Afro-flag Youth Vision and Oxfam International, two actively operating NGOs in Ethiopia, called upon African governments that are debating the progress of industrialisation in the continent at the opening of the African Union (AU) assembly to act jointly and block the threat posed by the European Union's (EU) Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs).

"The implementation of EPAs will have a critical negative impact on Africa's industrial development and economic policies," Abera Tola, a representative from Oxfam, said at the 10th ordinary session of heads of states and governments of the AU.

The EPA, an ambitious plan to facilitate the economic and political integration of Africa-Caribbean-Pacific (ACP) countries into a liberalised world market over the next 20 years, was declared in 2000 with the European Union (EU) in the Cotonou Agreement.

It replaced the previous Lomé Convention and provides for a general set of privileged relations between the EU and the ACP countries in matters of market access, technical assistance and other issues.

However, civil society and business groups in the ACP countries have studied the implications and come out with vigorous campaigns to stop the signing of the EPAs.

According to their claims, the Agreements will cause losses of jobs, government revenue and cuts in public services as developing countries are forced to open up their markets to the EU before they are ready.

In addition, critics claim it may bring corporate domination as ACP governments' ability to regulate big business is restricted and choose their own development strategies.

"An overwhelming number of studies indicate that the lowering of import tariffs will rob governments of significant revenue, forcing governments to cut expenditure on essential public services such as healthcare and education. This is clearly suicidal given the challenges Africa faces," Abera explains.

According to Oxfam, EPAs are skewed in favour of rich countries and threaten to leave 750 million poor people worse off than ever and hence demands a strict resistance against their coming to force.

It is explained by the two NGOs that, for example, for Burundi, Cameroon, Congo, Kenya and Mauritius the loss in tariff revenue is greater than their entire spending on health in a 'worst case' scenario. Furthermore, Gambia and Cape Verde stand to lose nearly 20pc of their total government revenue, while Ghana and Senegal will face a decline in revenue of 10pc.

Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade has recently said that African states should think twice before accepting the EPAs.

"Establishing a perfectly fair competition among European and African economies is totally asymmetrical," he remarked. "This amounts to accepting and deepening a de facto disequilibrium and totally exposing African markets to subsidised European products.

The negotiations on these EPAs started in September 2002 and were supposed to be completed by 2008 as a World Trade Organisation (WTO) waiver on the non-compatibility of the EU's preferential trade relations with ACP countries would expire by that time.

Accordingly, from November into December 2007, the European Commission (EC) continued pushing hard to get something achieved and by December 19, some 35 ACP countries had given in and initiated an "interim EPA" or "EPA-lite" with the EU, mainly to avoid tariff increases on their exports as of January 1, 2008. (The Caribbean signed a full EPA.)

The countries resisting the most are Senegal, South Africa, Nigeria and many so-called least-developed countries (which will be able to fall back on market access preferences through the EU's Every-But-Arms deal).

"In Lisbon, African leaders made the point very clear. Now Africa's leaders must clearly articulate that an African common position is necessary," Eyob Balcha of the Afro-flag said.

He finally called upon all African leaders to jointly address this at the highest political level as it may jeopardise the existing benefits of trade under the Cotonou Agreement or reverse attempts towards industrialisation.