The European Commission is quite right to want to give the $1.6 billion surplus in its agriculture budget to African farmers. We look forward to both member governments and the European Parliament’s endorsing the payment to be made early next year.
The case for the donation is the stronger as the surplus is money unspent on farm export subsidies no longer needed because of markedly higher world prices. Ironically, it is this regime of subsidies that so disadvantages Third World farmers, particularly in Africa. Thus the proposal is both morally and economically justified. There is, however, a question of whether it is legal. If lawyers do decide the payment contravenes EU rules, then the rules must be changed. The law was made for man, not man for the law.
A further irony is that at almost the same moment that the extra aid for African farmers was being proposed, Brussels announced the withholding of precisely the same amount from Bulgaria because the government had failed to attack rampant corruption. Bulgaria is one of the EU’s newest members, joining in January 2007. In the past, the EU has given greater latitude to new member states as they put their houses in order. For example, considerable latitude was given to Greece, which joined in 1981. That the EU has decided to act so decisively against Bulgaria is perhaps an indication of the serious level of corruption, driven by mafias made up in part by the former members of the old Communist regime. With the collapse of state socialism these people were particularly adept at staking out for themselves the commanding heights of the business and banking sectors. The withholding of $1.6 billion from Bulgaria will have a condign effect on the country. However well spent in Africa, the same sum could have an immeasurably greater impact on African farming. Nor does this sum represent any great sacrifice for the wealthy EU nations. Brussels expends $190 billion representing 40 percent of its entire budget on agriculture. Put into perspective, the Europeans are spending on their own farming almost two thirds of the total Gross Domestic Product for the entire African continent.
This demonstrates both the substantial economic disparity between Europe and Africa and underlines the need for far greater international aid investment to help make African agriculture more productive and efficient. European and North American agricultural subsidies and their unfairness on Third World farmers is one of the vexed issues currently stalling the Doha Round of the World Trade Organization talks.
If Europe can afford to give $1.6 billion of unspent export subsidies to Africa, maybe its leaders should be asking themselves why they should not cut and save on the subsidies themselves and pass on that money also to boost the performance of agriculture in developing countries. European farmers will not unnaturally protest but what really is wrong with seeking to equalize agricultural production throughout a world that is already running short of food and where output has to be boosted in order to avert disaster?
