Tale of modern times told in Burkina Faso

One of my friends, a farmer and former soldier, used to relish telling me the following story at some of our moonlight wakes.

The setting, he says, is France in May 1968. It is already dark. The hen has locked herself up inside the hen-house, when the fox approaches. He stops at the fence and turns on his radio. A journalist is just reporting from the student uprising and tells listeners that on walls all around Paris the slogan is “It is forbidden to forbid”. He switches off his radio and turns to the hen: “Did you hear that? Times have changed. It is now forbidden to forbid!”

“So what? says the hen. What does that change for us?”

“It means that if you want to be up to date, as of tomorrow you should leave the door open, when you get out of the hen-house. You can no longer forbid anyone to enter“. Upon these words he is off and on his way.

The following morning, after a good night’s sleep, the hen wakes up and gets out to look for food. She is just about to close the door, when she is reminded of the fox’s words. “Of course, I am bang à la mode” she says and leaves the door open.

When she returns in the evening, she gets inside her hen-house to get some sleep. She is just about to close the door, when she changes her mind, remembering the fox. “I forgot that I am now modern! I must leave the door open. I must adapt to modern times. If not, the fox is going to make fun of me.” Therefore, she leaves the door open and falls into the blissful sleep that befalls a pure conscience.

A few moments later the fox moves towards the hen-house, careful not to make any noise, thinking “Will the hen be stupid enough not to close her door?” As he gets nearer, he instantly sees that it stands wide open. Just one big leap and he snatches the hen and devours her!

This tale, I think, is a perfect illustration of what Europeans are telling the Africans at present, in an attempt to bring African countries to sign a form of agreement, which will have dramatic consequences for its population.

In Brussels I attended a meeting with the Commission and members of the European Parliament, who were following the negotiations for the conclusion of an Economic Partnership Agreement. The Commission’s representative explained that there is no alternative to today’s liberalism. The European union can do only to one thing to help the ACP countries (Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific): bring them to modernise their economy and open their frontiers. “Liberalism is life” he said. In other words “Be modern! Accept free trade!

Europe is trying to persuade the African countries that “adapting to modern times” means: “Leave your door open! Abolish your customs duties! Accept free trade as it comes, undiluted and straight from the tap!”

If Europe were less of a hypocrite and less ferocious in its dealings with Africa, it would talk in completely different terms. Saying for example: “You wish to develop milk production? Start by taxing imported powder milk! Look at us! Our milk sector is far ahead of yours. Nevertheless we have not stopped protecting it! In our countries imported milk is taxed at 75%, whereas you take out only a 5% customs tax.” There could be many more examples from Europe.

The Europeans could tell the Africans: “Make use of our experience. When we negotiate trade agreements with other countries, we carefully avoid liberalising everything. We only do it where it brings us a benefit, be we refuse free trade for a whole range of products, when it would be to the detriment of our producers. You should exclude just as many items as we did in our free trade agreements - with Chile 471 customs positions where left out of any reduction in tariffs), 631 in the agreement with Mexico, 324 with South Africa. The items excluded regarded such products as meat, dairy products, cereals, wheat, sugar and processed food.

If Europe intended to build up a true partnership – instead of strengthening its domination over Africa – it would supply its West African trading partners with useful advice and tell Africa to follow its example, i.e. introduce two kinds of import duties, which could be applied simultaneously. Why not tax imported rice at a rate of 20% instead of the present 10% and add a flat rate per kg of, for instance 100 CFA francs? The EU makes frequent use of this technique. Why should this not be open to West Africa in its efforts to develop its agriculture? One could also suggest a customs duty of 1000 CFRA francs a piece for imported poultry. This is common practice in a number of countries. And there are many more examples bringing us to the conclusion that the entire External Customs Tariff system should be reformed.

But Europe is to Africa what our fox is to the hen in the story. And unfortunately, the African countries are much like the hen! What sort of event would it take to help the parties involved to change their attitudes?

Koudougou, 25 May 2006

Maurice Oudet

Director, SEDELAN