co-operation and Africa's Relations with the European Economic Community (Economic Commission for Africa, United Nations, 1972.)Google Scholar E/CN.14/L409/WP 6, p. 6, Table 1.

10 Ibid., Table II.

11 Ibid. Tables III and IV.

12 West Africa, 2 July 1973, p. 883.

13 Ibid., 10 Feb. 1975, p. 153.

14 For a complete text of the ACP-EEC Convention of Lomé see: Lomé Dossier reprinted from The Courier, No. 31, Special Issue, March 1975.

15 Kjeld Philip, Economic Commission for Africa Study, E/CN/14/L409.

16 Deniau was the European Commissioner then in charge of Development and Cooperation. For a discussion of the Deniau Memorandum see West Africa, 16 April 1973, pp. 490–1.

17 For a full description of M. Cheysson's background in this regard see: Gruhn, Isebill V., Functionalism in Africa: Scientific and Technical Integration. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1967, Chapter 2Google Scholar.

18 West Africa, 4 February 1974, pp.113–4

19 For discussions regarding the significance of the Jamaica Conference see West Africa, 5 August 1974, p. 457, and Lomé Dossier, p. 5.

20 See Lomé Dossier, p. 6.

21 Lomé Dossier, p. 23.

22 Protocol I, No. I, Title I, Lomé Convention.

23 Title II, Chapter I, Lomé Convention.

24 Protocol III, No. Ill, Lomé Convention.

25 Title III, Lomé Convention.

26 Title IV, Lomé Convention. In January 1975 a unit of account (UA) was the equivalent of $ US 1.24.

27 West Africa, 16 June 1975, p. 692.

28 Ibid., 30 June, 1975, p. 753.

29 The Economists, February 1,1975, p. 52 and August 2, 1975, pp. 70–1.

30 It would appear, for example, that the African Bloc at the Law of the Sea Conferences is forging a good deal of unity regarding its demands at the expense of the needs and desires of some of the weaker and disadvantaged states in the African Bloc. Hollick, for example, calls attention to African organization and unity as compared to other regions. Yet in her discussion of demands made by Africans at the conference one would be led to conclude that the views of the stronger African states appear to prevail. See Hollick, Ann ‘What to Expect from the Sea,“ Foreign Policy, No. 18, Spring 1975Google Scholar.

31 For a general discussion of the ECOWAS Treaty see West Africa, 16 June 1975, p. 678–9.

32 For a useful discussion of the role of interest aggregation and interest articulation as it pertains to LDC's in multilateral discussions see Walters, Robert S., “International Organizations and Political Communications,” International Organization, Vol. 25, No. 4, Autumn 1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar.