Europe with Africa

A hypothetical classification of human suffering in history would undoubtedly see the African continent and its peoples taking top place: not so much in terms of intensity (in what corner of the planet have people not suffered, and unfortunately continue to suffer, as a result of war, humiliation, poverty and disease?), as due to a kind of “insistence” in refusing to emerge from a situation of objective delay in development – in the Western connotation of the concept – that has lasted since time immemorial. And the solution to this failure to develop still belongs more to the sphere of hope than to that of socio-economic policy or any tangible prospect of realization.With the passage of years, some key factors of African backwardness also lose value as grounds for historical or sociological justification. And this in spite of the existence of innumerable and conspicuous schemes of financial and other forms of aid under the aegis of organizations and agencies of every kind and every nationality: from the UNO to the World Bank, from the Club of Paris (the main donor countries) to the African Union, from the Catholic Church and the various agencies of Islam to the galaxy of NGOs, and “last but not least” the European Union.The resources (in terms of people and methods) so far dedicated to Africa have clearly been inadequate. Far greater resources are needed to win the battle against diseases and epidemics, redistribute wealth more fairly, promote education, democratize institutions, curb clandestine immigration, promote peace and restore to the African people the dignity of which they have been robbed, or which they have perhaps never possessed. The Africa of the third millennium has a need “ex novo” of a complete “check-up”, and a medium-to-long-term programme of rehabilitation embracing all sectors of social, cultural, economic and political life: education, professional training, agriculture, environment, healthcare, welfare, management of water resources, employment, immigration, foreign investments, infrastructures, public order, ethics in public administration, solidarity, and pacification – not forgetting, of course, the primary needs of hundreds of millions of people who are daily struggling for their very survival, and who are daily losing the battle: the victims of a “human darwinism” intolerable for science and our conscience today. It is especially the concepts of development and aid to development that need to be radically overhauled today: both in theory (for planning, negotiations, the definition of priorities and allocations) and in practice (for the actual implementation of useful and lasting programmes and projects). People, and not money, need to be placed at the centre; the human person as the architect and engineer of his own new home; the person as an active subject and not a passive object.Lastly – and it seems we are on the right road – constructive and fruitful collaboration between donors and beneficiaries can no longer fail to pursue the path of co-management in aid and investment: if hitherto the money – on the basis of projects monitored from every possible aspect – reached local government and from there, all too often, all trace of it was lost, today the level of control is even greater and effective disbursement of the funds is subjected to rigid rules of transparency (as far as is humanly possible) and the guarantee of constant control by the donor himself. The European Union deserves credit for having opened the way and set an example to the international community, thanks to the recent introduction of new rules for the management of the European Fund for Development (EFD) and more generally for the conducting of bilateral and multilateral relations with ACP countries (Africa, Caribbean, Pacific), which make any financing conditional on the full participation of the Commission and other EU organs responsible for the management of whatever project, whether political or financial.A few years ago, on the margins of a training course in Brussels on EU contracts in third countries, a senior administrator of the Commission who has since retired, and whose professional life was dedicated with passion and integrity to relations with the ACP countries, the African ones in particular, made an assertion that aroused some curiosity: “The future of Europe is Africa”. We cannot exclude this proposition, and perhaps we would like to believe it. In any case, the health of the world’s finances and the position of Europe today on the international stage do not seem able to repudiate this forecast. Rather they seem to confirm it. But perhaps even more we would like to believe the opposite: “The future of Africa is Europe”.