[ad_1]
It started as a rumor, then unconfirmed reports that Rwanda would have closed its border with Uganda.
After complaints from businessmen on both sides who could not get to the other side, the authorities then officially announced that the crossing of the border had been closed well. It was months ago.
Initially, there was no reason to justify the move and many thought it was a "minor" issue that needed to be addressed to bring the occupied crossing back to normal operations. But the days have turned into weeks and the border has remained closed until now. Last week, Rwanda partially opened the border to trucks.
It was the intense exchanges between the two countries, mainly the main leaders, that made people aware of the intensity of the problem.
Nevertheless, the recognition of the leaders did not help to solve the problem. For several months, a common border between Uganda and Rwanda has remained closed, thus jeopardizing the activities of hundreds, if not thousands, of businessmen and other people using the point of passage.
The clashes between the two countries, which led to the closure of the border post, affected not only the two countries, but also the rest of East Africa, the border being not used by Ugandans and Rwandans.
This action could not have come at a worse time than when East Africa is trying to promote intraregional trade as part of its common market protocol. During the closing months of the border, we witnessed a wave of diplomatic activities with Rwandan President Paul Kagame visiting Tanzania and a meeting of President John Magufuli at State House. A few days later, a photo provided by the State House showed that President Magufuli was receiving a special message from his Ugandan counterpart, Yoweri Museveni.
Although there is no official recognition, it seems that Rwanda and Uganda have trusted Dr. Magufuli as an intermediary to resolve their misunderstandings. It is encouraging to note that these two countries have trusted other East African member states to play the role of mediator.
But this happened after misunderstandings between the two East African countries reached a critical point: Kagame said that Uganda had plotted to overthrow him. This is a serious allegation and many believe it is at this point that the East African Community (EAC) should have intervened.
This regional body, which was re-established in 1999 as the central body responsible for designing the economic, social and political development of the region, was an appropriate body to address the misunderstandings of Rwanda and Uganda.
Unfortunately, the Community has relegated to the background until the two rivals see a mediator to President Magufuli. And this is just one of the problems for which the EAC has not been able to play its muscles in the region. The regional body was supposed to tackle many other issues but decided not to do so. The protracted crisis in southern Sudan is a good example. Since the troubled country joined the regional group, the EAC has not done enough to help it out of the crisis.
When the country was admitted to the club, many people in the region thought that the EAC would use its powers to help the youngest country in the world overcome the crisis that is impeding the economic, social, cultural and political development of the emerging country. .
While the promotion of democracy is part of the EAC mandate, we have witnessed anti-democratic practices in many EAC member states and the regional body has chosen to stay away from these issues.
Some in the region believe that the EAC is not supposed to intervene on local issues. What such people forget is that it is these "local problems" that make the EAC member states what they are and that these members make of East Africa.
This means that East Africa is made up of local issues that are embraced by all Member States. Staying out of these issues is like staying out of East African affairs. Taking this Rwandan / Ugandan spit as an example. What can regional programs do when a border between two EAC member states is closed?
Have we considered the effects of closing the border on hundreds, even thousands of businessmen, large, medium and small? Have we examined the effects of moving to these two landlocked countries?
It is therefore self-evident that if businessmen from Uganda and Rwanda are affected by this decision, the whole region will overheat, because they have trade and trade relations with their colleagues from other East African and Caribbean countries. beyond. The EAC is supposed to facilitate free trade and the movement of goods, services and people in the region. If he does not intervene in what is happening in these countries, how can he do his facilitation work? Obviously, he will always find himself isolated if he does not intervene in what happens to his members.
The East African Community should take note that the continent is now moving towards a continental free trade area that has been ratified by about half of the African countries. As more and more countries ratify the agreement, East Africa is expected to occupy a central place as it is one of the most important regions in the world. continent where resources are a resource.
Therefore, the EAC should be given greater and greater responsibility each time it is to exploit regional capacity and capacity to participate in continental and global trade.
The days devoted to regional trade are rapidly fading. To be enforceable, this trade agreement would create a $ 3 trillion market and a market of 1.2 billion people without tariff and border restrictions. The signatures of 22 countries must be ratified. Since Ethiopia became the 21st country to ratify the agreement recently, it only needs one country to implement it.
In such circumstances, events such as the closing of borders, as we have seen between Rwanda and Uganda, can only disadvantage the region in continental and global trade.
Major African business leaders have recently met to strengthen their support for the FTA. They believe this is one of the best ways to exploit continental economic power. As the continent accelerates on the path of a merged continental economy, the EAC can not afford to stay behind.
For this continental approach to work, political will is essential. Regional groupings should be at the forefront of resolving issues that impede trade and economic activities in their respective regions.
The CFTA has many benefits that will help advance local development programs in the region. That the EAC and its members do not have to bog down in the continental initiative.
Nyanje is an independent journalist
Source link
