Washington, DC — Criticism won't be heard at the conference table on the G-8's "Africa Day" Thursday. And it will only be faintly heard outside of the conference room. In fact, protestors will be kept almost 60 miles away in Calgary. Even the mountain hiking trails that surround the resort town of Kananaskis, where the Summit is taking place, are patroled by troops. But many questions will linger long after Kananaskis returns to normal.
At the center of "Africa Day" in Kananaskis is Nepad - the New Partnership for Africa's Development, a development plan shaped in Africa that aims to attract some US$64bn in investment from wealthy nations in return for pledges of adherence to democratic principles, human rights and reform of economic structures and practices.
An important part of Nepad's design has Africa's leaders making each other answerable through a "peer review" process for human rights abuses, corruption and mismanagement that have plagued many of the continent's nations. This approach say African leaders, avoids what they perceive as meddling by outsiders. Africa will not beg for money with "cap in hand," insists Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo who is Chair of the African group attending the Kananaskis Summit.
But from it's inception, Nepad has been criticized inside and outside of Africa as a top-down effort that ignores civil society even as it lays claim to being committed to "good governance."
Last month the Post newspaper of Zambia quoted academician Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika as calling Nepad "nothing much beyond a more sophisticated continuation of a partnership that could be likened to that between a rough and socially insensitive profit motivated Western capitalist, and a docile, economically disadvantaged exploited African horse."
In less rhetorically infused language, a 13-page policy paper released last week by the North-South institute raised three critical questions not likely to be answered by whatever words emerge at the end of the Kananaskis Summit: "Is a real parnership possible when the balance of power necessarily weighs on the side of developed countries...Is real ownership by African partners probable...How likely is it that real ownership by developing countries will lead donors to increase resource flows and reform aid policies, programs and practices?"
Even before "Africa Day" got underway, African participants were quietly expressing their own worries and dissatisfactions. They had hoped the G-8 nations would commit to a comprehensive aid package known as the Millennium Development Account, but they have been told that such a commitment will not be made.
Africans, who are supported in this by World Bank President James Wolfenshon, want half of that US$12bn fund directed toward the continent, but U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell told a Canadian television interviewer, "We will...make the case that there are other nations in the world that have a need for the kinds of funds we are about to make available."
Very privately, some African officials grumble that they are being penalized collectively because of the dissatisfaction with the way some African nations have responded to Zimbabwe's elections in March. After a ballot widely held to be deeply flawed, there was no overt action by African states against the Zimbabwe government. But these African officials argue that while the new African Union will have self-policing mechanisms, the current Organization of African Unity (OAU) does not.
Other claims on G-8 money are of greater concern to the United States. These include a desire for contributions from Europe and Japan for a proposed $20-billion subsidy for Russian nuclear disarmament, and the shortfall in a hoped-for US$5bn pot of money for rebuilding Afghanistan.
Issues of critical importance to Africa - debt relief and leveling the trade playing field - are not expected to be seriously considered, although the four African heads of state are certain to bring them up in their face-to-face meetings. Without coming to terms with these, say critics, Africa will continue to bear the pain of "reform" with little to show for it except for the need for more charity.
Africa's arduous struggle with the HIV/Aids pandemic seems not to be on the agenda either. "How can you talk about the future of sub-Saharan Africa without AIDS at the heart of the analysis?" asked Stephen Lewis, the UN Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS, speaking at the opening of the "G6B (Group of 6 Billion) The Peoples' Summit," an alternative to the G-8 Summit, that was held in Calgary.
Meanwhile, Tuesday, Amnesty International slammed G-8 nations for contributing to continued conflict in Africa, the Middle East and Asia through arms sales. "G-8's proliferating trade in arms and military aid undermines fundamental human rights and sustainable development," said Kate Allen of Amnesty, UK. According to Amnesty, each year Britain exports US$600m in arms to Africa.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Unexpectedly eclipsing discussion at this Summit, which for most of the year the world has been told would be coming to grips with Africa's needs, is continuing tension in the Middle East and the policy statement that President George Bush articulated Tuesday. "They cannot even stick to their own agenda," said Njoki Njehu, a Kenyan activist who also spoke at the G6B forum.
The larger issue of globalization, what Africa Action executive director Salih Booker has called "global apartheid" frames much of the criticism. "You have global minority rule where you have a small number of wealthy, primarily white countries that rule a world that's populated primarily by people of color of whom 800 million Africans are a significant part. We're focusing on the need to democratize the institutions that currently serve global apartheid like the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO, he told allAfrica.com.
No communique will be issued by the Summit, although a statement of support for Nepad is expected. The discussion now moves to South Africa, where the "Africa Union" replaces the OAU at the end of the month. Already critics are wondering what concrete results will emerge.
