Is Tanzania sabotaging Kenya's economic interests?
Jan. 14, 2017, 12:00 am
By ELIUD KIBII @eliudkibil
THOUGH arguable, monogamy is likely to have less push and pull than polygamy. The reason is the number of interests in that marriage, given the number of parties. The EAC is in the latter category, and the problem is currently about the Economic Partnership Agreement, popularly known as the EPA. It is a scheme to create a free trade area between the EU and the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of states. The EPAs are intended to enhance regional integration and economic development in the ACP countries. They are based on the principle of asymmetrical market openings — providing better access to the EU market for ACP partners for agricultural and fisheries products.
For the umpteenth time, the EAC has pushed forward the signing of the EPA agreement with the EU. This follows the deferment of the EAC Heads of State meeting to February after it was postponed in November. The EPA was the key agenda.
This is despite the Council on June 20 last year authorising, on behalf of the EU, the signature and provisional application of the EPA. The signing date was scheduled for July 18. Almost needless to say, the expiry of the period given to sign this deal was October 2014. This is a very important arrangement for Kenya. But Tanzania appears to be totally uninterested. It pulled out in July, citing the “turmoil following Brexit”.
But is Tanzania deliberately sabotaging Kenya’s national interests, particularly economic?
Kenya has established itself as the regional hub for trade, investments and finance in East Africa. Its 2014 documented Foreign Policy is to a great extent directed towards the region through economic diplomacy.
This has necessitated more commitment in co-operation with neighbouring states to mould the EAC into a more viable economic bloc in an increasingly liberal economic environment.
Tanzania won’t play ball.
Admittedly, integration constrains states from pursuing certain undertakings they may want to pursue inasmuch as the identification and definition of those preferred policies are shared. This led to the Coalition of the Willing that comprised Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Rwanda, leaving out Burundi and Tanzania.
Given the strategic importance of the EU market to key agricultural sectors such as coffee, tea and horticulture, Kenya’s trade diplomacy is likely to exert increasing pressure on dismantling the tariff and non-tariff barriers that undermine market access. That is why Kenya is pushing for the EPA.
But Tanzania thinks this was designed to kill the local manufacturing sector. Former President Benjamin Mkapa last year at the University of Dar es Salaam said, “I don’t understand how such a powerful trade bloc [EU] can have a free trade agreement with the developing economies of Africa. There is no way that our small economies can have a free trade agreement with Europe”.
The issue here is national interests.
This lack of commitment in fast-tracking the EPAs deal is because of the difference in mutual compatibility, intensity and urgency of respective national interests. But Kenya is in a fix.
Silas Kiragu, deputy High Commissioner in Nigeria, told me in 2014 that where the EAC integration has reached, it is close to impossible for Kenya to conduct any diplomatic agreements without considering the regional bloc.
Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and Tanzania have an option to rely on the Everything But Arms Trade arrangement, which Kenya doesn’t qualify for.
Failure to sign the EPA will subject Kenyan exporters to import duties of between five and 8.5 per cent. The impact is that Kenya could lose at least Sh7.8 billion in duty paid for its exports to the EU, and risk the collapse of an economy employing more than 150,000 people. All the other trade blocs in the continent have signed EPAs. The EU negotiates on behalf of its 28 members and, therefore, expects the EAC to do the same on behalf of its members.
This is not the first time we are in this situation. Tanzania and Burundi have previously refused to attend a series of infrastructure talks launched by Kenya, Uganda, and Rwanda on the presumption that the projects will not benefit them.
In addition, a quest by the region to implement a single tourist visa suffered a setback after Tanzania, supported by Burundi, said it was not ready to join the arrangement. The other three countries went ahead and implemented the visa under the Coalition of the Willing.
The East African Common Market Scorecard by the World Bank indicates Tanzania has so far been the worst performer in eliminating NTBs at 66 per cent, compared to Rwanda, which has eliminated 94.1 per cent and Kenya at 85.5 per cent. Further, Tanzania and Burundi regulations make the two nations that are unfortunately the most difficult to move capital into and out of their borders.
For its own benefit, Kenya needs to react to circumstances at hand in this marriage accordingly, without compromising on what is key to its survival and prosperity.
You can not be serious! Do your home work..........As Tanzanian, single visa and EPA sounds good really but it is not for us as Tanzania, we are too good and better than that, We have all it takes to be what we wanna be. Good luck with single visa thingii which till now has done not a thing since launched.
Jan. 14, 2017, 12:00 am
By ELIUD KIBII @eliudkibil
THOUGH arguable, monogamy is likely to have less push and pull than polygamy. The reason is the number of interests in that marriage, given the number of parties. The EAC is in the latter category, and the problem is currently about the Economic Partnership Agreement, popularly known as the EPA. It is a scheme to create a free trade area between the EU and the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of states. The EPAs are intended to enhance regional integration and economic development in the ACP countries. They are based on the principle of asymmetrical market openings — providing better access to the EU market for ACP partners for agricultural and fisheries products.
For the umpteenth time, the EAC has pushed forward the signing of the EPA agreement with the EU. This follows the deferment of the EAC Heads of State meeting to February after it was postponed in November. The EPA was the key agenda.
This is despite the Council on June 20 last year authorising, on behalf of the EU, the signature and provisional application of the EPA. The signing date was scheduled for July 18. Almost needless to say, the expiry of the period given to sign this deal was October 2014. This is a very important arrangement for Kenya. But Tanzania appears to be totally uninterested. It pulled out in July, citing the “turmoil following Brexit”.
But is Tanzania deliberately sabotaging Kenya’s national interests, particularly economic?
Kenya has established itself as the regional hub for trade, investments and finance in East Africa. Its 2014 documented Foreign Policy is to a great extent directed towards the region through economic diplomacy.
This has necessitated more commitment in co-operation with neighbouring states to mould the EAC into a more viable economic bloc in an increasingly liberal economic environment.
Tanzania won’t play ball.
Admittedly, integration constrains states from pursuing certain undertakings they may want to pursue inasmuch as the identification and definition of those preferred policies are shared. This led to the Coalition of the Willing that comprised Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Rwanda, leaving out Burundi and Tanzania.
Given the strategic importance of the EU market to key agricultural sectors such as coffee, tea and horticulture, Kenya’s trade diplomacy is likely to exert increasing pressure on dismantling the tariff and non-tariff barriers that undermine market access. That is why Kenya is pushing for the EPA.
But Tanzania thinks this was designed to kill the local manufacturing sector. Former President Benjamin Mkapa last year at the University of Dar es Salaam said, “I don’t understand how such a powerful trade bloc [EU] can have a free trade agreement with the developing economies of Africa. There is no way that our small economies can have a free trade agreement with Europe”.
The issue here is national interests.
This lack of commitment in fast-tracking the EPAs deal is because of the difference in mutual compatibility, intensity and urgency of respective national interests. But Kenya is in a fix.
Silas Kiragu, deputy High Commissioner in Nigeria, told me in 2014 that where the EAC integration has reached, it is close to impossible for Kenya to conduct any diplomatic agreements without considering the regional bloc.
Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and Tanzania have an option to rely on the Everything But Arms Trade arrangement, which Kenya doesn’t qualify for.
Failure to sign the EPA will subject Kenyan exporters to import duties of between five and 8.5 per cent. The impact is that Kenya could lose at least Sh7.8 billion in duty paid for its exports to the EU, and risk the collapse of an economy employing more than 150,000 people. All the other trade blocs in the continent have signed EPAs. The EU negotiates on behalf of its 28 members and, therefore, expects the EAC to do the same on behalf of its members.
This is not the first time we are in this situation. Tanzania and Burundi have previously refused to attend a series of infrastructure talks launched by Kenya, Uganda, and Rwanda on the presumption that the projects will not benefit them.
In addition, a quest by the region to implement a single tourist visa suffered a setback after Tanzania, supported by Burundi, said it was not ready to join the arrangement. The other three countries went ahead and implemented the visa under the Coalition of the Willing.
The East African Common Market Scorecard by the World Bank indicates Tanzania has so far been the worst performer in eliminating NTBs at 66 per cent, compared to Rwanda, which has eliminated 94.1 per cent and Kenya at 85.5 per cent. Further, Tanzania and Burundi regulations make the two nations that are unfortunately the most difficult to move capital into and out of their borders.
For its own benefit, Kenya needs to react to circumstances at hand in this marriage accordingly, without compromising on what is key to its survival and prosperity.
You can not be serious! Do your home work..........As Tanzanian, single visa and EPA sounds good really but it is not for us as Tanzania, we are too good and better than that, We have all it takes to be what we wanna be. Good luck with single visa thingii which till now has done not a thing since launched.
