The relationship between EU and ECOWAS and mobility control

by Giulia Gasser, Ulrich Stege and Daniele Valeri

Let’s help them

A glance at the aid

Migration management has become a central issue in the relationships between the European Union and the African countries. Whereas in 2000, the Cotonou Agreement dedicated a residual space to this matter, highlighting the potential positive effects of migration on development and concentrating cooperation efforts on strengthening economic integration processes, migration flows currently have primary importance in cooperation and development programmes between the EU and African countries.

Already in 2005, with the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility (GAMM), the EU inextricably linked cooperation and development policies with migration management. A new public discourse on migration and development was being formed, which would lead, within 15 years, to the structuring of a complex system of EU border externalization policies. The 2015 Valletta Summit marked a turning point in the relations between the EU and African countries: the conference led to the establishment of the European Trust Fund (EUTF) for Africa, whose objective was “to address the root causes of instability, illegal migration and forced displacement in Africa”. This fund is worth over 4.5 billion euros and is financed primarily through the European Development Fund (EDF).

This led to the growth of a promiscuity area between development programmes and migration control policies, leading to a twist in the direction of security in development aid. Following the Summit, the Migration Partnership Framework was established, which redefined the priorities of previous agreements, primarily in relation to development policies, around the single objective of migration management. As a result, the various development aid programmes are used to a large extent to stem irregular migration, from a basically European perspective, through so-called informal mechanisms. In fact, part of the strategic approach of the EU is to address the root causes of migration in the countries of origin of migrants.

In their countries

Regional free movement regimes within African agendas

The establishment of regional free movement regimes is an ambition for most African regional economic communities, with some – most notably ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) – well advanced in achieving this goal. These regional free movement regimes are considered important tools for regional economic integration and a significant driver of growth and development. At African Union (AU) level, the establishment of free movement regimes within all regional economic communities is seen as the critical basis on which to build economic integration and free movement at continental level.

In recent years, there has been a turning point in regional integration policies. Free movement is in fact a key ingredient for a politically unified Africa, as presented in the AU Agenda 2063 adopted in 2015. In 2018, the AU adopted a Protocol on the Free Movement of Persons, the Right of Residence and the Right of Establishment.

In the same year, the AU also developed the Migration Policy Framework for Africa, which “recommends the harmonization and strengthened implementation of AU and Regional Economic Communities free movement provisions related to residence and establishment, as well as enhanced cooperation among Member States in facilitating free movement.” The African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), launched in 2018 and signed by all but three African countries,  is a critical precursor of free movement. The AfCFTA in fact aims to foster “the movement of business persons across fifty- four African countries with a combined population of over one billion people. The pre- existence and success of the CFTA means that the concept of free movement of people is not an alien one and that a discussion can be built on that”, as argued by the African Union Commission (AUC) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in a recent study.

Beyond these high-level policies and agreements, several ambitious initiatives have been established in support of regional free movement – most notably the

The Joint Labour Migration Programme for Africa, adopted in January 2015, is another example of initiatives developed to foster regional free movement. The programme in fact aims to improve and coordinate an exchange of labour across Africa, keeping a protection dimension on the rights of migrant workers and strengthening the social and economic benefits they bring.

In spite of the various initiatives promoted in terms of free movement, it is still necessary to address the challenges and the resistances at regional and state level for the effective implementation of these commitments.

Regional free movement is in fact seen as an economic and security risk by a significant number of African states.  This resistance has been reinforced  as a result of the EU’s engagement on mobility and migration issues in Africa. Nowadays in fact African governments are increasingly adopting a narrative that presents migration as a risk and that stresses the need to securitise borders and limit movement, while prior to 2015 African migration priorities would have focused on migration as bringing development and remittances. Such a new approach on migration and mobility – matching EU priorities – is a route to access EU funds. But it also reflects the  “contagion of the EU’s obsession with irregular migration as a threat.” However these explanations do not tell the whole story. In fact, for some African states, the EU’s securitised approach to migration fits well with their perspectives and interests. In any case, there does appear to be a tension between African regional free movement ambitions and the EU’s migration agenda.

ECOWAS regional free movement agenda

West Africa is one of the most mobile regions in the world. Contemporary migratory flows in West Africa are rooted in socio-economic, political and historical-cultural factors which have had serious impacts on intra-regional migration of cross-border workers, professionals, female traders, irregular workers and refugees. The emigration configuration is also highly diversified, with some countries serving as source, origin, and transit routes for migrants. Flows within the region are greater than those towards the Maghreb or Europe: 90% intra-regional migration compared with 10% extra-regional.

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is one of the most advanced expressions of regional free movement regimes in Africa, particularly regarding the free movement of persons.  Today, visa-free entry and free circulation in West African states are consolidated realities, reflecting a long tradition of seasonal and circular migration in the region. Founded in 1975, ECOWAS enacted a Protocol on free movement of persons, the right of residence and establishment as early as 1979. ECOWAS citizens are entitled to visa-free entry into other member countries. The ECOWAS passport was also introduced in 2000.

Let’s help them at their place

Cooperation between the European Union and ECOWAS occurs through formal and informal mechanisms.

Formal mechanisms are characterized by interactions between institutions through dialogue platforms “best practices”’ and information are exchanged. Following the RCP (Regional Consultative Processes) model, whereby a group of states engage in regular, informal, behind-closed-doors dialogue on migration, the EU has established several dialogue platforms and ECOWAS participates in two of them: the MIDWA and the Rabat Process. MIDWA aims to assist and encourage ECOWAS Member States to discuss common migration issues in a regional context, while the Rabat Process, boasting the participation of various European and African states as well as the European Commission and ECOWAS, provides a framework for consultation and coordination on key issues related to the phenomenon of migration.

Cooperation also takes place through informal mechanisms and through the negotiation of bilateral agreements with individual countries in the ECOWAS region. In addition, the EU has expressed interest in assisting states in developing conditions to promote regional labour mobility as an alternative to irregular migration to Europe.

The object of these bilateral agreements is primarily economic aid to strengthen capacity in terms of border security, fighting trafficking in illicit goods and humans and building capacity to facilitate easy readmission of returnees.

Side effects of aid: obstacles to internal movement in the region

There are many critical issues regarding the European approach to relations with ECOWAS.

First of all, bilateral negotiation with individual member statesrather than with the ECOWAS secretariat means that the EU is able to select the countries identified as most at risk of migration and make them benefit from substantial aid to the detriment of others as they are considered key countries to counter irregular arrivals in Europe. For example, Niger, due to its strategic location as a transit country to Libya, has benefitted more than any other country from the EUTF, receiving 266.2 million euros in just 3 years.

In addition, several critical points emerge from the management of the EUTF itself. Among these, the main concern can be identified in the decision-making process regarding the destination of the Fund, which is governed by European actors. This implies that ECOWAS members cannot decide on the nature of the initiatives being funded, which is a clear violation of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.

EU action directed at blocking migration flows within ECOWAS is forcing the region to look at free movement from the perspective of European migration policies.

The EU is clearly facilitating, if not forcibly demanding, the implementation of laws that directly hinder the ECOWAS integration programme and are aimed at restricting, if not prohibiting, movement and travel within the area where the ECOWAS integration programme is instead anchored on freedom of movement, which includes, among other things, the right to migrate and settle in the territory of a member state other than the state of origin. EU policies in ECOWAS are undermining this programme; member states are now more concerned with enhancing border security than facilitating the full realization of residence and dwelling rightswhich, contrary to EU policies, promote intra-regional migration.

EU-sponsored awareness campaigns, which are widespread in these countries, are primarily aimed at convincing potential migrants to stay in their countries of origin.

The EU’s policy on freedom of movement is marked by a paranoid focus on border security within the free movement area; the EU’s partnership with Niger and Mali, as outlined by AU and UNECA officials, has been about securing borders, directly hindering the movement of ECOWAS citizens. Thus, the permeability of the borders, attributed to the ECOWAS free movement regime is seen as the cause of the infiltration of weapons for terrorists and gangs, trafficking and smuggling of goods, human trafficking, and other security threats in these countries.

At the same time, this massive effort towards movement restriction and securityaimed at hindering or preventing immigration to Europe has caused an increase in the number of cases of human rights violations within the area of free movement.

In addition to the fact that restricting or preventing free mobility violates the right to free movement of ECOWAS citizens, the manner in which these EU-inspired policies are implemented exposes migrants to abuse. ECOWAS citizens crossing these borders often experience harassment by security officials which may constitute violation of the fundamental rights to personal freedom and human dignity.

In any case, there is no question that border management has become a lucrative business, from biometric control systems, barriers, maritime and land interception systems, surveillance technology, etc. to the use of border control systems.

A slogan is a set of words designed to direct our thoughts and our choices, but at the same time it hides a different meaning: now we can understand, albeit briefly, what thought is behind the statement “Let’s help them in their home countries” and the consequences of the policies that implement it.

Photo by David Rotimi on Unsplash