[pic] | KOMISIJA EVROPSKIH SKUPNOSTI |

Bruselj, 29.5.2006

COM(2006) 248 konč.

SPOROČILO KOMISIJE SVETU, EVROPSKEMU PARLAMENTU IN EVROPSKEMU EKONOMSKO-SOCIALNEMU ODBORU

ODNOSI EU S PACIFIŠKIMI OTOKI – STRATEGIJA ZA OKREPLJENO PARTNERSTVO {SEC(2006) 642}

SPOROČILO KOMISIJE SVETU, EVROPSKEMU PARLAMENTU IN EVROPSKEMU EKONOMSKO-SOCIALNEMU ODBORU

ODNOSI EU S PACIFIŠKIMI OTOKI – STRATEGIJA ZA OKREPLJENO PARTNERSTVO

1. Uvod

EU in pacifiške države AKP[1] že več kot 30 let sodelujejo v okviru partnerstva EU–AKP. To dolgotrajno sodelovanje temelji na zapuščini skupne zgodovine, skupnih vrednot, ekonomskega in trgovinskega sodelovanja. Danes razvoj na obeh straneh utemeljuje obnovo tega partnerstva in vzpostavitev celostne strategije za pacifiške države AKP. Za predložitev te nasploh prve strategije EU za Pacifik obstajajo tehtni razlogi.

Na strani EU revidirani Sporazum iz Cotonouja in evropsko soglasje o razvoju – tristranska politična izjava, ki so jo skupaj sprejeli Evropski parlament, Svet in Komisija – zagotavljata novo podlago in spodbudo za odnose med EU in Pacifikom. Sporazum iz Cotonouja krepi politično razsežnost sodelovanja med EU in AKP, ki omogoča izboljšan politični dialog s partnerji, medtem ko evropsko soglasje opredeljuje izkoreninjenje revščine v okviru trajnostnega razvoja kot bistven osnovni cilj, ob upoštevanju pomembnosti zagotavljanja politične skladnosti za razvoj in ustvarjanja sinergij med različnimi politikami, tako notranjimi kot zunanjimi, in ciljev zunanjih ukrepov EU. Pariška deklaracija o učinkovitosti pomoči, sprejeta marca 2005, ponovno potrjuje zavezanost usklajevanju in prilagajanju politike pomoči ter določa posebne cilje za leto 2010.

Na pacifiški strani se pacifiške države AKP srečujejo s številnimi pomembnimi izzivi, kot so ranljivost, revščina in slabo upravljanje. Vse prepogosto se pacifiške države AKP spregleda, saj njihovo prebivalstvo skupno šteje manj kot 10 milijonov, od tega pa več kot polovica živi na Papui Novi Gvineji. Decembra 2005 je Vzhodni Timor ratificiral Sporazum iz Cotonouja in postal po prebivalstvu druga največja pacifiška država AKP. Pacifiške države AKP imajo demokratično politično ureditev, z edino izjemo Tonge. Značilnost teh držav je izjemna kulturna raznolikost, ki jo je treba ohraniti.

Hkrati ima regija znatne naravne vire (ribe, les, kmetijski izdelki, nafta, plin, minerali). Zelo si prizadeva za ublažitev podnebnih sprememb. Njena biološka raznolikost je zelo velika (npr. ocenjuje se, da ima samo Papua Nova Gvineja petkrat več vrst rib kot cela karibska regija). Veliko vplivnih mednarodnih akterjev, kot so Kitajska, Japonska in ZDA, povečuje svojo prisotnost v regiji.

Poleg tega je bila v letu 2005 obnovljena spodbuda za sodelovanje v pacifiški regiji in vseh 16 držav članic Pacifiškega foruma, vključno s 14 pacifiškimi državami AKP[2], Avstralijo in Novo Zelandijo, je sprejelo Načrt za Pacifik. To označuje pomemben in ambiciozen korak naprej v sodelovanju v pacifiški regiji, ki se osredotoča zlasti na gospodarsko rast, trajnostni razvoj, dobro upravljanje in varnost za pacifiške države s pomočjo regionalizma, ter daje možnost za pospešitev odnosov med EU in Pacifikom.

Glede na te spreminjajoče se okoliščine je treba nadgraditi in ponovno opredeliti evropsko strategijo za Pacifik. Zato se predlaga osredotočanje na omejen sklop posebnih prednostnih nalog, pri katerih Pacifik potrebuje znatno pomoč, pri kateri ima Evropa neizpodbitne primerjalne prednosti.

Okrepljeno partnerstvo je zato treba osredotočiti na upravljanje, regionalizem in trajnostno upravljanje naravnih virov.

2. Razlogi za sodelovanje EU v Pacifiku

2.1. Naravni viri in okoljski izzivi globalnega pomena

Tihi ocean pokriva celo eno tretjino površine Zemlje , kar pomeni, da bo okoljski razvoj na tem območju imel pomemben vpliv v svetovnem merilu, npr. na prihodnost svetovnega ribištva in podnebne spremembe.

V interesu človeštva je, da se ohrani izredna biološka raznolikost Tihega oceana , ki je v veliki meri še nepoznana. Ocenjuje se, da je bilo podrobno raziskanih le okrog 20 % rastlinskih in živalskih vrst Tihega oceana. Regija ima edine ribolovne vire na svetu, katerih prekomerni ribolov še ni ogrozil, vključno z največjim staležem tunov na svetu.

Edinstvena morska biološka raznolikost regije in prevladujoči ribji staleži (vključno s selivskimi staleži) so medsebojno odvisni. Tihi ocean ima izjemen potencial za človeško zdravje v smislu biotehnologije, kot so bioinženirska zdravila in postopki zdravljenja, ki so jih razvili iz organizmov, živečih v Tihem oceanu. Zato se Tihi ocean, enako kot druga večja ekološka območja, npr. Amazonka, lahko šteje za globalno javno dobro .

Če skupnosti netrajnostno izkoriščajo ekosisteme, lahko pride do ekološkega propada , kar pa vodi v še večjo revščino, napetosti ali celo spore.

Tropski gozdovi Papue Nove Gvineje so globalnega pomena v smislu biološke raznolikosti in podnebnih sprememb. Prekomerna sečnja na tem območju, pa tudi na Samoi, Salomonovih otokih, Vzhodnem Timorju, Tongi in Vanatuju zato predstavlja znatna tveganja za globalno skupnost. Skupaj z netrajnostno kmetijsko prakso v nekaterih primerih vodi do degradacije tal. To potem uniči pogoje za preživetje kmečkega prebivalstva in način življenja otočanov v Pacifiku. Če se bodo podnebne spremembe nadaljevale, bodo mnogi otoki pacifiških držav AKP izginili in regija se bo morala soočiti s problemom okoljskih beguncev. Poleg tega zbujata resne skrbi tudi industrijsko onesnaževanje in slabo upravljanje okolja. Okolje neposredno vpliva na vse gospodarske in socialne sektorje, vključno s turizmom, ribištvom in zdravjem.

Ker se obstoječi naravni viri v drugih delih sveta postopoma izčrpavajo in ker gospodarstva Kitajske, Indije in ASEAN-a še naprej rastejo, se bo povpraševanje po naravnih virih še povečalo in znatni viri Pacifika bodo vedno bolj pomembni, zato mora EU nameniti posebno pozornost vprašanju njihovega trajnostnega upravljanja.

2.2. Izziv stabilnosti in varnosti

Glede na to, da je v številnih pacifiških državah AKP v nedavni preteklosti prihajalo do konfliktov, je potrebno nenehno spremljanje s strani svetovne skupnosti in usmerjena podpora, ki obravnava temeljne vzroke konfliktov. Posledice nestabilnosti v smislu izgubljenih priložnosti za razvoj so lahko zelo hude. Napetosti na Salomonovih otokih, na primer, so povzročile zmanjšanje BDP na prebivalca za eno tretjino.

Interes EU je stabilnost in varnost v pacifiški regiji. Nedavni dogodki v Vzhodnem Timorju in Salomonovih otokih so še dodatno opozorilo, da to regijo ogrožajo civilni spopadi, kriminal in politična nestabilnost. EU je zagotovila misijo opazovanja volitev za splošne volitve na Fidžiju v letu 2006, Komisija pa je pridobila nekaj izkušenj pri spodbujanju naporov regije pri notranji stabilizaciji države, kot so dodatni ukrepi k misiji regionalne pomoči za Salomonove otoke (RAMSI).

Šibke države v Pacifiku so za mednarodno skupnost velik izziv. K šibkosti države prispevajo šibke institucije in napake v upravljanju, nizka gospodarska rast, visoka stopnja brezposelnosti ter revščina. Regija se bo v prihodnosti soočila z vedno večjimi težavami. V povprečju gospodarstva pacifiških držav AKP komaj kaj napredujejo, medtem ko se hitra rast prebivalstva nadaljuje. Če se ta trend ne obrne, lahko sproži hudo poslabšanje socialnega in/ali političnega položaja, saj se bo povečala revščina. Skrb zbuja tudi dejstvo, da se v pacifiških državah AKP širi virus HIV-AIDS, žarišče te težave pa je na Papui Novi Gvineji.

2.3. Odnosi EU s tretjimi državami v regiji

15 pacifiških držav AKP je del širše azijsko–pacifiške regije, katere geopolitični pomen narašča. EU je že priznala vse večji pomen širše regije z vzpostavitvijo novega partnerstva z jugovzhodno Azijo v letu 2003.

Avstralija in Nova Zelandija sta ključna akterja v Pacifiku. Odnosi EU z obema državama so trdni in široko zasnovani. Vključujejo sodelovanje pri vprašanjih zunanje politike, trgovine, varnosti, okolja in izobraževanja. Poleg tega postaja razvojno sodelovanje vse bolj cenjen del splošnih odnosov z Avstralijo in Novo Zelandijo, kar pa je treba še okrepiti. ZDA in Japonska sta tudi zelo pomembna akterja v Pacifiku. Vsi navedeni imajo pomembne varnostne, politične in trgovinske interese v širši pacifiški regiji, medtem ko se je vloga Evrope zmanjšala. Dvostranski odnosi EU z ZDA, Japonsko, Avstralijo in Novo Zelandijo bi se lahko še izboljšali z okrepljeno vlogo Evrope v pacifiški regiji.

Vedno večje sodelovanje Kitajske je nov dejavnik, ki vpliva na prihodnji razvoj v Pacifiku in je že sprožil novo dinamiko v regiji ter vpliva na politični položaj številnih pacifiških držav AKP.

Francija prek svojih treh čezmorskih ozemelj in z vojaško prisotnostjo še naprej igra pomembno vlogo. Združeno kraljestvo , ki ima ČDO (čezmorske države in ozemlja) v Pacifiku, je pred nedavnim zmanjšalo svojo diplomatsko prisotnost v regiji, medtem ko ima Portugalska ključno vlogo pri obnovi Vzhodnega Timorja.

Štiri ČDO (Nova Kaledonija, Francoska Polinezija, Wallis in Futuna, Pitcairn) v Pacifiku so pridružene EU in predstavljajo cenjeno in pomembno prisotnost Evrope v regiji. Predstavljajo tudi prispevek, ki ga je treba v celoti upoštevati pri strategiji, da bi spodbudili njihovo vključevanje v regiji.

Okrepljeno partnerstvo in povečan politični dialog med pacifiškimi državami AKP in EU lahko bolje podpirata skupne dejavnosti večstranskih forumov (trinajst pacifiških držav AKP je članic ZN in pogosto delujejo kot skupina), na katerih imata obe regiji pogosto skupne interese za izboljšanje svetovnega reda, na primer glede podnebnih sprememb.

3. Strategija za okrepljeno partnerstvo

Sporazum iz Cotonouja temelji na petih stebrih in vsi so zelo pomembni za današnje sodelovanje med pacifiškimi državami AKP in EU: (i) okrepitev politične razsežnosti; (ii) sodelovanje civilne družbe, zasebnega sektorja in drugih nedržavnih akterjev; (iii) zmanjšanje revščine; (iv) inovativni okvir sodelovanja na področju gospodarstva in trgovine; (v) racionalizacija finančnih instrumentov in sistem za tekoče načrtovanje.

Predlagana strategija je sestavljena iz treh delov:

(1) okrepljeni odnosi med EU in pacifiškimi državami AKP ter regijo za nadaljevanje širokega političnega dialoga o zadevah skupnega interesa, ki zajemajo od političnih in varnostnih do ekonomskih, trgovinskih, socialnih, okoljskih in upravljalnih vprašanj, ter tako povečajo prepoznavnost in politični profil partnerstva med EU in Pacifikom na obeh straneh;

(2) bolj osredotočena razvojna akcija z več poudarka na regionalnem sodelovanju, da bi vzpostavili kritično maso, okrepili regionalno vodenje in olajšali medsebojno bogatenje. Glavni poudarek bo na izpolnjevanju ključnih prednostnih nalog regije, predvsem kot so določene v Načrtu za Pacifik[3];

(3) bolj učinkovito izvajanje pomoči , vključno z večjo uporabo proračunske podpore in večjega usklajevanja z drugimi partnerji, zlasti Avstralijo in Novo Zelandijo.

3.1. Okrepljen odnos

Predlaga se okrepitev političnega dialoga s Pacifikom s povečanjem stikov predvsem z in preko Pacifiškega foruma, ki je glavna regionalna institucija za politična vprašanja, katere naloga je zagotoviti mednarodni pravni status in katere mandat in skladne regionalne politike so določene v Načrtu za Pacifik.

Dialog, ki izhaja iz foruma[4] in ki je trenutna povezava med obema regijama, ima številne pomanjkljivosti, kot so omejena prepoznavnost, vzajemno delovanje in vpliv, ter premalo časa za pripravo in razpravo v času, ko se obseg sodelovanja med EU in Pacifikom veča.

Treba je dodati, da je več partnerjev regije, na primer Japonska, poleg sodelovanja pri dialogu, ki izhaja iz foruma, vzpostavilo še dialog z regijo glede posebnih vprašanj.

Odločitev vodij Foruma oktobra 2005 za sprejetje novega Sporazuma o vzpostavitvi Pacifiškega foruma kot medvladne organizacije v skladu z mednarodnim pravom ponuja dobro priložnost za okrepitev dialoga med EU in pacifiško regijo, da se odpravijo zgoraj navedene pomanjkljivosti dialoga, ki izhaja iz foruma.

O podrobnostih za okrepljen dialog med EU in Pacifikom se je treba dogovoriti tako, da se dialog vodi čim bolj učinkovito in smotrno.

Poleg okrepitve dialoga na regionalni ravni, predlagane zgoraj, se predlaga tudi vodenje dialoga na nacionalni ravni s ključnimi pacifiškimi državami AKP. Za take nacionalne politične dialoge si je treba prizadevati v skladu s Sporazumom iz Cotonouja pri čemer je treba upoštevati posebne značilnosti Pacifika, obenem pa popolnoma in sistematično izkoriščati njegove možnosti.

3.2. Bolj osredotočeni razvojni ukrepi

Za zagotovitev optimalnega učinka je potrebno osredotočenje. Predlaga se osredotočenje na tri prednostne naloge, ki odražajo med seboj povezane ključne potrebe Pacifika in evropskih primerjalnih prednosti: upravljanje, regionalizem in trajnostno upravljanje naravnih virov.

3.2.1. Upravljanje

EU ima lahko konstruktivno vlogo, saj lahko na podlagi izkušenj EU pri podobnih stanjih drugih delih sveta nudi podporo pri preprečevanju konfliktov in stabilizaciji pokonfliktnih razmer. V takih razmerah mora evropska pomoč podpirati nemoten prehod v dolgoročen razvoj in biti usmerjena v jasno upravljanje ter oblikovanje države .

EU bo še naprej obravnavala temeljne vzroke konfliktov, kot so revščina, degradacija, izkoriščanje ter neenakomerna razdelitev in dostop do zemlje in naravnih virov, slabo upravljanje, kršenje človekovih pravic, neenakost med spoloma in demokratični deficit. Spodbujala bo dialog, udeležbo in pomiritev.

Dobro upravljanje je bistveni predpogoj za trajnostni razvoj. Osrednji del dobrega in učinkovitega upravljanja je krepitev verodostojnih institucij, kot so parlament, sodstvo in sistemi upravljanja javnih financ, vključno s statističnimi storitvami, na nacionalni in regionalni ravni. EU bo v sodelovanju z drugimi donatorji še naprej nudila podporo demokracijam v Pacifiku. Nekatere pacifiške države AKP se srečujejo s težavami pri upravljanju v sektorjih ribištva in gozdarstva, predvsem z odtekanjem sredstev , npr. v obliki oprostitev plačila davkov, zaradi česar so prihodki za zadevno upravljanje dosti nižji.

Poleg tega je glede upravljanja bistveno spodbujati večjo usklajenost z mednarodnimi standardi v boju proti korupciji, pranju denarja in financiranju terorizma. V preteklosti je težavo v regiji predstavljajo pranje denarja. Čeprav je na tem področju še vedno prisotno tveganje, je ta težava zdaj dosti bolj pod nadzorom. Vendar pa bo EU še naprej spodbujala preglednost in učinkovito izmenjevanje informacij med organi za boj proti korupciji ter korporacijskim in finančnim zlorabam. EU bo tudi spodbujala ključne napore pacifiških držav pri izvajanju njihovih obveznosti do OECD na področju davkov in za odpravo škodljive davčne prakse. V skupnem interesu EU in pacifiških držav je zagotoviti, da se navedene obveznosti še naprej učinkovito izvajajo.

3.2.2. Regionalizem

Doseganje kritične mase

Načrt za Pacifik temelji na konceptu regionalizma . Tesnejše regionalno sodelovanje bi izboljšalo zmogljivost regije za obravnavanje razvojnih izzivov, s katerimi se sooča. Učinkovita strategija za podporo razvoja mora zato temeljiti predvsem na pomoči pri regionalnem vključevanju, da bi vzpostavili kritično maso, okrepili regionalno vodenje in olajšali medsebojno bogatenje.

Obstajajo pomisleki glede učinkov naraščajoče globalizacije in posledično tesnejšega regionalnega sodelovanja tako na področju raznolikosti med pacifiškimi državami AKP in njihovim socialno-ekonomskim razvojem. Evropske izkušnje, ki temeljijo na združevanju konkurenčnosti in socialne kohezije, kažejo, da je mogoče in koristno tudi za majhne narode, da se v globalnem svetu povežejo, a ob tem varujejo svojo nacionalno identiteto in kulturo.

Dolgoročni načrt za učinkovito in politično dobro utrjeno regionalno vključevanje v Pacifiku se še vedno oblikuje. Na nekaterih področjih regionalno sodelovanje že dosega dobre rezultate, kot je Agencija za ribištvo Pacifiškega foruma (FFA), ki združuje 17 vlad članic. Načrt za Pacifik je pomemben korak naprej, a ga je treba obravnavati kot „dokument v razvijanju“, kar pomeni začetek procesa in ne njegov konec. Regionalno sodelovanje v Pacifiku se bo zagotovo razvijalo in politiko EU za regijo bo zato treba postopoma prilagoditi. To je najlažje doseči s trajnostno podporo sekretariata foruma in drugih agencij Sveta regionalnih organizacij v Pacifiku (CROP)[5], zlasti glede upravljanja naravnih virov, ranljivosti in upravljanja. To bo spodbudilo krepitev regionalizma v Pacifiku na področjih, na katerih je to potrebno in na katerih lahko EU prispeva pravo dodano vrednost.

Sporazum o gospodarskem partnerstvu (SGP)

Postopek SGP ima pospeševalni učinek na gospodarsko sodelovanje in vključevanje v pacifiški regiji, saj:

- spodbuja pacifiške države AKP, da se pogajajo kot skupina;

- zagotavlja spodbudo za odpiranje med pacifiškimi državami AKP samimi;

- spodbuja in institucionalizira okrepljeno regionalno upravljanje v obliki medsebojnih pregledov.

10 % skupnega izvoza pacifiških držav AKP je namenjenih EU. To je zelo veliko, če upoštevamo velikost teh držav in fizično oddaljenost med Tihim oceanom in Evropo, vendar na splošno ni veliko. Koristi od trgovine z blagom pritekajo večinoma od prodaje številnih posebnih izdelkov , ki so pomembni za številne države. Dodatne koristi bi vse države v regiji povečale z okrepljenim regionalnim vključevanjem in gospodarskim upravljanjem, zlasti če bi bila pravila, povezana s trgovino, storitve in naložbe vključeni v SGP.

V trgovino z blagom z EU so vključene le večje pacifiške države. Izdelki, s katerimi se največ trguje, so ribe in ribji izdelki ter sladkor . Fidži je kot država podpisnica protokola o sladkorju upravičen do pomoči za svojo prilagoditveno strategijo v zvezi s sladkorno reformo. Pričakovano prestrukturiranje industrije sladkorja na Fidžiju bi moralo skupaj s SGP izboljšati konkurenčnost. Poleg tega bodo spremljevalni ukrepi za države podpisnice protokola o sladkorju, ki koristijo določena sredstva EU, zelo verjetno okrepili ukrepe trajnostnega razvoja naravnih virov, tako da se bodo osredotočili na proizvodnjo energije iz biomase in pogozdovanje.

EU ostaja oddaljena in relativno majhna trgovinska partnerica za regijo in morebiten učinek liberalizacije trgovine v skladu s SGP na pacifiške države AKP bi verjetno bil razmeroma majhen. Po drugi strani pa ima predlagan sporazum o regionalni prosti trgovini z Avstralijo in Novo Zelandijo (PACER) drugačne razsežnosti in bi lahko vseboval znatne prilagoditvene stroške za pacifiške države AKP. Zato bo pomembno spodbujati postopni pristop k liberalizaciji trgovine v povezavi z drugimi ukrepi, kot sta odprtje trgov razvitih partnerjev za delovno silo iz pacifiških držav AKP in povečanje razvojne pomoči.

Da bi kar najbolj povečali želeni učinek SGP je bistvenega pomena, da se pogajanja in rezultat usklajuje z načrtovanjem in pravočasnim izvajanjem razvojne pomoči na regionalni in nacionalni ravni, da se vzpostavijo sinergije. Zlasti pomembni so pomoč, povezana s trgovino, in ustvarjanje zmogljivosti, socialno-ekonomsko, finančno in davčno upravljanje ter usmerjeni ukrepi pomoči vključno z izpolnjevanjem mednarodnih carinskih standardov in olajšanje trgovine, kjer je potrebno, sladkor, razvoj zasebnega sektorja in človeških virov ter socialno varstvo.

S prilagodljivostjo, konstruktivnostjo in inovativnostjo lahko EU določi nove razvoju prijazne standarde v trgovinskih pogajanjih z malimi razvijajočimi se otoškimi gospodarstvi, ki jih drugi razviti trgovinski partnerji regije lahko upoštevajo pri (ponovnih) pogajanjih o svojih trgovinskih sporazumih s pacifiškimi državami AKP.

3.2.3. Trajnostno upravljanje naravnih virov

Glede na pomen dobrega upravljanja naravnih virov Komisija predlaga, da se trajnostno upravljanje z naravnimi viri in podpora pacifiškim državam AKP pri njihovih prizadevanjih za obravnavanje posledic podnebnih sprememb, dvigovanja gladine morja, zmanjševanja staležev rib, koralnega beljenja, netrajnostne sečnje, degradacije tal ter naraščanja onesnaževanja in odpadkov obravnava v okviru osrednje „modro-zelene“ teme za okrepljeno sodelovanje.

To je politično področje, na katerem je dodana vrednost EU nesporno priznana in na katerem lahko Evropa poleg finančne pomoči ponudi svoje skupne izkušnje in strokovno znanje pri obravnavanju okoljskih težav ter vprašanj upravljanja virov. To bi omogočilo tudi priključitev prizadevanj za sodelovanje med EU in Pacifikom k mednarodnim prizadevanjem za obravnavanje ključnih globalnih okoljskih težav, pri katerih imajo pacifiške države AKP, Nova Zelandija in EU skupne cilje, kot so tisti, določeni v Kjotskem protokolu. Treba si je prizadevati za dialog z drugimi tretjimi državami, ki aktivno sodelujejo pri izkoriščanju naravnih virov.

Na podlagi prednostnih nalog, ki jih je določila regija sama[6], lahko Evropska unija pacifiškim državam AKP pomaga pri upravljanju oceanskih in obalnih virov na trajnostni način s pobudami, ki bi združevale ohranjanje ribje populacije in morske biološke raznovrstnosti ter hkrati spodbujale regionalno sodelovanje in okrepile vlogo majhnih otoških držav v razvoju (SIDS). Te pobude bi lahko zagotovile ukrepe za izboljšanje zmogljivosti za podporo izvajanja večstranskih okoljskih sporazumov in drugih potrebnih politik, povezanih s trajnostnim upravljanjem naravnih virov, in bi lahko zagotovile osnovo za sodelovanje zainteresiranih držav članic EU. Delovna skupina v pomorskem sektorju CROP, ki deluje v okviru Foruma[7], bi bila primerna za nadaljevanje te pobude in nadzor njenega izvajanja.

Ribištvo je sektor, ki lahko veliko prispeva k gospodarskemu razvoju pacifiških držav AKP in njihovem vključevanju v svetovno gospodarstvo. Trajnostna raba ribolovnih virov in dobro upravljanje tega sektorja sta zato prednostni nalogi v dejavnostih regije. EU je že pridobila znatne izkušnje pri regionalnem sodelovanju na področju ribištva v Pacifiku v okviru skupne ribiške politike in njenih razvojnih politik, zlasti glede raziskav in ocenjevanja staležev. EU in partnerji iz regije, organizirani v Agencijo za ribištvo Pacifiškega foruma, že dolgo uspešno sodelujejo v organizacijah regionalnega upravljanja, kot je Konvencija za ribištvo v zahodnocentralnem Pacifiku. EU bi lahko okrepila svoja prizadevanja za spodbujanje trajnostnega upravljanja ribištva s podporo sistema regije za spremljanje, kontrolo in nadzor (MCS) in s krepitvijo zmogljivosti regije za boj proti nezakonitemu, neprijavljenemu in neurejenemu ribolovu (IUU), zlasti v zvezi z izgubljenim zaslužkom. Obstaja tudi nadaljnji potencial za ribiške in morske raziskave, ki jih EU namerava podpirati, da bi spodbujala trajnostno upravljanje ribištva v regiji.

Nova generacija partnerskih sporazumov za ribištvo (FPA) označuje nov pristop, saj poleg zagotavljanja urejenega dostopa do možnosti ribolova za evropska plovila predvideva tudi tesno sodelovanje za spodbujanje odgovornega ribolova ter zagotavlja ohranjanje in trajnostno rabo ribolovnih virov zadevnih partnerskih držav. Ta pristop se bo izvajal s političnim dialogom in finančno podporo sektorju, da se zagotovi ključni prispevek k opredelitvi in izvajanju politike trajnostnega razvoja ribolovnih dejavnosti s strani obalnih držav v njihovih vodah. Prva nova partnerska sporazuma za ribištvo sta bila sklenjena s partnerskimi državami Pacifika.

Več pacifiških držav AKP in ČDO ima tropske gozdove in zadevno biološko raznovrstnost. ES si je pri sodelovanju s Papuo Novo Gvinejo že pridobila pomembne izkušnje na področju trajnostne sečnje. Preverjanje zakonitosti sečnje in izvoza lesa vedno bolj šteje kot ključni instrument v programih sektorske reforme. Zanesljivi sistemi, ki lahko razlikujejo med zakonito in nezakonito proizvodnjo, bodo bistvenega pomena za zagotovitev verodostojnega jamstva trgu, da je bil les zakonito pridobljen. V skladu z akcijskim načrtom za izvrševanje zakonodaje, upravljanje in trgovanje na področju gozdov (FLEGT) za države AKP Komisija predlaga regionalni pristop, vzpostavitev nacionalnih in regionalnih zmogljivosti za spremljanje in podporo partnerskih sporazumov FLEGT.

Ob upoštevanju občutljivosti za naravne nesreče je Komisija v letu 2005 pacifiškim državam AKP predlagala vzpostavitev regionalnih programov pripravljenosti na naravne nesreče . Ta pobuda se lahko spremlja in razširi na področje zmanjševanja nesreč (zmanjšanje tveganja, zmanjšanje ogroženosti in zmanjšana občutljivost, ob upoštevanju potrebe po prilagoditvi podnebnim spremembam). Taki ukrepi dopolnjujejo obstoječe regionalne ukrepe za zmanjšanje občutljivosti.

Zaradi visokih cen nafte, oddaljenosti in majhnih trgov morajo majhni pacifiški otoki obnovljive vire energije in učinkovitost energije postaviti na visoko mesto med prednostnimi nalogami. Sedanje pobude ES v tem sektorju se lahko spremljajo in razširijo, zlasti v okviru energetske pobude Evropske unije (EUEI) in povezanim skladom EU-AKP za energijo. Za dodelitev podpore ES se lahko upoštevajo tudi nadzor nad onesnaževanjem, vode in sanitacija.

Ukrepi za trajnostno upravljanje naravnih virov bi morali pripomoči k ustvarjanju pogojev za gospodarsko rast, ki bi vodila k vzpostavitvi produktivnega in primernega zaposlovanja, socialne kohezije in varstva ter k zmanjšanju revščine, in s tem k doseganju razvojnih ciljev tisočletja . Nenehna pozornost bo posvečena temeljnemu vprašanju razvoja človeških virov. V tem kontekstu imajo nedržavni akterji pomembno vlogo zaradi svojega ključnega prispevka k odprtju skupnosti, predvsem s spodbujanjem izboljšanega upravljanja, oblikovanja države in dajanja pooblastil.

Naložbe v znanost in tehnologijo na pacifiških otokih skupaj z naložbami v človeške vire in vzpostavljanje institucij bodo okrepile zmogljivosti na področjih, bistvenih za njihov trajnostni razvoj, kot so upravljanje ribištva, biološka raznovrstnost in pripravljenost na naravne nesreče. Možnosti za sodelovanje v raziskavah se lahko spremljajo v skladu z okvirnimi programi za raziskave Evropske unije.

Moderne informacijske in komunikacijske tehnologije so pomembni dejavniki, zlasti v regiji, za katero so značilne velike razdalje, in se lahko sistematično vključijo v izvajanje zgoraj navedenega ukrepa, na primer v obliki nadzornih ali kontrolnih sistemov za ribištvo in sečnjo ter za olajšanje komunikacije v sektorju izobraževanja, pa tudi za omogočanje medijem, da predstavljajo in ohranjajo veliko kulturno raznolikost regije ter uresničijo svoje gospodarske možnosti. Proučilo se bo možnosti za uvedbo ali okrepitev učenja na daljavo, predvsem e-učenja v oddaljenih kmetijskih območjih in otoških skupnostih.

3.3. Bolj učinkovito izvajanje pomoči

Da bi izboljšali učinkovitost razvojne pomoči EU in zmanjšali znatne transakcijske stroške na obeh straneh Komisija predlaga, da se pomoč bolj skoncentrira, kakor je poudarjeno zgoraj, z večjim poudarkom na regionalni ravni, učinkovitejši uporabi dodelitev majhnim državam in boljšo uporabo proračunske podpore, kjer je možno.

3.3.1. Usklajevanje donatorjev

Predlagano usklajevanje strategije EU bo olajšalo usklajevanje donatorjev na ravni EU in z drugimi, predvsem Avstralijo in Novo Zelandijo, ki ga Komisija želi nadaljevati, da bi še bolj zmanjšali pritisk na omejene zmogljivosti zadevnih nacionalnih uprav. Usklajevanje je ključno za preprečevanje prekrivanja in neskladnosti med tistimi, ki si prizadevajo za doseganje skupnih ciljev. Usklajevanje donatorjev je zlasti pomembno v šibkih državah. Svetovni sklad za boj proti AIDS-u, tuberkulozi in malariji izvaja vrsto programov v regiji, obstoječi večdonatorski odškodninski sklad za primer pandemije aviarne influence in človeške gripe pa je lahko zgled za mednarodno usklajevanje donatorjev na področju zdravja, če bi v regiji prišlo do izbruha.

3.3.2. Bolj učinkovito in smotrno sodelovanje z najmanjšimi državami

Popolno sodelovanje v sporazumu o partnerstvu, podpisanem v Cotonouju, zajema trajnostni politični dialog, soupravljanje razvojnega sodelovanja in popolno sodelovanje v postopku SGP. Za številne najmanjše pacifiške države AKP tako intenzivno sodelovanje za njihove uprave pomeni velik izziv, zlasti za izvajanje individualnih državnih programov. Da bi povečali učinkovitost pomoči in zmanjšali transakcijske stroške, predvsem v najmanjših pacifiških državah AKP, je treba pri zagotavljanju lokalnega lastništva na podlagi obstoječih izkušenj ovrednotiti nove pristope. Tekoči programi za obnovljivo energijo, ki zajemajo več držav, predstavljajo model, ki bi mu lahko sledili.

3.3.3. Proračunska podpora

EU namerava v svojem sodelovanju s pacifiškimi državami AKP bolj sistematično uporabljati instrument proračunske podpore.

Zato se glede na omejeno sodelovanje institucij Bretton Woods v pacifiški regiji načrtuje vzpostavitev dialoga z MDS, zlasti da bi si izmenjali analize, izkušnje in študije z namenom razvijanja tesnejšega sodelovanja v Pacifiku glede proračunske podpore.

Poleg tega želi EU proaktivno pomagati pacifiškim državam AKP pri doseganju meril za upravičenost do proračunske podpore, tj.:

- strateški dokument za zmanjševanje revščine (PRSP) ali nacionalna razvojna strategija v pripravljanju;

- stabilen makroekonomski okvir, ki je zadovoljiv ali v postopku prenove;

- transparentno in dobro upravljanje javnih financ.

Trenutno se izvaja en razmeroma preprost program proračunske podpore, ki ga financira EU, in sicer v Vanatuju. Komisija proučuje možnost za razširitev take podpore na druge države, kot sta Samoa in Fidži, ter po možnosti še na druge.

Na regionalni ravni ES zagotavlja sredstva Pacifiškemu forumu v obliki sporazumov o prispevkih, ki zagotavljajo visoko stopnjo lastništva. V kratkem bo izvedena institucionalna ocena, da bi določili pogoje za tesnejše sodelovanje. V prihodnosti se lahko razmisli o predlogu za zamenjavo oblike financiranja, ki bi pomenila večji prispevek EU za opredelitev in spremljanje zadevnih programov.

4. Sklepne ugotovitve

Pacifik in EU povezuje dolgotrajno in tesno sodelovanje, ki izvira iz preteklosti[8]. Medtem, ko so se vezi v drugi polovici 20. stoletja zaradi dekolonizacije neizogibno zrahljale, pa sta se regiji znatno razvili in se zdaj ponovno zbližujeta.

To predstavlja pravo priložnost za okrepitev partnerstva v smislu širšega političnega dialoga, trgovine in razvojnega sodelovanja. Čeprav sta Pacifik in EU geografsko zelo oddaljena, sta drug za drugega bolj pomembna, kot se na splošno zdi ali misli v Evropi. Regiji lahko druga drugi veliko ponujata, se zelo dopolnjujeta ter delita ključne vrednote in interese.

Ker ima le nekaj držav članic in Komisija predstavništva v pacifiških državah AKP, bi bila za pacifiško regijo zelo primerna skupna prisotnost in ukrepanje EU na tem območju, na primer z napotenimi uradniki iz služb držav članic v regionalna predstavništva Komisije v Pacifiku, ki bi lahko tudi zagotavljala zmogljivosti na začasni osnovi („evropska hiša“).

Postopni proces, ki bi ga dopolnjevala potrebna prilagodljivost, bi zagotovil okvir za boljšo zunanjo zastopanost EU v Pacifiku v obliki večje prisotnosti, globljega političnega dialoga in boljšega profila za EU.

Države AKP – GLAVNI STATISTIČNI PODATKI

Prebivalstvo | Površina (km²) | IČR (Program ZN za razvoj 2003) | IEC | BDP na prebivalca (standardi kupne moči v USD) Svetovna banka 2004 |

2004 | (1000 km²) |

Cookovi otoki | 20 300 | 240 | 1 830 | 4 896** |

Fidži | 848 000 | 18 272 | 0,752 | 1 260 | 2690 |

Kiribati* | 98 000 | 690 | 3 600 | 970 |

Marshallovi otoki | 60 000 | 170 | 2 131 | 2 370 |

Mikronezija | 127 000 | 700 | 2 978 | 1 990 |

Nauru | 10 100 | 24 | 320 | 1 917** |

Niue | 1 800 | 259 | 390 | 2 970** |

Palau | 20 000 | 487 | 601 | 6 870 |

Papua Nova Gvineja | 5 700 000 | 462 840 | 0,523 | 3120 | 580 |

Samoa* | 179 000 | 2 857 | 0,776 | 120 | 1 860 |

Salomonovi otoki* | 471 000 | 28 446 | 0,594 | 1 630 | 550 |

Vzhodni Timor* | 925 000 | 14 874 | 0,513 | 322 | 550 |

Tonga | 102 000 | 699 | 0,81 | 700 | 1 830 |

Tuvalu* | 11 190 | 26 | 757 | 989** |

Vanuatu* | 215 000 | 12 189 | 0,659 | 680 | 1340 |

Skupaj | 8 788 390 | 542 773 | 20 439 |

* Najmanj razvite države** Podatki iz leta 2002, vir: University of the South Pacific.

Viri: NZaid: Annual Report 2004–2005; Pacific Development Report (2002); Secretariat of the Pacific Community; World Development Report 2006; UNDP: Human Development Report (2004)

STATISTIKA ZA PACIFIšKE ČDO

Država | Prebivalstvo (ocena: julij 2006) | Površina (km²) | IEC (km²) | BDP na prebivalca (PKM) (ocena: 2003) |

Nova Kaledonija | 219 246 | 19 060 | 1 347 964 | 15 000 USD |

Pitcairn | 45 | 47 | 837 221 | ni podatkov |

Francoska Polinezija | 274 578 | 4 167 | 4 553 115 (druga največja na svetu) | 17 500 USD |

Wallis & Futuna | 16 025 | 274 | 271 050 | 3 800 USD (ocena: 2004) |

ANNEX

1. The Pacific Region

1.1. Key characteristics

Oceania is an essentially maritime continent of about 30 million people with Australia at its centre of gravity. There are 15 countries in this region that have a special development, trade and political cooperation with the EU, governed by the Cotonou Agreement between the EU and Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP). The total population of the 15 Pacific ACP countries is only about 9 million. Papua New Guinea (PNG) with its 5.7 million inhabitants is the biggest, while Niue with 1800 is the smallest. The Pacific ACP countries are inhabited by Pacific peoples (Melanesians, Micronesians and Polynesians). Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu are all Melanesian countries. Timor-Leste and Fiji are predominantly Melanesian, while Fiji also has an important Indo-Fijian population. The Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Kiribati, Nauru, Palau and the Republic of the Marshall Islands are all Micronesian countries. Cook Islands, Niue, Samoa, Tonga and Tuvalu are the Polynesian countries.

In addition, the Pacific region includes eight territories , of which four are European: New Caledonia, French Polynesia and Wallis and Futuna are French territories, while tiny Pitcairn is the last remaining UK territory in the Pacific. Of the remaining four territories three are with the United States (American Samoa, Guam and Northern Marianas); and one with New Zealand (Tokelau).

Apart from PNG, Solomon Islands and Fiji land resources are limited, but marine resources are very considerable. Twenty million sq km of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Pacific region belongs to the Pacific ACP countries[9]. The Pacific has the richest fishing grounds in the world and is one of the world’s centres of marine biological diversity , with up to 3,000 species found on a single coral reef. It has been estimated that PNG alone has five times more species of fish than the entire Caribbean region and twice as many as the Red Sea. Forests and their biodiversity are other important components of the Pacific islands natural capital, especially for poor rural communities in Melanesia. PNG hosts one of the world’s four remaining tracts of tropical rainforest and 7% of the world’s species of plant and terrestrial life forms, while Solomon Islands has the highest concentration of endemic birds on the planet. The region is rich in minerals – gold, copper, nickel – as well as oil and gas, and much of it is still unexplored.

Australia and New Zealand play a special role in the region. Each country has its own Pacific strategy, however, Australia and New Zealand have coordinated policies in some areas.

Australia, the region’s dominant economy and political actor, is geographically close to Melanesia. The region’s stability has always been an important issue for Australian foreign policy, while the Pacific is less important for Australia in commercial terms. Key concerns for Australia relate to transnational crime, and in recent years Australia has been pursuing a robust policy aimed to prevent the emergence of failed states in the region, including important initiatives to stabilise the Solomon Islands, to improve governance in PNG and to promote regional police cooperation. Its policy has been influenced by a number of terrorist attacks outside Australia, where Australian lives were lost. Australia has a delicate balancing act so as not to be seen as over-dominant. The country’s relations with its immediate neighbour, Papua New Guinea, have sometimes been strained, while its negotiations with Timor-Leste regarding a permanent maritime boundary, including access to natural resources, have, at times, been difficult. An important ongoing debate in the region concerns the interest of the Pacific ACP countries in gaining access for their citizens to the Australian labour market, in particular for unskilled labour. Australia is the most important donor in the region and has recently announced a very substantial increase of its ODA. Australia is about to launch its first White Paper on Development as well as an analytical report highlighting major challenges facing the Pacific to the year 2020. Australia is highly supportive of EU engagement with the region and keen to coordinate its development assistance with the EU.

New Zealand has close ties to the Pacific, and notably Polynesia, partly for historical reasons, partly because of its large Polynesian population. The Pacific is a primary area for New Zealand’s foreign policy. It played an important role in the peace process for Bougainville and it is the second biggest participant in the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI). New Zealand is committed to promoting Pacific regionalism. The Pacific is a medium-sized trading partner for New Zealand. It concentrates most of its relatively limited ODA to the region and is an important development partner for many Pacific ACP countries. Like Australia, New Zealand is also highly supportive of an active EU engagement with the region and keen to coordinate its development assistance with the EU.

1.2. Geo-political and geo-economic importance

The US, Japan, China, Australia and New Zealand are the key Pacific powers, and they all have important security, political and trade interests in the wider Pacific region, where the US has been the leading power since the end of World War II. Japan and Australia are close US allies, and have underpinned the position of the US in the wider Pacific for decades, while the European role has decreased with decolonisation. France, however, is significantly engaged through its territories and military presence. The growing engagement of China in the region is a new factor influencing future developments in the Pacific in the form of Chinese trade, investments, migration and aid coupled with an intensifying diplomacy. As the economies of China, India and ASEAN continue to grow rapidly, demand for the region’s natural resources is increasing.

1.3. Main development challenges

Of the 15 Pacific ACP countries no less than 11 have populations around or below 250.000[10]. It is difficult for such small nations to attain a critical mass for production and trade or indeed political influence, because of important dis-economies of scale. The concern is that for many small Pacific ACP countries globalisation may not mean interdependence, but increased dependency.

With the exception of Tonga, which is an almost absolute monarchy, all Pacific ACP countries are fully fledged democracies , but modern institutions have not yet taken root everywhere and do not easily combine with traditional power structures. In recent years political developments have proven that a number of Pacific countries are potentially unstable[11].

A number of Pacific countries, notably PNG and Solomon Islands, face important problems of governance and corruption . These are often linked to the issue of nation building in countries that are very heterogeneous, as identification with a clan or similar group may be stronger than with the State[12].

While the region, apart from Tonga, is not in general marred by grave human rights problems, there are serious issues related to gender . While the situation differs from country to country, violence against women and polygamy constitute important problems and women still have far to go in terms of empowerment[13].

Poverty and progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) remain important challenges in a number of the countries. Poverty of opportunity is a particularly acute problem, with rural communities, where most Pacific islanders live, facing problems, such as poor access to basic social services, sustainable, efficient and affordable energy services and telecommunications, and with economic activities hampered by distance, insufficient and expensive transport services and limited access to capital.

Unsustainable management of natural resources is a serious issue facing several countries in the region. In particular, the rates at which forests are being depleted and biodiversity is being lost are so high that the countries concerned risk losing critical economic assets within a very short time span. Often a result of weak governance, this combines with serious leakages of financial resources away from Government. The result is that critical resources that should be invested in the development of these countries are diverted.

The Pacific ACP countries have relatively good food-security , although there is a problem of malnutrition in some places. However, while there is a tradition for safety nets and a culture of sharing, community support systems are now under strain in many places.

[pic]

The Pacific possesses an exceptional cultural diversity[14] , which is the basis for an extraordinary richness of cultural expression. This diversity, including the linguistic heritage, should be preserved[15]. Furthermore, this diversity also represents a non-negligible source of wealth in economic terms which the media through the use of ICTs can help realise.. The question of how best to achieve the desired and inevitable economic modernisation without jeopardising fundamental strengths of the traditional culture is crucial to the future of the region. When engaging in dialogue and development cooperation with the Pacific ACP countries this cultural dimension needs to be fully taken into account.

For potential investors Pacific culture imposes a number of important constraints. Traditional collective land ownership raises barriers to obtaining land for development and using land as collateral. The strong culture of sharing constitutes a disincentive to saving for investment.

Some of these factors may partly explain the weak economic growth experienced by most Pacific ACP countries, a concern not least in view of the growing population (around 3% a year) A study of economic data (available for 11 of the 15 Pacific ACP countries - excluding Cook Islands, Nauru, Niue and Tuvalu) shows that in the period 2000-2004 average annual GDP growth was only 1.1%. However, some countries, notably Samoa, have recorded strong growth in the same period. Average inflation for the 11 countries stood at a modest 1.6% in 2004. There are considerable differences in GDP/capita requiring adapted policies and cooperation.

The Pacific is particularly vulnerable to natural disasters, such as earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes, and generally with the poorest population segments being the most exposed. Since 1950 natural disasters have affected more than 3.8 million people in 14 Pacific ACP countries (Timor-Leste not included). In the 1990s alone natural disasters cost the region about USD 2.8 billion (in real 2004 value). From 1990 to 1999 the region had the world’s highest rates of disaster-related mortality, percentage of population affected, and damage cost per capita. While traditional coping mechanisms are strong, the number of reported disasters and the population affected per event have increased significantly, reflecting population growth, rapid urbanisation, growing environmental degradation in coastal areas, climate change and variability. With climate change and increasing sea levels many low-laying Pacific islands are at risk and the region may in future face a serious problem in terms of environmental refugees.

Last but not least, the geography of the Pacific is characterised by the enormous distances between and within most of its countries. The Cook Islands (population less than 25,000) stretch 1,400 km from North to South, and 1,000 km from East to West, while Kiribati (population 100,000) includes Christmas Island located 3,200 km from the country’s capital. In addition, it is the ACP region which is the furthest removed from the EU in geographical terms. This “tyranny of distance” is a serious constraint for development in the Pacific, because of serious diseconomies of distance resulting notably in low frequency and high-cost transport. However, electronic communication is becoming cheaper and more available.

1.4. Regional cooperation

The Pacific Islands Forum (the ‘Forum’) is the premier regional policy-making body of the self-governing states in the Pacific. Established in 1971, its membership includes 14 of the Pacific ACP countries together with Australia and New Zealand.[16] Forum Heads of State and Government meet annually, as do Forum Economics and Education Ministers. Similar meetings are planned for Forum Health Ministers. Ad hoc meetings of Transport and Fisheries Ministers are also held. The Chairmanship of the Forum rotates on an annual basis among the Member States. As regards security, the Biketawa Declaration of 2000 establishes a framework for Forum intra-state security cooperation, which calls for Forum Foreign Affairs Ministers to meet as part of an ad hoc crisis management mechanism for the region.

The Forum is served by its Secretary-General, whose work is supported by the Forum Secretariat . The Secretariat’s overall objective is to service the Member States and to promote Pacific regional cooperation, particularly on economic and trade matters. It also acts as the Forum’s administrative arm, implementing its decisions, including delivering development assistance to Member States. In the case of trade-related assistance, it can also act as implementing agency.

The Forum Secretary-General is also permanent Chair of the Council of Regional Organisations in the Pacific (CROP) , which brings together the Forum Secretariat and nine other Pacific regional organisations (see annex A)[17].

At the October 2005 meeting of Forum Heads of State and Government two important decisions aiming at strengthening regional cooperation were taken. The Leaders approved an Agreement giving the Forum legal personality under international law. They also approved the Pacific Plan and a roadmap for its implementation. This decision represents the culmination of a process started in 2003 by initiative of the New Zealand Forum Chair aimed at strengthening Pacific regionalism. The Plan, covering the years 2005-2015, has been presented as a dynamic framework for strengthened regional cooperation and integration. It remains to be seen how far effective implementation can be achieved. Full implementation will depend on continued political commitment and mobilisation of the required financial resources.

Presently, regional cooperation in the Pacific is neither broad nor deep. Among the explanatory factors can be mentioned the geography of the region, the fact that many Pacific countries are still relatively young as independent states and therefore particularly sensitive about issues pertaining to sovereignty, and the asymmetry between Australia and New Zealand on the one hand, and the Pacific ACP countries on the other[18].

In 2004 intra-regional trade between the Pacific ACP countries was as low as 3%[19], mainly due to transport costs and the limited size of their markets. These countries have concluded the Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA) , aiming to establish a FTA among its parties. The Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations (PACER) is a trade and economic cooperation agreement among all 16 Forum Member States. It sets out the basis for the future development of trade relations among these states[20].

The Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) is a sub-regional trading arrangement among PNG, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji, with New Caledonia as an observer. MSG aims at a FTA in 2008 and aspires to a Customs Union.

There is scope for increased cooperation and synergy between the Pacific ACP countries and the region’s OCTs in areas such as environment and vocational training.

1.5. Key partners of the Pacific beyond Europe, Australia and New Zealand: United States, Japan, China and Taiwan

The United States has important security interests in the Pacific, which it has dominated since its victory in World War II. US trade with the larger Asia-Pacific region has now overtaken its trade with the EU, so also for this reason the US has a strong interest in continued stability. The US National Security Strategy from March 2006 highlights the importance of in particular Japan, South Korea and Australia. In its Quadrennial Defense Review Report from February 2006 the US Department of Defense reports that of the major and emerging powers, China has the greatest potential to compete militarily with the United States, adds that the pace and scope of China’s military build-up already puts regional military balances at risk, and states: “U.S. policy remains focussed on encouraging China to play a constructive, peaceful role in the Asia-Pacific region and to serve as a partner in addressing common security challenges, including terrorism, proliferation, narcotics and piracy.” The US has renewed economic and military agreements (Compacts of Free Association) with Palau, Micronesia and the Marshall Islands. The US also has territories in the Pacific, and Hawaii is a US state. Having curtailed its development cooperation with the region in the past the US has recently reengaged, notably with Vanuatu. The US has indicated its interest in seeing the EU pursue an active role in the region.

Japan has security, foreign affairs, trade and fishery interests in the region, and is traditionally an important donor, specialising mainly in infrastructure. As memories of World War II fade Japan’s cooperation with the Pacific ACP countries becomes easier.

China ’s role[21] in the Pacific region is growing in line with its increasing economic weight in the world. There is also migration from China to the Pacific ACP countries. China is competing with Taiwan for diplomatic relations with a number of the 13 Pacific ACP countries, which are members of the UN[22]. It already pursues defence cooperation with PNG, Fiji and Tonga. China has been a “Dialogue Partner” of the Forum since 1989 and has contributed generously to its activities. Since 1992 Taiwan has held its own separate post-Forum meeting with “friendly” Pacific Islands States. This competition between China and Taiwan, through investments and development cooperation, can be destabilising for the Pacific ACP countries concerned, as was seen in PNG in 1999, and most recently in Vanuatu, where it caused a political crisis in 2004.

2. EU AND THE PACIFIC

2.1. EU – Pacific relations so far

EU relations with the region are based on the colonial past , most recently with the UK, France and Portugal as the important players, and before that Germany and Spain. These EU Member States have all influenced the region in ways which are still perceptible today. The influence of British political institutions and tradition has been profound. Many Pacific ACP countries are members of the Commonwealth and most of these retain the Queen of England as Head of State[23].

France and UK have territories in the Pacific. The EU has an Association Agreement with four OCT in the region. The OCT are subject to a different preferential regime from the ACP countries. Under their statutes of autonomy, the French OCT are showing an increased interest in Pacific regional cooperation as they are enhancing contacts with their neighbours and their region.

France is a regional power with an important military presence and a series of diplomatic representations in the region, as well as a growing cooperation with Australia. France also engages in development cooperation with Pacific ACP countries, in particular with Vanuatu.

While the United Kingdom is presently phasing out its development cooperation with the Pacific ACP countries, it remains engaged through its diplomatic representations, its investments, volunteer programmes and its close relations with Australia, New Zealand and the United States.

Several EU Member States are strengthening official contacts with Pacific ACP countries. In addition, many Member States are engaged in other ways in the region, e.g. through scientific research or through a number of European NGOs , mainly environmental or faith-based, in particular from the UK, France, Germany, Italy and The Netherlands.

A number of EU Member States, in particular Portugal , have cooperation activities with Timor-Leste.

The EU’s relations with the Pacific ACP countries are structured, and have been so for decades, first on the basis of the Lome Conventions, and now by the Cotonou Agreement . In political terms an important objective for the EU has been to underpin a successful stabilisation following decolonisation while supporting economic and social progress. Considering the political volatility experienced in a number of Pacific ACP countries, this goal has not yet been convincingly attained. Research and evaluations indicate that the development assistance has had a positive impact in the region and that without it growth would have been lower and social indicators poorer. However, analyses indicate that in the last decade overall economic growth remained sluggish on average and insufficient to reduce poverty.

The EU has furthermore agreed Joint Political Declarations with Australia and New Zealand, and entered into a series of separate Agreements with these two countries, on the basis of which regular consultations are held.

The Pacific ACP countries and the EU share core values , such as democracy, human rights, rule of law, effective multilateralism and environmental protection. These countries are generally supportive of EU environmental positions. They also play a growing role in international institutions. Some of them, notably Fiji, contribute to UN peacekeeping missions worldwide[24].

The EU’s political dialogue with individual Pacific ACP Member States is limited. At the regional level, a broad political dialogue is pursued with the Forum, through the so-called Post-Forum Dialogue, which traditionally follows immediately after the Forum Leaders annual Summit[25]. Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement concerning essential elements was triggered in the case of the 2000 coup in Fiji. Cooperation was resumed in 2003.

Members of the European Parliament observed the 2001 parliamentary elections in Solomon Islands. A fully-fledged EU election observation mission took take place in Fiji in 2006.

EU-Pacific trade is relatively small and erratic. Unprocessed agricultural products, in particular palm oil and sugar dominate Pacific exports to the EC. Machinery, ships and boats are important items in the EC export structure. There has always been a trade surplus for the Pacific in its exchanges with the EC. Australia and New Zealand are major trading partners for the region particularly as regards Pacific ACP imports. The EC is a relatively small trading partner for the Pacific ACP absorbing around 10% of their exports and providing an estimated 5% of their imports. Based on 5-year averages PNG and Fiji together accounted for a full 90% of the Pacific ACP countries’ exports to the EU, while taking 41% of the total imports from the EU. In 2004 Pacific ACP goods exports to the EU amounted to € 588 million, while goods imports from the EU amounted to € 333 million[26]. Fiji currently exports half of its production (i.e. approximately 165,000 tonnes of a total production of 330,000 tonnes) to the EU under Sugar Protocol at guaranteed prices.

The EU has either signed or initialled fishery agreements with three Pacific ACP countries: Kiribati, Solomon Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia. A small number of Spanish and French vessels are fishing with licenses under these agreements. In December 2004, the European Community acceded to the Western Central Pacific Fisheries Convention (WCPFC), which is responsible for overseeing the sustainable management and conservation of tuna in the Pacific. The EU also supports the scientific tuna stock work of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC). The EC is also an active participant in the on-going inter-governmental consultations for the creation of a regional fisheries management organisation for non-tuna species in the Pacific.

EC development assistance to the region is substantial, and total aid granted under successive Lomé Conventions and the Cotonou Agreement exceeds € 1.8 billion.[27] Furthermore, Timor-Leste has received more than € 200 M under other instruments since 1999. In addition, the European Investment Bank and the Centre for Development of Enterprises are also active in the region. Together with ODA flows from the EU Member States, such as Portugal’s bilateral aid of more than € 300 M for Timor-Leste, the EU is one of the few major donors to the Pacific ACP countries, and this includes support financed by the EU’s budget, such as the Erasmus Mundus programme, food security and environment.

In September 2004 the EU and 14 Pacific ACP countries opened negotiations on an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA )[28]. These aim at arriving at an ambitious and development-oriented arrangement, which should promote regional integration and economic development, policy reform, sustainable management of resources, such as fisheries, thereby also contributing to the reduction of poverty. The ACP side has indicated its interest in securing arrangements relating to services and tourism, fisheries and investment as well as goods. Their commitment to these negotiations was most recently confirmed by Pacific ACP Leaders in October 2005. However, given that negotiations need to be concluded before the end of 2007, there is a need for the ACP side to accelerate preparations and negotiations[29]. EPA will replace the preferential access scheme contained in Cotonou and which is currently covered by a WTO waiver, which expires in 2008.

2.2. Present challenges facing EU – Pacific relations

Presently, EU relations with the Pacific suffer from a lack of political profile and visibility on both sides, inadequate arrangements for regional interaction and reduced efficiency in development cooperation efforts due to a lack of focus and high transaction costs. Beyond the bilateral consultation mechanisms between the EU and Australia and New Zealand respectively, the only structured interaction between the EU and the Pacific region is provided by the so-called Post-Forum Dialogue.

Immediately following the Forum Summit, the Heads of State and Government interact with main Forum partners and donors through the Post-Forum Dialogue at ministerial level. On the Forum side this involves a panel consisting of three ministers and the Forum Secretary-General with a minister representing the Forum Chair as head of Delegation.

Presently, the EU takes part in this Dialogue with a delegation consisting only of the Commission. However, twice the EU Council Presidency has been associated to the Commission in this exercise. In parallel, France and the UK, the two EU Member States with remaining significant engagements in the Pacific region, hold separate Dialogue-meetings with the Forum panel.

Although positive exchanges have taken place over the years between the EU and the Pacific region through this arrangement, the Post-Forum Dialogue does not fully reflect the importance of EU-Pacific relations and is insufficient in terms of sustaining the bilateral relationship between the regions. Particular shortcomings are as follows:

1. Limited visibility for the EU in the Pacific. The arrangement does not reflect the fact that the EU is the second largest donor in the region. No joint communiqué is issued after the dialogue. The number of Dialogue partners has been increasing over the years.

2. Limited visibility for the Pacific in Europe due to lack of formal preparation in the EU institutions and the fact that the meetings always take place in the Pacific region.

3. Limited impact on both sides due to lack of formalisation.

4. As the Post-Forum Dialogue takes place the day after the Forum summit is concluded, there is insufficient time for the EU side to properly prepare its reactions to the summit outcome.

5. The time allotted to the EU dialogue is insufficient to deal with an increasingly comprehensive EU-Pacific agenda. The distribution of responsibilities between the two parties as regards the issues in the agenda is unsatisfactory.

Full engagement in the Cotonou partnership entails sustained political dialogue, co-management of development cooperation and full participation in the EPA process. For a number of the smallest Pacific ACP countries such intensive cooperation poses a serious challenge. The costs for these countries relating to their Cotonou obligations is substantial, the cooperation may therefore not reach critical mass for them, and may even outweigh the benefits. For countries with limited administrative capacity there is the added concern that the cooperation may crowd out other and perhaps more important activities.

The European OCT face specific challenges, such as economic, social and environmental vulnerability, as well as problems of scale and progressive erosion of their trade preferences with the EU. At the same time, the OCT have a number of strengths, such as advanced education, health and research facilities and relatively developed economies, which they bring to the growing ACP-OCT interaction in the region.

Annex A

CROP Agencies

The ten organisations are:

The Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS)

Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA)

Pacific Islands Development Programme (PIDP)

Secretariat for the Pacific Community (SPC)

South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC)

South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP)

South Pacific Tourism Organisation (SPTO)

University of the South Pacific (USP)

South Pacific Board for Educational Assessment (SPBEA)

Fiji School of Medicine (FSchM)

The CROP membership varies significantly and is summarised in the table below.

Annex B

European Representations in Pacific ACP Countries |

Papua New Guinea | EC Delegation, UK High Commission, French Embassy |

Fiji | EC Regional Delegation, UK High Commission, French Embassy |

Timor Leste | EC Technical Office, Portuguese Embassy, UK Embassy, Irish Representative Office, French Co-operation Office |

Solomon Islands | EC Office, UK High Commission |

Vanuatu | EC Office, French Embassy |

Samoa | EC Technical Office, UK High Commission |

Kiribati | EC Technical Office |

[1] Cookovi otoki, otočje Fidži, Kiribati, Marshallovi otoki, Federativne države Mikronezije, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua Nova Gvineja, Samoa, Salomonovi otoki, Vzhodni Timor, Tonga, Tuvalu in Vanuatu.

[2] Vzhodni Timor ima status opazovalca.

[3] Za podrobnosti glej prilogo.

[4] Za podrobnosti glej prilogo.

[5] Devet agencij CROP: specializirane tehnične agencije, ki delujejo na podlagi mednarodnih sporazumov na regionalni ravni v Pacifiku.

[6] Načrt za Pacifik kot eno prednostnih nalog regije navaja omogočanje mednarodnega financiranja za trajnostni razvoj, biološko raznovrstnost in varstvo okolja ter za preprečevanje učinkov podnebnih sprememb v Pacifiku. V okviru tega naslova Načrt za Pacifik navaja tudi celosten načrt za kmetijstvo in gozdarstvo. Politika otokov Tihega oceana, sprejeta leta 2002, upravičuje celostno upravljanje oceana v interesu prihodnjih generacij prebivalcev pacifiških otokov in predvideva integriran okvir za ukrepe pobud za ocean.

[7] Skupino sestavljajo Sekretariat pacifiške skupnosti (SPC), Južnopacifiška komisija za uporabno geografijo (SOPAC) in Pacifiške regionalni okoljski program (PREP).

[8] Glej prilogo.

[9] Of the 15 Pacific ACP countries six (Cook Islands, FSM, Nauru, Niue, Palau and the Republic of the Marshall Islands) have a total population of around or less than 250.000, but combined EEZs that exceed 8 million km2.

[10] All 15 Pacific ACP countries are SIDS (Small Island Developing States), and they participate actively in the UN-sponsored SIDS’ process, which most recently resulted in the Mauritius Declaration and Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of SIDS agreed in January 2005.

[11] Secessionist war on the island of Bougainville in PNG; tensions in Solomon Islands; repeated coups in Fiji; severe economic and financial crisis in Nauru; democratic deficit in Tonga.

[12] While PNG is ranked 130th in Transparency International’s corruption perception index, in some other Pacific countries corruption is a minor issue, such as in Kiribati, where theft is seen as dishonouring, and carries severe social sanctions.

[13] An extreme case is Solomon Islands, which as late as early 2006 did not have a single female member of parliament.

[14] It has been estimated that Papua New Guinea alone has more than 1000 cultural groups speaking some 800 different languages.

[15] The forthcoming UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions will offer a new international framework to promote international cooperation aimed at preserving cultural diversity, which may be important in this regard.

[16] Timor-Leste has observer status in the Forum and is not at present considering full membership.

[17] The core activities of these regional organisations are funded by contributions from Member governments, but they are governed by bodies that reflect their varying membership.

[18] Attempts at sectoral regional integration have had mixed results since the 1970s. PNG, by far the largest Pacific ACP country, established its own higher education system (UPNG, Unitech), while the rest of the region created the University of the South Pacific. Nauru, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu initially created Air Pacific but then quickly set up their own national airlines to promote tourist arrivals directly from major airports in Australia, New Zealand and Hawaii. The Pacific Forum (shipping) Line also proved unviable as a way of servicing the more peripheral states.

[19] Timor-Leste, which acceeded to the Cotonou Agreement in December 2005, is not included in this statistic.

[20] Timor-Leste is neither party to PICTA nor to PACER.

[21] In 2000 the Pacific Islands Forum agreed to establish of a Pacific Trade Office in Beijing and from 2000 to 2004 bilateral trade with China has doubled from USD 267 million to USD 530 million.

[22] Six Forum Member States currently recognise Taiwan: Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, Palau and Nauru.

[23] Pacific culture has influenced major European artists, such as the painter Paul Gauguin and the author W. Somerset Maugham. The Pacific also provides a permanent source of inspiration for the European haute couture art and industry. English is an official language in all the present Pacific ACP countries, apart from Timor-Leste, which has Portuguese as an official language, while French is spoken in Vanuatu and in the French OCT. The fact that so many Pacific islanders speak European languages facilitates exchange and understanding between the two regions.

[24] Fiji’s role in international peacekeeping is quite remarkable. This small country has participated in virtually every UN peacekeeping mission - including in Congo, Namibia, Cambodia, Timor-Leste and Lebanon – and also in Europe, where Fiji has contributed to the stabilisation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Kosovo.

[25] Cf section 3.1. below.

[26] As a result the EU was their second most important export market, after Australia and before Japan, while the EU was only 6th on the list of countries/regions the Pacific ACP countries source their imports from, behind Australia, Singapore, New Zealand, USA and Japan.

[27] Since independence Timor-Leste has benefited from substantial Community assistance under the ALA Regulation.

[28] Timor-Leste, which acceded to the Cotonou Agreeement in December 2005, does not at present participate in the EPA negotiations.

[29] The EU recognises that the Pacific ACP countries’ close links with Australia, New Zealand and the USA make these negotiations more complex. While trade flows between the Pacific ACP countries and the EU are limited, Australia and New Zealand are major trading partners and a FTA with them may imply major adjustment needs for the Pacific ACP countries. However, the opening of the formal negotiations on EPA, have not triggered demands by Australia and New Zealand to open discussions on parallel free trade negotiations as foreseen under Article 6 of the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations (PACER).