No C 221/16 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 8. 89 
Opinion on the Mediterranean policy of the European Community 
(89/C 221/05) 
On 25 January 1989 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the fourth paragraph 
of Article 20 of its rules of procedure, decided to draw up an Opinion on the Mediterranean 
policy of the European Community. 
The Section for External Relations, Trade and Development Policy, which was responsible 
for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 16 June 1989. 
The rapporteur was Mr Andrea Amato. 
At its 268th plenary session (meeting of 12 July 1989), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion by 45 votes to 19, with 17 abstentions (vote recorded). 
1. Introduction 
1.1. In its Opinion of 31 January 1985 (J), the Com­
mittee commented on the Commission communication 
concerning the implementation of a Mediterranean pol­
icy for the enlarged Community (2). The Communi­
cation, which was referred to the Committee, set out the 
Commission's first proposal for negotiating additional 
protocols to supplement existing association and coop­
eration agreements, and new financial protocols, with 
twelve non-EEC Mediterranean countries (TMCs)(3). 
The Opinion broadly supported the Commission pro­
posals, but also offered some comments and sugges­
tions. 
The Committee regrets to note that some of its more 
important comments have been ignored in the protocols 
(now finalized), and by the Council. This is, for exam­
ple, the case with the Committee's comments on social 
cooperation and trade in industrial products. 
1.2. The Committee is forced to note that the Com­
mission and the Council did not consult it on sub­
sequent Commission proposals (on adjustments to trade 
arrangements (4) and economic cooperation (5), nor on 
various recommendations for Council Decisions on the 
conclusion of protocols with individual TMCs. 
1.3. The Community's relations with the TMCs have 
entered into a new stage with the implementation of 
the new protocols. However, relations are clouded by 
some worrying developments and dissatifaction, in both 
the TMCs and the Mediterranean regions of the Com­
munity. 
(•) OJ No C 87, 9. 4. 1985. 
(2) COM(84) final of 11 May 1984. 
(•') The twelve TMCs with whom the Community has concluded 
agreements are: Malta, Cyprus, Turkey (association agree­
ments); Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, 
Syria, Yugoslavia (cooperation agreements); Israel (free access 
agreement). The Community thus has agreements with all 
the TMCs except Libya and Albania. 
(4) COM(85) final of 17 July 1985. 
(5) COM(85) final of 30 September 1985. 1.4. It is widely felt that the time has come to conduct 
a general review of the Community's Mediterranean 
policy, and to forge a new policy able to meet this 
wider challenge. 
1.5. The European Parliament has made a start by 
launching a political initiative for a Mediterranean 
cooperation council. The aim is a global cooperation 
treaty between the Community and the TMCs. 
1.6. The present Own-initiative Opinion is designed 
as a contribution to the further development of Mediter­
ranean policy. The assessments and recommendations 
are based on the analyses contained in the accompany­
ing Report. 
PART ONE: A NEW MEDITERRANEAN POLICY 
FOR THE COMMUNITY 
2. Why and how the Mediterranean policy needs to 
be changed 
2.1. There are various reasons for redefining the 
Community's international political and economic role: 
changes in the international political situation, the glo­
balization of the economy, the widening imbalances 
between North and South, and even the completion of 
the EC internal market. 
The new challenges and opportunities, and the 
increased responsibilities, make the question of Euro­
pean identity and union more pressing. The Community 
must review and refine its external relations priorities 
for the different regions, in the light of the relative 
importance of: (a) trade considerations; (b) develop­
ment cooperation and aid; (c) the drive for synergies 
with a view to economic integration. 
28. 8. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 221/17 
2.2. The Committee considers that the Community 
should assign priority and strategic importance to the 
TMCs. They should be included in category (c) above. 
2.3. Even once it is reinforced by establishment of a 
barrier-free internal market, the Community will not 
be able to withstand competition from the two main 
strategic areas of America and Asia unless it extends 
its economic area and market. To create this strategic 
European area, the Community will have to turn to its 
neighbours: European Free Trade Association (EFTA), 
Eastern Europe, and the Mediterranean. In this latter 
region, the Community must rapidly make up for lost 
time: the Mediterranean is now a focus of US and 
Japanese trade, investment, economic aid and above 
all, technological 'colonisation'. 
2.4. In terms of economic and political maturity, the 
above three neighbouring areas obviously differ greatly. 
In the TMCs in particular, complementary synergies 
and a fortiori economic integration can only be achieved 
by narrowing the serious development gap with the 
Community. 
2.5. However, this is not the only reason why the 
development of the TMCs is of such interest to the 
Community. Demografic forecasts show that the Com­
munity's population is expected to fall from 320 to 
310 million by 2020, against a rise in the TMCs from 
200 to 500 million. This demographic time-bomb would 
affect the Community. It would be an entirely inad­
equate response to hope that administrative measures, 
albeit essential, would suffice to curb the entry into the 
Community of millions of TMC citizens. The TMCs 
must be helped to create attractive living conditions 
and jobs, bearing in mind the link between economic 
growth and population growth. 
2.6. Nor can we ignore the fact that the Mediterrane­
an is increasingly a hotbed of domestic conflict and 
social and religious tension. The most extreme 
expressions of this are now felt inside Europe. They 
cannot be ignored, or tackled in varying ways by the 
different Member States. The economic and social conditions in the TMCs are 
at the root of these conflicts and tensions, even if they 
are not the sole cause. Moreover the security of the 
Community's southern borders is a further reason for 
the EC to support TMC development. 
2.7. The Committee thus considers that while Euro­
pean political cooperation should concentrate more on 
the Mediterranean, at economic and social level the 
time has come to relaunch, renew and develop the 
Community's Mediterranean policy. 
2.8. Mediterranean policy has been among the most 
gratifying of Community initiatives. It has strengthened 
links with the TMCs, and has been of undoubted 
benefit both to the Community and to the TMCs. 
However, ten years after the policy was launched, it 
must be admitted that its general aims have not been 
achieved. 
Although some positive results may be noted, it has to 
be said that trade between the Community and the 
TMCs has not seen the increase that was hoped. The 
Community is losing ground in its trade with these 
countries, and the aim of restoring a trade balance has 
not been achieved. The TMCs' trade deficit with the 
Community (excluding oil) has considerably increased. 
Mediterranean policy has been unable to stem the 
worsening economic and social plight of the TMCs 
[drop in per capita gross national product (GNP), 
increased dependence on food imports, increased 
debt] I1). 
2.9. The limited resources of Community Mediter­
ranean policy are of course partly due to the intrinsic 
limits of the agreements and inconsistencies in their 
implementation. For example, the goal of increasing 
TMC exports has often been thwarted by protectionist 
practices on the part of the Community. Similarly, the 
Community has not yet fully implemented the commit­
ments laid down in the agreements concerning migrant 
workers. The paltry level of funds allocated to financial 
cooperation has thwarted effective cooperation. But the 
most damage has been done by the inherent limits and 
contradictions of the Community's general Mediter­
ranean strategy, and by outstanding problems within 
the Community itself. 
2.10. TMC exports—a major problem which the 
1987-1988 additional protocols left unresolved—are a 
case in point. Community import concessions do not 
always suffice to boost exports, as the importer must 
first be able to produce the quality of goods demanded 
(l) See point 2.6 of the Section Report. 
No C 221/18 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 8. 89 
by the increasingly sophisticated Community market. 
The key to the problem thus lies in human resources, 
technological development, and the development of the 
TMCs' production systems. 
2.11. It is thus TMC development strategy which 
is in most need of review, particularly the present 
Mediterranean policy assumption that exports should 
be virtually the sole locomotive of TMC development. 
Experience shows that exports will only play a pivotal 
role in development if they are backed by a high-tech 
production system able to create added value, capital 
accumulation and re-investment locally. This is why 
the absence of a specific cooperation policy has been 
disadvantageous despite the high level of Community 
imports. The type of development aid provided under 
the financial protocols (project-by-project assistance) 
also manifestly does not further this goal. 
2.12. A renewed and more effective Mediterranean 
policy can only be achieved by the removal of certain 
major external handicaps—or at least, those caused by 
the Community. 
The first of these is the competition between the present 
and potential production system of the TMCs and that 
of the Community Mediterranean regions. Protectionist 
measures against TMC exports must be ruled out, 
as they would exacerbate the TMCs' socio-economic 
problems and lead to a drop in their imports from the 
Community, with adverse political reactions. At the 
same time, it is difficult to envisage further concessions 
for TMC exports without a change in the development 
of the southern regions of the Community, as such 
concessions would generally clash with the vital 
interests of large areas of the Community. 
Cheap agricultural exports to the TMCs adversely 
affect TMC self-sufficiency. Whilst the answer to this 
problem does not depend solely on the Community, 
further reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) 
would certainly help. handicaps. Other Community policies will also need 
adjusting. 
2.14. The development of the TMCs and the safe­
guarding of the interests of the Community's Mediter­
ranean regions can only be reconcilied within a Mediter­
ranean policy aimed at the overall development of the 
whole Mediterranean region. Consideration of possible 
strategies for helping the development of the TMCs, 
and of the development model to pursue, has also led 
the Committee to this conclusion (J). 
2.15. Furthermore, development of the Mediterrane­
an area will provide the Community with an excellent 
opportunity to extend its internal market southwards, 
thus doubling its size. The Mediterranean should be a 
priority in terms of strategic expansion, representing a 
'new frontier' for Europe. However, the construction 
of a strategic Euro-Mediterranean area must be equated 
with further southward enlargement of the Community. 
Rather, it means pursuit of a joint strategy by separate 
political and economic bodies. 
3. General features of the new Mediterranean policy 
3.1. An EEC Mediterranean policy extending beyond 
trade and aid would involve the Community and the 
TMCs in a joint development project. To be effective, 
such a project must have a cultural and political content 
as well as an economic one. A joint development strat­
egy means an effective commitment to dialogue between 
the EEC and the TMCs, and between the individual 
countries involved, not least with regard to social and 
demografic issues. 
The joint development strategy must thus also produce 
social and cultural results. Peace among the Mediter­
ranean nations, pluralist growth of their individual 
societies, respect and mutual recognition of different 
religions and customs, are all crucial to a fully fledged, 
sustained joint development policy. 
3.2. Such a project must be carried out with due 
respect for each country's sovereignty and autonomy. 
It will require commitments and constraints, but these 
will be bearable for all sides because they will be 
outweighed by the ensuing benefits. 
2.13. The present Mediterranean policy has done all 
it can, but it cannot eliminate these limitations and (') See points 11 and 12 of the Section Report. 
28. 8. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 221/19 
3.3. For the Community, this will mean: 
— tackling the competition problems which will be 
caused by the gradual opening-up to TMC agricul­
tural and industrial exports. A coordinated reorgan­
ization of Community production, starting with 
EC Mediterranean produce, should be carried out 
within the framework of Community policies, 
— revising or strengthening Community policies (CAP, 
industry, R&D, energy, transport, regional policy), 
to help achieve a balanced geographical and sectoral 
distribution of production. 
3.4. The TMCs too will have to review their pro­
duction strategies to ensure that they accommodate the 
overall scheme. As the main aim is the development of 
the whole Mediterranean basin, each country must 
make sure that its strategy fits in with the requirements 
of the other TMCs, of the Community's Mediterranean 
regions, and of the Community as a whole. 
3.5. If progress is to be made towards economic 
integration and complementarity in the Mediterranean 
area, we must iron out the disparities between the south 
and the centre-north of the Community, giving the 
Community's Mediterranean regions a strategic role as 
a bridge between the most economically advanced parts 
of Europe and the developing economies of the Mediter­
ranean. 
3.6. This will entail full achievement of the goal of 
internal cohesion and a wider, regional division-of-
labour, to strengthen the TMC economies and give the 
EC Mediterranean regions a greater role in the 
advanced and innovative production processes already 
used by the more developed areas. 
3.7. Only if it plays a full part in these production 
processes will the southern part of the Community be 
able in turn to play a locomotive role in the development 
of the whole Mediterranean region to which it grogra-
phically and strategically belongs. The aim must be: 
— to knit together the various areas of the Mediter­
ranean, from north to south and from east to west, 
by developing a proper transport and communi­
cations network, 
— to achieve complementary relations between the 
various industries (including agriculture), providing the Mediterranean regions with access to inno­
vation, technologies and hi-tech services whilst also 
tapping local environmental and cultural resources. 
3.8. Introduction of a barrier-free internal market 
(and the production and social changes which this 
will entail) offers an excellent opportunity for the new 
regional division of labour. Firms operating at Euro­
pean level, particularly those using the European com­
pany statute, could form one of the main vehicles for 
this operation, which would also involve coordination 
of economic and sectoral policies (and the coordination 
of public-sector demand), and negotiations with the 
two sides of industry. 
3.9. It is thus time to restate the idea of a 'global' 
Mediterranean policy, which inspired the launch of 
Community Mediterranean policy in the 1970s and 
received a new boost with the Commission's 1982 Com­
munication. However, the concept must be updated to 
embrace the whole Mediterranean basin, starting with 
its Community shores. The problems of the Com­
munity's Mediterranean regions must of course be tack­
led within the Community framework, with an eye to 
integration with the rest of the Community; but account 
must also be taken of the new affinities which an 
effective Mediterranean policy will bring with it. 
3.10. Whilst recognizing its differences, the Commit­
tee sees the Mediterranean area as a single unit. There 
is an urgent need for an effective dialogue between 
all the TMCs, based on mutual recognition of each 
country's national and historic identity. The Committee 
considers that Mediterranean policy must: 
— have a joint perspective which transcends the 
national interests of the inidividual Member States 
and TMCs, 
— disregard pleas for special treatment from certain 
TMCs which claim to have closer ties with the 
Community, 
— abandon the current bilateral EEC-TMC relations, 
as these aggravate the imbalances between Mediter­
ranean nations, 
— coordinate Member States' national TMC cooper­
ation policies within a joint framework, providing 
Community support (people and resources) for 
national and regional initiatives, and furthering the 
transfer of powers in the matter to the Community, 
which should become the main actor. 
No C 221/20 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 8. 89 
3.11. The objectives which underpin the 1987/1988 
financial protocols must be furthered by an overall 
Mediterranean policy which works gradually towards 
economic integration and entails action on the Com­
munity side. The Committee fully endorses these objec­
tives, which should form the short and medium-term 
goals of the overall Mediterranean policy. They are: 
— development and diversification of agricultural pro­
duction so as to alleviate dependence on food 
imports, 
— diversification of agricultural exports to achieve 
greater complementarity between the various Medi­
terranean regions, 
— economic complementarity between the Com­
munity and the TMCs via cooperation in industrial, 
services, research and development, training and 
other sectors, 
— regional and multilateral cooperation. 
3.12. The Committee would here stress the immedi­
ate practical importance of Community support for 
investment in the TMCs, preferably in the form of 
joint ventures under the development agreements (see 
point 4). 
Of key importance here are: the quality and technologi­
cal level of investment, its role in the development of 
the TMC production system, its implications for the 
internal market and for exports, and the desirability of 
processing natural resources locally. These points are 
discussed in more detail in points 11 and 12 of the 
Section Report. 
3.13. Regional-level economic integration of the 
TMCs is crucial to the integrated development of the 
Mediterranean basin as a whole. The extension of 
their internal markets, the mutual benefits (e.g. for 
agriculture and the oil industry), and the need to resolve 
internal conflicts, all argue in favour of such regional-
level integration. The Committee therefore welcomes 
the Arab Maghreb Union between Algeria, Libya, 
Morocco, Mauritania and Tunisia. It is pleased to note 
the progress made on establishing an Arab Cooperation 
Council between Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and North Yemen. 
The Committee hopes to see concrete action from the 
Community to support these initiatives, again within 
an overall Mediterranean perspective. The establish­
ment of EEC budget line 967 could form a useful first 
step in this direction. 
3.14. To sum up: the Mediterranean policy proposed 
by the Committee is a global policy aimed at economic 
integration and cohesion. It must grow from a cooper­ation policy into an EEC-TMC joint development pol­
icy, with scope for further extension. Cooperation is 
only one strand of a joint development policy. 
4. The development agreement: a key instrument 
4.1. The joint development policy outlined here 
requires an instrument for joint decisions and mutual 
commitment. The Committee feels that a development 
agreement would be the best instrument. 
4.2. This would commit the Community and one or 
more TMCs, together with other public (Community, 
national and local) or private bodies from both sides, to 
the implementation of specific undertakings contained 
within a development programme. 
4.3. The development agreement and programme 
should lay down a coherent set of development projects 
(both in the TMC and in the Community), commercial 
contractual commitments, and financial commitments. 
4.4. The practice of allocating aid on an individual 
project basis should be reviewed, as individual direct 
investments usually have limited spin-off. Instead, each 
investment should be linked to other investments and 
measures upstream and downstream, as well as with 
measures to boost infrastructure, vocational training, 
innovation, etc. 
Development measures could be linked to long-term 
supply contracts, guaranteeing supplies to the Com­
munity (e.g. of raw materials) at guaranteed prices for 
the TMCs, hence preventing a deterioration in the terms 
of trade. 
4.5. The development programmes underpinning the 
agreements would thus be integrated programmes. 
However, they should not necessarily involve an entire 
TMC or cover all possible measures in that country. 
They should focus on a particular resource or develop­
ment goal, and be elaborated and financed as circum­
stances permit. Hence they would be drawn up for a 
particular product and a particular area. 
4.6. A development agreement, with three-way inter­
vention and commitments, could also provide a vehicle 
28. 8. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 221/21 
for mutual economic support and integration at intrare-
gional level between TMCs in the same area, starting 
with those which already have regional associations 
(the Maghreb union, the Arab Cooperation Council, 
etc.). 
5. Financing 
5.1. The debt exposure of the TMCs is worsening. 
They also need to finance their balance of payments 
deficit, as they cannot increase their exports or raise 
prices, at least for the next few years. The funding of 
this deficit and the need to finance economic take-off 
require a large amount of capital for a long period, 
with repayments scheduled over an even longer period. 
5.2. A joint development policy of the type outlined 
here requires the Community to assume a financing 
role as far as possible. This would obviously require a 
much greater commitment than at present. 
5.3. The loans and non-repayable aid from the Com­
munity should not take the form of aid for the balance 
of payments, nor of traditional development aid (which 
is better suited to poorer countries). Instead they should 
fuel structural adjustment, as an alternative to macro-
economic stabilization measures of the International 
Monetary Fund (IMF) (which the TMCs are unable to 
shoulder). 
5.4. Contributions to risk capital ventures are al­
ready scheduled in the latest financial protocols con­
cluded with the TMCs, and should be expanded. How­
ever, the Committee wonders why such contributions 
take the form of interest-bearing loans of the European 
Investment Bank (EIB) (even if subordinate or con­
ditional) rather than being paid through a revolving 
fund. 
5.5. The European Central Bank could set up a 
Mediterranean department, which would act as a finan­
cing instrument for the development programmes. This 
department could also liaise with and complement the 
initiatives of the World Bank. 
5.6. With a view to the establishment of a Euro-
Mediterranean strategic area, the Community must 
help to shield the TMCs' trade and financial trans­
actions from exchange-rate volatility. Greater use should be made of the ECU for pricing raw materials, 
oil, farm produce and industrial products, as well as 
for financial aid to the TMCs. 
5.7. The Committee again undertakes to conduct a 
more detailed study of financial flows to the TMCs, 
and to draw up more specific proposals on financial 
cooperation. 
6. Institutional arrangements 
6.1. The Mediterranean policy described here cannot 
be governed by bilateral agreements. An overall conven­
tion or a Treaty—as indicated in the Commission's 
1982 Communication (*) and again proposed at the 
recent conference on global cooperation in the Mediter­
ranean, with the support of the European Parli­
ament—would probably best meest the requirements 
of the new Mediterranean policy. Unlike the Lome 
Convention, it would not be concerned with develop­
ment cooperation, but rather with the joint develop­
ment of the Community and the TMCs. 
6.2. The use of a single convention does not mean 
uniform action or a uniform Community commitment 
to the TMCs. It simply means defining a single frame­
work for common goals, strategies and decisions for 
the development of the whole Euro-Mediterranean 
area. The development agreements would respect the 
special circumstances of the individual TMCs, and 
would be tailored to their differing situations and needs. 
6.3. The global convention should lay down the 
main planks of the joint development policy and the 
instruments for implementing this policy. It should be 
drawn up by the Community and the TMCs, through 
the regional associations of the latter where these exist, 
and should specify the involvement of the Member 
States and the Community regional authorities. 
(') The Commission here recommends that, as an act of faith in 
the future, the Community should declare its readiness to 
propose to all the Mediterranean countries that they enter 
into a collective contract as soon as circumstances permit. 
This would show a common commitment to peace and to 
independence from forces outside the region, within an 
environment conducive to economic expansion and a meeting 
of cultures. 
No C 221/22 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 8. 89 
6.4. The convention should provide for the establish­
ment of a jointly managed agency to provide technical 
and planning back-up for the development agreements. 
This agency should cover a variety of sectors, particu­
larly technology transfer. 
6.5. The Committee does not consider that a single 
global convention is precluded by the diversity of TMCs 
or the conflicts which still exist between them. How­
ever, such a convention should not be an immediate 
goal; it must be constructed gradually as a natural 
concrete development of the present cooperation and 
association agreements. 
6.6. Pending the achievement of these objectives, the 
Committee feels that the Community should set up a 
Mediterranean forum, as mentioned in the UN Resol­
ution of 7 December 1988 (*) and echoed by the Euro­
pean Parliament at the abovementioned conference. 
The forum would be open to all TMCs, and would 
bring together the various international, Community, 
national and regional bodies, socio-economic represen­
tatives, and scientific and cultural institutions. Its aim 
would be to forge closer links, conduct analyses, and 
debate concrete issues, covering everything from sec­
toral problems to debt, from the environment to peace. 
6.7. The Committee trusts that the Mediterranean 
Cooperation Council proposed by the European Parlia­
ment will be established in the near future, to provide 
a forum for the Community and the TMCs to construct 
an overall Mediterranean policy. 
7. Involvement of the social partners 
7.1. The new Mediterranean policy has little chance 
of success unless the social partners, both in the Com­
munity and in the TMCs, can play a constructive and 
synergic part. 
7.2. The general criteria which should underpin the 
role of the social partners are set out in the document 
drawn up for the 12th meeting of socio-economic organ­
izations of the African, Caribbean and Pacific States 
(ACP) and the EEC and the ensuing final declaration. 7.3. At this stage of the preparation of the conven­
tion, the Committee could undertake, with the 
Council's support, to: 
— set up a permanent contact group between the ESC 
and the TMCs' economic and social committees 
(where they exist) or their socio-economic organiz­
ations, 
— organize an annual meeting of the socio-economic 
organizations of the Euro-Mediterranean area. 
7.4. The Committee feels that it has a contribution 
to offer to the administration of Mediterranean policy, 
and urges the Council and Commission to involve it 
more closely. To begin with, the Committee asks to be 
consulted on the proposals for implementing the latest 
financial protocols concluded with the TMCs. 
8. Blueprint for the construction of an overall Mediter­
ranean policy 
1st stage: 
— Production of a Community paper setting out gen­
eral guidelines for relaunching Community Mediter­
ranean Policy. This should be approved by the 
Council, following a proposal from the Commission 
with cooperation from the European Parliament 
and a Committee Opinion. 
— Establishment of a Mediterranean Cooperation 
Council (MCC) in which the above guidelines will 
be discussed. 
2nd stage: 
— Establishment of a Mediterranean forum. 
— Preparation by the MCC of guidelines for sectoral 
policies, following in-depth discussions within the 
forum. 
— Launch of various major pilot development agree­
ments. 
— Coordination and support with regard to Member 
States' policies on cooperation with TMCs. 
3rd stage: 
— Establishment of a centre or agency to provide 
technical and planning support for the development 
agreements. 
— Generalization of the development agreements. 
— Conclusion of framework EEC-TMC sectoral 
agreements. 
(') Adopted during the first part of the 43rd session of the UN 
General Assembly. — Adjustment (convergence) of the present cooper­
ation and association agreements. 
28. 8. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 221/23 
4th stage: 
— Conclusion of an EEC-TMC joint development con­
vention with the setting-up of specific institutions 
for the purpose. unions, professional associations, cooperatives and 
non-governmental organizations (NGO). 
Research and development and innovation 
PART TWO: 
POSALS SOME INITIAL SECTORAL PRO-
9. The spheres of action 9.5. As outlined in point 11 of the Report, the TMCs 
first require help in acquiring the know-how needed 
for plant and capital goods. The Community has a lot 
of ground to make up here, as the TMCs' technology 
needs in many fields are now met by non-member 
countries (USA, Japan, Soviet Union). 
9.1. Initial recommendations for the main spheres of 
a joint EEC-TMC development policy are outlined 
below. Specific Section Opinions on a number of these 
spheres (in particular, agriculture, industry, the craft 
sector, energy, services, the environment) will build on 
these recommendations. 9.6. Particular encouragement should be given to 
technologies which use indigenous resources, save 
scarce resources, and minimize waste. To help develop 
such technologies, support should be given to ventures 
which bring together research bodies, universities, local 
institutions and industry. Specific measures should also 
be established, in order to encourage small firms to 
expand their research and development policies. 
Training and socio-economic support 
9.2. Training is a keystone of any development pol­
icy for the TMCs, as well as for the Community's 
Mediterranean regions. It should play a prominent part 
in the development programmes and agreements. 
As well as the financing of training bodies and facilities, 
and the implementation of training programmes and 
schemes in the TMCs (including courses for managerial 
and administrative staff), assistance should cover the 
organization of courses whithin the Community. These 
would teach craft, technical and managerial skills to 
TMC nationals resident in the EEC who wish to return 
to their country of origin. The courses should be linked 
to enterprise programmes in the TMCs to create appro­
priate jobs. 
9.3. Support should also be given for a variety of 
measures to boost the local economy and encourage 
new enterprise (cooperatives, local employment initiat­
ives, and so on). These could perhaps be carried out in 
collaboration with similar ventures in the less developed 
areas of the Community. The need for appropriate technology is also widely felt 
in the Community's Mediterranean regions. Priority 
should therefore be given to programmes which bring 
together businessmen and research bodies from the 
TMCs and from the EEC Mediterranean regions to 
carry out parallel research, experimental and manufac­
turing activities both in the south of the Community 
and in the TMCs. Such ventures are already underway 
in some parts of the Community. They should be asses­
sed, improved, and extended. 
Agriculture and the food industry 
9.7. The aim should be to develop an efficient, mod­
ern agriculture and food-industry in the Mediterranean 
basin, and ensure that the production of different 
regions is as complementary as possible. The Com­
munity and the TMCs need to frame a coordinated 
programme for the radical reorganization of Mediter­
ranean agriculture and food industry. This should: 
— coordinate programmes to develop production on 
the basis of (a) the development needs of the Com­
munity Mediterranean regions and the TMCs, and 
(b) the product markets (also in third countries), 
9.4. Particular support should be given to joint train­
ing and assistance schemes run by companies, trade rationalize and redistribute cultivation of the Medi­
terranean crops which are most vulnerable to inter­
nal competition, striving to achieve maximum com­
patibility by (a) exploiting the seasonal differences 
No C 221/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 8. 89 
between the climates of the various Mediterranean 
countries; (b) specializing in particular local prod­
ucts, as part of a general drive to improve quality; 
(c) promoting consumption both within the Com­
munity and outside (elimination of duties; common 
trade policies and instruments, etc.); and (d) 
research and development in the processing 
industry, 
— encourage the best use of poor natural resources 
and the development of new products (non-food 
agricultural products, products created by the use 
of biotechnology), by means of integrated R&D 
and technology transfer networks, 
— improve the TMCs' food self-sufficiency by sup­
porting large-scale programmes to improve farm 
structures and providing technical back-up for the 
building of appropriate infrastructure, 
— ensure that the terms of employment in agriculture 
and the food industry respect the conventions of the 
International Labour Organization (ILO). 
9.8. The protectionist measures which still apply to 
TMC farm exports could then be lifted. Radical reform 
of the CAP rules for Mediterranean produce would also 
be needed. This would mean: 
a) gearing guarantee machinery to regional-level pro­
duction and development targets, with product 
quality as the sole yardstick; 
b) revising the present price-support mechanisms, dis­
tinguishing income support from support for 
restructuring or switches to other crops; 
c) adopting measures to protect Mediterranean prod­
ucts, e.g. banning chaptalization and reducing the 
price of olive oil. 
9.9. A trade promotion agency, run jointly by the 
Community and the TMCs, could be set up for Mediter­
ranean products. 
9.10. The TMCs will continue to need food imports 
for some time to come. To prevent Community agricul­
tural exports from having an adverse effect on TMC 
domestic agriculture (see the Report), an export credit 
policy should be introduced (in the form of a contri­
bution to the financing of developing countries' agri-
food imports, with interest rates and repayment sched­
ules geared to their low solvency) and long-term con­tracts concluded. As well as helping to stabilize world 
prices, this would allow the TMCs to plan their agricul­
tural development over an extended period. The con­
tracts should be linked to TMC agricultural develop­
ment programmes, complementing and guiding them 
in the same way as the Community's 'Operation Flood' 
in India. 
Industry 
9.11. An examination is needed of the general criteria 
which should guide investment with a view to TMC 
development. As far as possible, TMC investment 
decisions (often prompted by engineering and manufac­
turing firms, or those selling plant and machinery) must 
tie in with the overall needs and interests of the entire 
Euro-Mediterranean area. This means devising a coher­
ent industrial development programme for the Mediter­
ranean region as a whole. 
9.12. The programme should cover: (a) sectors 
involving the highest technological skills (new 
materials, recycling, information technology, telecom­
munications), which should be given investment pri­
ority; (b) sectors which already have excess capacity 
in the Community (such as the steel, chemicals, and 
petrochemicals industries) and which are of vital 
importance for the development of the TMCs, not least 
to help them process raw materials locally; and (c) 
certain sectors which could be developed in the TMCs 
by building on the existing industries, accumulated 
know-how and untapped potential in the Mediterrane­
an region; these could attract investment to the TMCs 
by exploiting the scope for integration and synergies. 
9.13. In the textile and clothing industry, the Com­
mittee feels that voluntary restraint agreements have 
had their day. These products should once again have 
free access to Community markets (as the Committee 
has said before) provided that: 
— exports do not involve dumping: 
— the export credits system operated by some TMCs 
is reviewed, 
— the TMCs adopt stringent regulations and effective 
checks to eliminate counterfeiting, 
— producers respect the ILO conventions on: human 
rights, minimum social standards, safety at work, 
28. 8. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 221/25 
social security, trade union rights, rights of trade 
unions to negotiate agreements on working con­
ditions, and respect for collective agreements. 
9.14. It is easy to see that the achievement of peace 
in the Mediterranean could create difficulties for some 
sectors of the Community arms industry. The Com­
mittee would like to see Community-level measures to 
support and develop existing moves to convert to civil 
production. The Section would however stress the need 
for effective Community rules on the trade and export 
of arms, building on the progress already made with 
chemical weapons. 
9.15. The preferred form of industrial cooperation 
should be joint ventures. In some cases these could be 
'two-way' ventures: in other words, covering industrial 
activities carried out within the Community. To pro­
mote them, maximum use should be made of the oppor­
tunities offered by the present financial protocols. 
9.16. To promote efficient local networks of small 
firms, the Community should allow the TMCs to draw 
on the experience gained in the Community programme 
for small firms (BC-NET, data banks, etc.), starting 
with the business and innovation centres (BICs). For 
the same reason, the links should be strengthened 
between the Commission and the international unions 
representing small businesses and cooperatives. 
9.17. The Commission should take early steps to set 
up an ad hoc service to keep the TMCs abreast of 
progress towards the internal market, and help them 
carry out the technical adjustments needed in certain 
key sectors (product standards, patents, movement of 
goods, transport, banks, insurance, etc.). 
9.18. The main intermediaries in industrial cooper­
ation should be chambers of commerce, business associ­
ations, cooperatives, and NGOs. 
Energy 
9.19. For the reasons outlined in the Report, the 
Committee considers that the volume of oil imports 
from the TMCs would justify a special EEC-TMC joint 
development policy dealing with the trade side, and linking this up with traditional cooperation (as in the 
recent agreement with the Gulf States). 
9.20. The Community must first frame a common 
strategy and policy for the oil and natural gas sectors. 
9.21. Existing contracts for the supply of natural gas 
and the conclusion of long-term oil supply contracts 
could from the basis of joint development programmes, 
if properly regulated. This does not mean an obligation 
to buy certain products from the Community (tied aid) 
in return for price stability or even price concessions. 
All the developing countries reject this. Instead, it means 
harnessing the spin-off from supply contracts to bolster 
economic and trade relations, by setting up mutually 
beneficial joint initiatives to help industrial and agricul­
tural development. Joint Member State/producer coun­
try ventures could be established for scientific and tech­
nological research, prospecting, production, and mar­
keting. 
9.22. Joint programmes could start with the indus­
trial uses of natural gas, e.g. experimental use or pro­
duction of special steel in pilot plants in the EEC 
Mediterranean regions which already have natural gas 
pipelines. This could later be extended (either as a 
joint venture or independently) to the TMCs. Another 
possible work area could be the development and con­
struction of ships designed to reduce the evaporation 
of liquefied natural gas on long hot crossings. 
9.23. For oil, Community policiy should be to 
encourage collaboration between EEC and TMC firms 
through the whole prospecting-production-refinery-dis-
tribution (petrol pumps) cycle, and for new industrial 
uses. Experience already acquired with the Gulf States 
by individual companies could form the basis for this. 
9.24. The development of renewable energy is an 
issue for the whole Mediterranean region. The Com­
munity should do more to develop solar, wind and 
biomass energy in its Mediterranean regions. The 
TMCs should be involved in this development drive 
(parallel experiments and dissemination). 
Tourism 
9.25. Tourism is a major resource throughout the 
Mediterranean. It should develop as more than a purely 
traditional activity, and should receive the support of 
No C 221/26 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 8. 89 
hi-tech services and cultural activities. Greater cooper­
ation between the TMCs and the Community is 
both possible and necessary (synergy between tourist 
agencies), as it is between the TMCs and the Mediter­
ranean regions, and between the TMCs themselves (e.g. 
integrated itineraries). 
Transport and telecommunications 
9.26. The integrated development of the Mediter­
ranean region requires a proper communications net­
work. The main routeways must extend not only from 
north to south, but also from east to west. 
9.27. The implications for sea transport of a joint 
Euro-Mediterranean development policy include: 
— adjustments to the common maritime transport 
policy, 
— planning of better communications between Medi­
terranean ports, 
— elimination of the protectionist practices found in 
most TMCs, 
— improvement of Mediterranean port infrastructure, 
which today causes serious delays, 
— joint regulation of traffic, based on the principle of 
free navigation; this should (a) exclude unilateral 
action (discrimination, cargo restrictions, etc.), (b) 
further tax liberalization, and (c) include dispute-
settlement arrangements. 
Environment, sea and land 
9.28. Pressures on the Mediterranean environment 
have reached danger point. Not only is the sea seriously 
polluted (oil discharges, rise in resident and tourist 
population, increase in industry); urbanized coastal 
areas need to be decongested and cleaned up. Some 
Mediterranean coastlines are also showing signs of 
desertification. The only answer to these problems is 
an integrated plan to clean up the sea, agreed jointly by 
the Community and the TMCs, and a new development 
strategy which respects the environment. This should 
draw on the Mediterranean action programme—partic­ularly the plan for the sea—financed by the United 
Nations Environment Programme and the signatories 
of the Barcelona Convention. 
Labour market, employment, social conditions 
9.29. An overall approach to the problems of the 
labour market, covering the entire Euro-Mediterranean 
area, is also needed. On the Community side, there 
are glaring contradictions: an unacceptable level of 
unemployment (17 million) and a growing gap between: 
(a) the main labour market (organized and protected); 
(b) the secondary labour market (disorganized and 
poorly protected), consisting of temporary and/or 
socially unpopular jobs; and (c) the black economy 
(undeclared and unprotected work). 
Most TMC emigrants to the Community work in these 
last two markets, which have grown steadily in the 
last few years independently of trends in the regular 
economy (the drop in economic growth has chiefly hit 
the main labour market, which has been unable to 
mop up rising unemployment). Without a vigorous 
Community labour policy to restore balance, the sec­
ondary labour market and the black economy will 
continue to expand. High unemployment (still growing) 
in the TMCs increases the number of migrant workers 
entering these two labour markets, in the wake of 
earlier emigrants already resident in the Community. 
Medium and long-term forecasts predict ageing and 
contraction of the Community population. In addition 
the preference of Community workers for better paid, 
better protected and more rewarding jobs, will underpin 
and possibly exacerbate labour shortages in sectors 
with unpleasant working conditions, little protection 
and low wages. The growth of the 'secondary' labour 
market based on casual or clandestine working raises 
the spectre of labour policies differentiated according 
to the possession or lack of Community citizenship. 
A labour policy is urgently needed to counter this trend 
and ensure first and foremost that workers, whether 
Community or non-Community, who fill vacancies are 
covered by social legislation and the rules laid down by 
collective bargaining. This requirement would, inter 
alia, meet the conditions laid down by ILO Convention 
143. 
9.30. Of course, the overriding aim is to bolster 
28. 8. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 221/27 
TMC development, and hence boost employment 
within the TMCs themselves. 
However, for the reasons outlined above, it would be 
difficult to postulate an end to immigration from the 
TMCs. Rather than to deny or underestimate the 
importance of immigration, the aim is thus to regulate 
migrant flows within a joint development policy, so 
as not to aggravate the Community unemployment 
situation or turn migrant workers into new unem­
ployed. 
9.31. The keystones of these coordinated regulations 
should be: 
— the fight against illegal immigration, with agreement 
on the rules for entry into the Community and the 
measures to take against migrant workers whose 
papers are not in order. But the most effective 
tool for combating illegal immigration lies with the 
Community, which must clamp down on all forms 
of undeclared employment (until this is eliminated, 
it will be difficult to tackle illegal immigration). At 
all events, any stiffening of administrative barriers 
(e.g. visa requirements) to the entry of TMC citizens 
must be ruled out, 
— an analysis of migrant movements and employment 
forecasts within the Community, 
— an upgrading of the jobs traditionally filled by 
migrant workers, 
— encouragement for training to improve migrant 
workers' skills, 
— implementation of the principle of equal employ­
ment conditions and rights for migrant workers 
(and their families), 
— establishment of common arrangements for moni­
toring the living and working conditions of migrant 
workers in the Community. 
9.32. Now is not the time to discuss the merits of a 
single, Community-wide employment market—which 
would in any case be divided into two parts, the desir­
able jobs and the less desirable ones. The Section would 
however like to see Community support for any forms 
of employment grouping (e.g. service cooperatives) 
which help stamp out temporary, ill-protected work. 9.33. As regards guarantees against discrimination 
and measures to help the integration of TMC migrant 
workers, the Committee: 
— deplores the Community's continuing failure to 
implement the guarantees against discrimination 
laid down in the additional protocol to the associ­
ation agreement with Turkey (16 years after it enter­
ed into force) and in the cooperation agreements 
with the Maghreb countries (12 years after their 
entry into force), 
— considers that this shirking of responsibility has 
helped bring about the deplorable situation in which 
calls for a clampdown on immigration are made 
in order to reduce domestic unemployment, while 
undeclared workers continue to be exploited, 
— reiterates the recommendations in the Committee's 
earlier Opinion on Mediterranean policy, and its 
Opinion on migrant workers of 25 October 1984 (*), 
now made even more urgent by the worsening signs 
of racism and xenophobia within the Community, 
— takes for granted the fact that the Community basic 
social rights outlined in the Committee's February 
1989 Opinion should also apply in full to migrant 
workers normally resident in the Community. 
9.34. Nevertheless, the Committee considers that the 
growing unemployment in the TMCs must be tackled 
first and foremost by the economic development of 
these countries. 
9.35. A joint development policy means that working 
conditions in the TMCs must not amount to social 
dumping vis-a-vis the Community. Joint guarantee and 
monitoring arrangements must be drawn up to ensure 
that the TMCs respect the ILO conventions on workers' 
minimum rights. 
Culture and information 
9.36. The aim here should be joint organization of 
cultural channels, as culture is most worthwhile when 
it is based on mutual awareness of diversity. Shared 
cultural goals may emerge with the commitment to 
shape a common future. 
(') OJ No C 343, 24. 12. 1984. 
No C 221/28 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 8. 89 
9.37. The TMCs' knowledge of and information 
about the Community needs to be improved at all 
levels, form the specialist to the mass media. However, 
it is even more important for us to gain a better know­
ledge of the culture of the TMCs (for example by 
setting up Community exchange programmes between 
Done at Brussels, 12 July 1989. universities, contacts between young people, and TMC 
language, history and literature courses), their tourist 
resources, and more particularly their socio-economic 
and administrative patterns (not least in order to help 
investment decisions). 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
APPENDIX 
to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following members, present or represented, voted in favour of the Opinion: 
Mr/Mrs/Miss: Amato, Ataide, Beltrami, Bento Goncalves, Beretta, Bleser, Boisseree, Bredima Savopoulou, 
Brigand, Cal, Calvet Chambon, Cavazzuti, Ceballo Herrero, Alves Conde, Delia Croce, Elstner, Eulen, 
Frandi, Giacomelli, Gomez Martinez, Horsken, Kazazis, Laca Martin, Liverani, Luchetti, Mainetti, Manto-
vani, Margot, Mayayo Bello, Morselli, Muriiz Guardado, Neto Da Silva, Orsi, Quevedo Rojo, Ramaekers, 
Santillan Cabeza, Schopges, Silva, Telles, Vallejo Calderon, Vassilaras, Velasco Mancebo, Vercellino, Vlasso-
poulos, Zufiaur Narvaiza. 
The following members, present or represented, voted against the Opinion: 
Mr/Mrs/Miss: Bazianas, Breyiannis, Broicher, Campbell, Ceyrac, Clavel, Collas, van Dam, De Tavermer, 
Donck, Droulin, Kirchfeld, Kitsios, Laur, Low, Petropoulos, Polyzos, Ribiere, Wick. 
The following members, present or represented, abstained: 
Mr/Mrs/Miss: Berns, Bos, Dassis, Decaillon, Drago, Haas, Kroger, L.ustenhouwer, Marvier, Meyer-Horn, 
Mourgues, Muller, Raftopoulos, Rouzier, Tixier, Wagner, Yvcmeau.