Europe balks at imposing ban on Nigeria trade

Date: 16/11/1995

By Elizabeth Wise

NIGERIA's defiance of international pleas not to hang nine political activists - and the limited response proposed by member states - has fuelled fears that the EU cannot respond forcefully to a challenge and suggestions that it puts big business before politics.

An emergency meeting of member states called this week to respond to the defiant regime of General Sani Abacha did not, according to diplomats, come close to imposing trade sanctions.

“The conversation did not even get that far,” said one. Another commented: “Two countries suggested it and then the debate died.”

Diplomats from several EU countries said the idea was not seriously explored because of considerations of “commerce and contracts”, or business interests.

“There are big investments in Nigeria. To impose sanctions and cancel contracts would be an incredible destruction of capital,” said one.

Member state officials did agree, however, to recommend three measures to EU governments: a ban on arms sales to Lagos; a freezing of development aid for the country and its suspension from the Lomé Convention; and visa requirements for all Nigerian government officials and their families. These are expected to be agreed at a meeting of EU foreign ministers on Monday (20 November).

But the European Parliament has suggested that governments should consider going further. With passions heightened by a visit to Strasbourg by Ken Wiwa, son of the writer Ken Saro-Wiwa - who was hung with eight other activists last weekend after a closed trial - Euro MPs will vote today (16 November) on a resolution calling for a consumer boycott of Shell products and asking the Council of Ministers to “consider” imposing an oil embargo on Nigeria.

This week's meeting of member state officials followed an announcement by the European Commission at the weekend that it was freezing aid to Nigeria, a move which affects 225 million ecu of the 365 million ecu allocated to it up until 1999. The remainder is already in the pipeline, and Commission officials said they were trying to see how much of it they could recall.

The freeze does not, however, affect humanitarian aid for Nigeria, where one in five Africans live.

The planned arms embargo only tightens restrictions already in place. Current EU rules are that applications for new export licences are renewed case by case “with a presumption of denial”. The new ban would also apply to supplies destined for Nigerian peacekeeping troops, such as the mission now in Liberia.

Similarly, the visa rule tightens restrictions already in place by extending them to civilian members of the government and their families in addition to the military members and their families, who are barred from entry into the EU. But diplomats said officials had decided against freezing Nigerian government members' assets in Europe on the grounds that it would be “impractical”.

Suspending a country from the Lomé Convention, the treaty that binds the EU to 70 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) nations, is not without precedent. Sudan is still on the sidelines because of an oppressive military dictatorship.

But the EU cannot expel either country without their agreement, because a decision to expel a member of the convention requires the unanimous approval of all 70 members, including the country concerned.

An oil embargo against the huge exporter now appears very unlikely. Sweden, however, plans to register its dissent on Monday with a statement that the measures should include a ban on EU member states importing Nigerian oil.

EU business in Nigeria includes consultation and development contracts attached to the millions of ecu worth of Lomé projects, as well as massive investments by companies such as Royal Dutch/Shell which has been drilling oil there for the past 30 years.

Rather than answering the question of whether an embargo would hurt Nigeria's government or its citizens, EU officials appeared to focus on their countries' business interests.

“If you force companies to cancel contracts there, they will be punished by the Nigerian clients,” commented one diplomat.

Some at the emergency meeting noted that trade sanctions are usually imposed by the United Nations and then implemented by EU states.

Most took that as reason enough to give up. But the Maastricht Treaty article outlining rules for suspending trade with a country makes no mention of the UN, and requires only a qualified majority vote of EU members.

In Strasbourg on Tuesday (14 November), UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali said economic sanctions, such as an oil embargo, would have to be raised first in the UN Security Council.

With the US, the UK and France apparently reluctant to begin such proceedings, an import ban on Nigerian oil is unlikely.