Global Elections: the race to be the next leader of the WTO

After 8 years in office, Pascal Lamy, the long-standing, cool-headed leader of the World Trade Organization will step down. Lamy (France, and former EC Commissioner for Trade) was the fifth Director-General of the WTO. Past leaders included Supachai Panitchpakdi (2002-2005, Thailand), Mike Moore (1999-2002, New Zealand), Renato Ruggiero (1995-1999, Italy) and Peter Sutherland (1993-1995, Ireland, also the last leader of the GATT). (WTO)

Lamy has presided over the WTO during some difficult times. Most notably, he has repeatedly tried–and failed–to revive the Doha round of trade talks. This has not been his fault, the D-G has limited power to impact members’ behaviors. And one could say that he has succeeded in fending off the complete death of the negotiations. However, one can wonder whether a fresh face might help revive talks.

Who is running for office?

According to Reuters, we only have two names at the moment (Reuters). Formal nominations will be made in December

The African Candidate
It is common for regional blocks to put forward their own candidates and the African Union may have the clearers mechanisms for doing this. Several potential African candidates have been mentioned. Nigeria’s Finance Minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, who also was an important candidate for the World Bank’s top job earlier this year, has reportedly expressed no interest in running for the WTO position (PeaceFMOnline). Nigeria’s current trade minister, Olusegun Aganga, has also been mentioned. Another possibility that has been mentioned is South Africa Trade Minister Rob Davies (Reuters). But apparently the AU has decided it will be none of the above. There are a number of reports stating that the African Union has decided that Ghana’s former trade minister, Alan Kyremanten, should hold the post (Ghana Joy Online; AfricaNews.com). Kyerematen currently is the trade advisor at the UN Economic Commission for Africa and head of the African Trade Policy Centre. (thisafrica.com). As Reuters reports, this was a contentious decision. However, if he can get all of Africa’s WTO members to back him, then that would be (a) the first time all of them supported the same candidate and (b) a significant portion of the WTO’s membership, which could go a long way towards getting him elected to the job.

New Zealand Again?
Another likely candidate is New Zealand’s trade minister Tim Groser. However, it has barely been a decade since someone from New Zealand held the post, making his chances unlikely (The New Zealand Herald).

Other possibilities
Reuters mentions a number of possible candidate from Mexico and Costa Rica, with some broader speculation about Brazil’s Ambassador to the WTO, Roberto Azevedo, as a possible Latin American choice.

Bottom Line
It is still way too early to tell what will happen in this competition for the WTO’s top job. But it is clear that the game is afoot.

Africa Notes: Angola’s Election

Reuters reported today the somewhat unsurprising challenge by Angola’s opposition party, UNITA, to the national election results of August 31st (Reuters). The ruling MPLA party, led by President dos Santos, won with 74 percent of the vote (Reuters). This was a legislative election, but the constitution–changed in 2010 under MPLA and Dos Santos direction–stipulates that the party leader should become president for a five-year term. Dos Santos has already served about 33 years.

MPLA’s advantages
The MPLA had key advantages going into the election, in terms of resources and influence over most media. It also is able to claim itself as the choice for peace and stability, given the near decade of peace that it has presided over since the end of the civil war (Reuters-Timeline-Angola). And that past decade has also been prosperous for Angola as a whole. Between 2002 and 2008, growth averaged an astonishing 17 percent per year. To further their case as the party of prosperity, the MPLA announced a platform with a main focus on combating hunger and extreme poverty.

The opposition’s case
The platform of the opposition groups have focussed on limited political and civil rights and–perhaps most directly–the growing economic inequality within Angola. UNITA and other opposition groups are quick to point out that benefits of a decade of economic growth have been unevenly realized (Reuters; Mail&Guardian). They accuse the government of mismanaging oil revenues.

In terms of the election itself, many were concerned about the lack of transparency in electoral rolls. And on the day of election there were reports of some irregularities. Perhaps even more seriously, one relatively new opposition group, CASA-CE, protested the imprisonment of its youth leaders (Global Voices). Finally, many claimed that the National Electoral Commission was biased in its attachment to the ruling MPLA party. The relatively low voter turnout of 57%, some suggest, might have to do with both the fraudulent conduct of the election and voter apathy in the midst of the inevitability of an MPLA win (Global Voices). It will be a little while before we know what types of impacts the opposition’s complaints to the National Electoral Commission will have.

My take on all of this
Many democracy advocates are upset about the conduct of the recent elections and the MPLA’s continued grip on power. And I agree that there are some legitimate grievances here. However, optimist that I am, I think there may be a few reasons to be optimistic about what happened here. First, I think that the practice of voting and participating in contested elections strengthens democracy. This was only the second election since the civil war ended and there was far more enlightened contestation in this one. Second, the MPLA and Dos Santos were forced in this election to consider and respond to the needs of those who feel left out of Angola’s rapid economic rise. I think there is a case to be made for thinking that the fledgling middle class in Angola may be starting to learn its important potential roles in Angolan democracy. Third, opposition groups also learned in this process. And while their challenges may not have much of an impact, the use of the official institutions–as frustrating as the process may be–could have an impact. Finally, there will be another window of opportunity in the next five years, whether from an early retirement by Dos Santos or through a regularly scheduled election, for both sides to take the lessons they are learning and apply them. I’m not optimistic that there will be a major shift in political power in that next election, but perhaps the one after? It take time to build a democracy.

Noted: DNC vs. RNC on the environment

Last week, with the RNC Convention, Romney raised more than a few eyebrows with his comments on climate change:

President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. MY promise…is to help you and your family. (Business Insider)

He paused in there just enough to get a laugh from the audience about Obama’s audacity to care about things like climate change. And this did not go unnoticed. The Examiner called it a “bizarre… laugh line”. Uri Friedman wrote for Foreign Policy that this might be the “most controversial line” in the speech:

Critics swiftly derided the comment. “That climate change laugh line is going to be in every documentary from the latter half of the 21st century,” Matt Novak wrote on Twitter. New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof tweeted that Romney’s “dismissiveness was appalling.”(Foreign Policy)

There clearly is a partisan divide on these issues, but as Fuentes-George notes on his blog, environmental issues have had Republican support in the past. Over at Legal Planet, there are some thoughtful posts by Matthew Kahn and Dan Farber about the partisan divide. Farber usefully shares his own attempt at making an objective side-by-side comparison as well.

One only needs to follow the blogs of the Sierra Club and similar environmental groups to discover very quickly who they think the best choice for President will be. Below is the infographic from a North Carolina chapter. Unfortunately, Obama himself seems to be less committed to doing something about climate change than he once was (energy biz). The most recent evidence of this may be his decision to OK drilling in the arctic (Reuters).wpid-energy-plan-2012-09-5-20-42.jpg

Course Planning for Students of Foreign Policy: Walt’s advice

Top ten things that would-be foreign policy wonks should study | Stephen M. Walt.

I’m not convinced that “wonk” is what most students aspire to. But Walt has some decent advice on what kinds of classes to take for those interested in careers in foreign affairs more generally.

#2: Statistics!  I keep telling my students to take a statistics or “methods” course. Glad to see this supported here.

#5: International Law: Maybe I should be teaching it more often?

I also like #10: Ethics. Like he says, not the kind of thing you can easily pick-up in a course. However, there are some courses that might help force you to think about these issues. In our department, the political theory courses would be a good place to look.

But I am on sabbatical this fall, so that may be all the course advice I will give!

Africa Notes: President Banda, changing the game

Joyce Banda’s ascension to the presidency of Malawi has been a game changer for that nation, and could be for Africa as well.

Domestic Game Changer
Politically, up until President Mutharika’s death, it seemed unlikely that Joyce Banda would wield major influence in that country, despite her status as his Vice President. Indeed, the former President Mutharika had seen Banda, his VP, expelled from his party in 2010 (Reuters). Mutharika, however, was facing growing opposition just prior to his death. His disputes with Western donors had led to reduced aid for the country. In an obituary, The Guardian noted that he went “from one of the most respected African leaders to a repressive despot in just two years” (The Guardian). Those frustrations are evident in Lucius Banda’s single “Life”. (h/t habanahaba).

Economically and politically, Malawi seemed headed for disaster.

Enter, Banda.

President Joyce Banda demonstrated she is different from the start. She fired an unpopular police commander and the foreign minister (brother of the former President), reshuffled the cabinet, and made a number of other administrative changes throughout the government (Africa Arguments, Reuters). She is also beginning to intervene in monetary policy, dropping the currency’s peg to the dollar (ICTSD). This may improve export performance.

She–apparently–has also come out in favor of removing bans on homosexuality in that country (though there is some confusion about the extent of this: Kim Dionne)

Donors have returned (Reuters). This may soon include a loan by the IMF as well (African Arguments).

Headlines immediately showed the hope both Malawians and many in the international community have felt:

This is a small, landlocked country, with a population of 15.4 million people, and a gross national per capita income of $330 (BBC). But Banda appears as principled and strong. And it appears that she has changed the situation for that country… for now. As Keith Somerville writes, Banda has brought “Malawi back from the brink.”

Game Changer for Africa
At the continental level, President Banda may prove to be a game changer as well, though her influence will be limited by Malawi’s relatively small stature. Mostly, she has an opportunity to shine as a leader with unique moral authority on the continent. This could stem from…

  • Her example as a woman leader and activist; and
  • Her approach to human and political rights.

The two themes the international media have paid most attention to are her stance on homosexuality and her apparent support for the ICC’s pursuit of al-Bashir. Unfortunately, the media may be getting both of these stories wrong. If she is taking moral stances on these issues, the motivations are muddied, at a minimum, by her clear need to appeal to Western donors for aid.

As has been widely reported, President Banda asked the African Union to prevent Bashir from taking part (Reuters). Now, the real question is her motivation. Unfortunately, any vision we might have of Banda as a visionary Western-style liberal leader may need to be qualified. There are at least two reasons beyond a concern for ethic and human rights for Banda’s decision here. Indeed, she does not clearly say anything about Bashir’s culpability and the moral or even legal implications of allowing him to attend a summit in Malawi.

  • It is about money (I). Malawi’s stated appeal to the AU was based on concerns about donors. The concern seems to be that allowing Bashir would look bad to donors which have only just started to give money again to Malawi. (It is notable too that some donors have suggested that anti-gay policies in Africa could be a reason to suspend or reduce aid.)
  • It is about money (II). Even before she was President, Banda was apparently unhappy with the idea that Malawi would be hosting the summit. As Rebecca Chimjeka reports, when Banda was still the VP she was opposed due to the costs of hosting a summit and the lack of assurances that there would be financial support from the AU or other African leaders. She did eventually receive the assurance, but one can wonder whether she thought that support adequate.

I am not sure what her long-term legacy will be, but Banda does seem to have an opportunity to wield Mandela-like moral authority in Malawi and across the continent. To do that, however, will require an even clearer articulation of a vision for her country and Africa. In the meantime, no one can argue that she has changed her own country’s economic and political situation… for now.

Africa Notes: ECOWAS acts in aftermath of coups

Regional cooperation in West Africa is such a unique thing. Where else do you see cooperation on economic matters appear to be so much more difficult that you switch to cooperating on security? Wasn’t the EU built on precisely the opposite logic?

BBC News – Ecowas to send troops after Mali, Guinea-Bissau coups.

Anyway, BBC (and others) are reporting what we have known would likely happen: ECOWAS is sending troops to deal with the aftermath of coups in Mali and Guinea-Bissau. Doing this in Mali makes a lot of sense to me. The situation is such a mess (political struggles over both regime transition and secession). And we can hope, based on its past, that Mali could return to a peaceful and democratic path once these issues get sorted. Not that this will be easy!

But I wonder if Guinea-Bissau might be a harder case. On the one hand, G-B’s problems are a little more straightforward: this is “just” a coup. But on the other hand, the prospects for a peaceful and democratic path are really pretty bad here. No president has ever finished their term in office. And, as Lesley Anne Warner notes, G-B is indeed quite coup-prone. The country has had twice as many coup incidents (10, including failed and alleged plots) as any other country in Africa since 2000. And that doesn’t even include the assassination of President Vieira in 2009! Reuters has a nice timeline of just a few of the events in their violent past.

All of that leads me to wonder: how will ECOWAS gauge success here? What is the exit strategy? Or are West African leaders trying to send some sort of hard signal to the elites in G-B that business-as-usual (coups every few years) cannot be tolerated? I just don’t quite know at this point.

By the way, in case you are wondering whether Africa has gone “coup-crazy” this year, Jay Ulfelder has a nice analysis that shows that, statistically, we are still within the norm (Dart-Throwing Chimp).

Africa Notes: Charles Taylor, Guilty!

The Special Court of Sierra Leone found Charles Taylor Guilty. Here is the summary of the judgment. As it states, he was found guilty of aiding and abetting the commission of 11 crimes, including terrorism, slavery, rape, and the use of child soldiers.

As a number of observers have noted, the guilty verdict falls short of the prosecution’s goals (The Economist). Mr. Taylor was not held directly responsible for any of these crimes. As Kevin Heller reports:

the judges have rejected the prosecution’s allegations that he participated in a JCE to commit the crimes alleged in the indictment or that he had effective control over the RUF soldiers who committed the crimes (i.e, no ordering or command responsibility).  The verdict represents a colossal victory for Taylor, even if it means that he will still receive a substantial sentence. (Opinio Juris)

However, as Heller also notes, Taylor is the second head of state to be found guilty by an international tribunal. (Before being tried at Nuremberg Karl Doenitz was President of Germany for 23 days after Hitler’s suicide. Milosevic could have been the second but he died before a verdict was reached.) (Opinio Juris).

Despite the weaker verdict, some victims apparently felt that some justice had been done here. Said the sister of one victim:

It’s good, this one is good, it’s a signal to other people that they should not completely use their money on war, ammunition, to destroy lives (Reuters)

Besides Opinio Juris, another good place to look for further reporting on this is IntlLawGrrls.

Africa Notes: Regional Trade and Integration

There has been some interesting online commentary on intra-regional trade in Africa.

Trade between African states may be increasing.
It is commonly observed that trade between African states is below what is typically seen in other regions of the world. However, as noted over at tralac, this might be changing. They quote Aileen Kwa:

In terms of non-oil exports Africa’s internal trade is almost on par with its exports to the EU. Furthermore, the trade growth rate within Africa is the second highest after China and before the United States and the EU. Therefore, it is very promising, also in terms of the quality of exports.

Europe should focus more on regional blocs in Africa
Paul Collier suggests that this might be a good time for Europe to reconsider some of its trade strategy with African states, which has often involved individual trade deals with African governments rather than more efficient engagement with Africa’s regional blocs.

And, as I note in my post on the WTO today, there may be more that Africa’s regional blocs need to do before regional integration succeeds
[Africa Notes: WTO Roundup]

South Africa’s attempt at being a gateway to Africa might be underscoring the need for greater regional integration.
Some discussion has been had regarding whether South Africa is–or can be–a gateway to Africa. Clearly it would like to be in that position. Last month, South Africa launched its Dube TradePort, a new international passenger and cargo airport. According to its website it can handle 7.5 million passengers per year right now and will eventually be able to handle 45 million. Its cargo terminal can handle 100,000 tons per year and eventually will handle 2 million tons (more than what LAX currently handles). However, some say this is not enough. Jacqueline Muna Musiitwa and Charles Wachira have a nice critique of the argument that South Africa is a gateway and note there are other competitors (including Angola) for that title in the near-future. TRALAC reports that SA’s most recent Industrial Policy Action Plan has some clues to some of the key challenges:

trade barriers are not the main impediment to raising Africa’s intraregional trade levels, which remain almost trivial when compared with goods and services flows in other territories.
Instead, the main constraints relate to the absence, or inadequacy, of the physical infrastructure linkages required to facilitate trade flows, as well as the continent’s under- developed production structures, which decreases the opportunity for trade in complementary value-added products. (tralac)