Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

46722Re: [Wanazuoni] Mkapa, Shivji denounce EU's trade pacts retrogressive

Expand Messages
  • juma mwapachu
    Jul 15, 2016
      I totally agree with Massawe and have shared my views on the 'Uongozi' platform for those like Maggid who contribute thereon. It is a platform which includes Ministers and MPs. Tanzania is fearing its own shadow; our failure to industrialize when it mattered. We betrayed Nyerere's industrialization philosophies and measures even when viewed in 'cloudy' lenses of 'Ujamaa'. The same leaders who embraced neo-liberalism and privatization which undermined Tanzania's long march towards creating a productive and competitive industrial base and which could have been leveraged through less interference from the State and creating partnerships with the private sector, Academia and R&D institutions like TEMDO and TIRDO, are now telling us that Tanzania cannot be part of global value chains in areas where we can benefit from ostensibly because EPA will expose us to pillage of our economies. Bullshit. Tanzania's global trade today in terms of industrial products and machinery is 90% aligned to China, India, South Korea, Japan and UAE. The EU is increasingly becoming a sunset partner. If anything, Tanzania, Africa and ACP countries benefit from commodity exports to the EU and have better returns from there than elsewhere. Tanzania which is at Second stage of the Industrial revolution in technology is not and will not compete with the EU countries EVER! The EU, USA etc are moving into the late stages of the Third Industrial Revolution and the Fourth has already stepped in. Our comparative and competitive advantages in industrial products will not be affected by EPA. And we have up to 25 years breathing space anyway. But do we have the right leaders and policies to make sense of even such breathing space? I have problems with Shivji and former Marxist colleague at the South Centre in Geneva who derailed Mkapa's thinking about the realities of global trade and economic dynamics. This is not College classroom stuff for goodness sake with all due respect. Let us not confuse the people. We fail to manage our economies properly and then we use out-dated ideologies as escape routes to justify isolationism in the name of neo-colonialism. When will this stop? Africa imports 90% of cereals it consumes at huge dollar costs because it fails to address basic integration and infrastructure development. Our leaders pillage our countries with illicit transfers of funds earned illegally from corruption funds which can make Africa less dependent on unnecessary external market goods. What is in EPA? Can Shivji tell us what applied research he has done to show how Africa's industrialisation will suffer 15 years down the line from signing the EPA? And now, if the other EAC countries ( and several SADC countries are signing it) sign the EPA what will happen the EAC Customs Union? It simply won't work. Tanzania would still become a market of the same industrial goods from the EU via Burundi or Uganda! 

      We need serious analysis of this matter and not the usual ideological discourses that are becoming absolutely stale in a different world. Refresh your ideas!

      JV Mwapachu.



      From: "'Dr. A. Massawe' massaweantipas@... [Wanazuoni]" <Wanazuoni@yahoogroups.com>
      To: "wanazuoni@yahoogroups.com" <wanazuoni@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, 15 July 2016, 12:18
      Subject: [Wanazuoni] Mkapa, Shivji denounce EU's trade pacts retrogressive

       

      My bit of contribution on the critical analysis on the subject Mkapa charged has not seen here:

      follows here:

      Me think EPA is a very good instrument which would impact rather than undermine sustainable growth in the industrial sector of Tanzania which is yet to achieve a deserved share of global manufacturing due to its unattractiveness to the leading manufactures in the world to expand or move in some of the industries they are operating elsewhere in the world.
       
      Tanzania’s opt out of EPA is counterproductive due to the following reasons:
       
      (1) The industries on R&D maintained competitiveness in the global market in terms of the qualities and prices of their products are the type which would impact sustainable growth in the industrial sector of Tanzania;
                                                                                                                                  
      (2)      Deployment of local conditions which attract leading  industrialists in the world to expand in and/or move in some of the R&D led industries they are operating elsewhere in the world is main of what would stimulate the evolution of global competitive industries which impact sustainable growth in the industrial sector of Tanzania;
       
      (3)  The Tanzania which is the cheapest to manufacture in, and, offers the biggest slice of the global market where its manufactured goods could be sold in at global competitive price will attract to the leading industrialists in the world to expand in and/or move in some of their R&D led industries operating elsewhere in the world, hence achieve sustainable growth in its industrial sector.
       
      (4)  But, The Tanzania which is cheapest to manufacture in, but, deploys protection which compromise the size of global market available for its manufactured goods to sell as one of the cheapest would become unattractive to the leading industrialists in the world to expand in and/or move in some of their R&D led industries operating elsewhere in the world, hence experience persistent deterioration of growth in its industrial sector;
       
      (5) That is, the other countries of EAC and the African Continent which partner with EU through EPA would become more attractive than the Tanzania which opts out of EPA to the global leading industrialists to expand in and/or move in some of their R&D led global industries, thanks to the bigger slice of the global market (which includes Tanzania and EU), their partnerships with EU through EPA would offer their industrial sectors to sell in their manufactured goods more reliably and cheaper than the industrial sector of Tanzania could sell its manufactured goods in;
       
      (6)   Moreover, EPA would stimulate rather than compromise growth in the industrial sectors of the countries of EAC and the African Continent which partner with EU through EPA, as it stimulates the industries costly manufacturing in the EU for the EU and the African markets to move and/or expand to these African countries where it would be cheaper to manufacture in for the same markets;
       
      (7) And that, the presence of high quality EU manufactured goods which sell cheaper in the markets of the other EAC and African countries in partnership with EU through EPA than they sell in the market of Tanzania which opts out of EPA, would definitely stimulate smuggling of the same from these other EAC and African countries into Tanzanian;
       
      (8)  As well as, the Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Australian and other global manufacturers African countries are working hard to attract in would go to the African countries which offer their manufactured good a bigger slice of the global market (thanks for the EPA instrument which add in the EU market) to sell more reliably and cheaper than the African countries which opt out of EPA could sell theirs in.
       
      Many who support Tanzania’s opt out of EPA argue that infant industries of developing countries like Tanzania won’t be able to compete those of the developed EU countries, not knowing that R&D led multinational manufacturers  are the main leaders of industrial sectors throughout the world, and that, EU manufacturers would always have goods they could manufacture in EU cheaper than they could manufacture them in East Africa, as well as, goods they could manufacture in East Africa cheaper than they could manufacture them in EU.
      They also base on faulty arguments that EPA would turn East African countries into net exporters of raw materials to EU and importers of manufactured goods from the same.
       (1) Why and what for smart global industrialists are going to produce in the EU what is costly to produce in for the EU and the East African markets where it is cheaper to produce the same for the same markets?!
       (2) Why and what for smart global industrialists are going to go for the costlier importation of raw materials from East Africa and manufacturing in the EU for the EU and East African Markets rather than go for the cheaper manufacturing in East Africa from East African raw materials for EU and East African markets?!
       
      HOW THE TAIFA STARS WHICH COMPETE IN THE GAMES WHICH INVOLVE THE STRONG TEAMS IN THE WORLD IS GOING TO BECOME ONE OF THE GLOBAL COMPETITIVE TEAMS?!



    • Show all 50 messages in this topic