By Sanjay Suri
LONDON, Oct 14 2003 (IPS)

New proposals over aid presented to the European Union come as a further threat to developing countries, two groups of leading non-governmental organisations in Britain and Germany said Tuesday.

The new dangers come from supposedly legal amendments to an earlier draft for a pan-European constitution. The draft constitution has been prepared by a convention on the future of the European Union (EU).

“The amendments were meant to focus on the legal coherence of the document,” Howard Mollett, the EU campaigns officer for the British Overseas NGOs for Development (BOND) told IPS Tuesday. “But every little change can have legal implications.”

BOND, which is a network of 280 British non-governmental organisations (NGOs), had expressed concern earlier over proposals that would subordinate development aid to a collective foreign policy proposed in the new Constitution.

According to BOND, the publication of the legal amendments to the constitution makes the threat more real now.

At the heart of the BOND objection lies the third broad section of the proposed constitution. This section deals with issues of development cooperation, humanitarian aid, and a third sub-section that covers economic, financial and technical assistance.

“But each of these sections covers a different kind of aid, and it is good that they were listed in separate sub-sections,” Mollett says.

“That division made it clear that the third sub-section on economic, financial and technical assistance does not cover developing countries. It is for middle income countries, and for countries that will be joining the EU.”

Ten countries are due to join the EU May next year.

“The legal amendments now presented blur the distinction between what is listed as economic, financial and technical assistance, and what is marked as development aid,” Mollett says.

On the face of it these could seem official and subtle points of language. But an overlap of language here could have deep and long-lasting effects on what the EU does with its aid programme, BOND says.

“The EU would now be able to pick and choose when and where to use the development policy framework for developing countries,” Mollett says.

“If aid is given to a country under the third category on economic, financial and technical assistance, then the EU will not be bound to refer to commitments on human rights or poverty reduction.”

BOND said in a statement Tuesday that this blurring of distinctions “could worsen the trend for European Commission (EC) aid to be used as a foreign policy tool to support countries on Europe’s borders and allocated away from those countries which need it most.”

Last year 60 percent of EC aid was allocated to middle income countries. The EC is the executive arm of the EU.

The new amendments serve only “to perpetuate the current confusion over EU development aid,” Mollett says.

That confusion is underlined in the separation of concerns over international development under commissioner for development Poul Nielson and the commissioner for external relations Chris Patten from the European Commission.

“There is a clear power struggle between the two,” Mollett says. “We need a clear legal framework to set out what money will go where.”

BOND expressed strong concern over the current EU Treaty talks over the role of a new EU foreign minister who would also have charge of development aid.

It said the current proposals in the draft Treaty of a new constitution will subordinate development to foreign policy.

Similar reservations were articulated by the Association of German Development NGOs (VENRO) Tuesday.

VENRO is the umbrella organisation of 100 independent and church related NGOs working in the fields of development cooperation, emergency assistance, development education, and advocacy.

VENRO chairman Reinhard Hermle strongly objected to the plan to place “all EC instruments”, including aid, at the disposal of the new EU Foreign Minister.

“It is essential that also under the new treaty, we have an independent EU Commissioner for development cooperation and humanitarian aid,” Hermle told IPS in Bonn, Germany.

That commissioner, said Hermle, must be a full-fledged member of the European Commission, enjoying the same status as other commissioners.

“Development policy must not be swallowed by European security and defence policy. It must not be allowed to become an instrument of foreign and economic interests of the EU,” Hermle added.

According to VENRO and BOND, EU Treaty proposals on foreign and security policy imply that EC development and humanitarian aid will become a resource for the new EU Foreign Affairs Minister and the nascent ‘European Security and Defence Policy’ (ESDP).

VENRO’s Hermle said “some of the positive and most welcome aspects of the EU Treaty should not be watered down”.

BOND said it welcomes the pledges to focus EU development cooperation on poverty reduction, human rights and sustainable development. “But these positive commitments are mostly preambular and rhetorical.”

“Europe has the potential to be a progressive global player,” says Mikaela Gavas, EU policy officer with BOND. “For that to happen, the new EU Treaty must strengthen and safeguard the political space for development, not undermine it.”

Meanwhile, BOND members have won support from several Members of Parliament over their concerns. They have invited BOND to give evidence on the development implications of the Treaty at a House of Commons select committee hearing on Nov. 6 and at a House of Lords select committee hearing Oct. 30.

Excerpt: