This document discusses the need for a new treaty between Africa and Europe to address shared security challenges like terrorism. It notes the "annus horribilis" of 2015, with attacks in both continents like Charlie Hebdo, Garissa University, and the Mediterranean migrant crisis. It argues the current Africa-EU strategic partnership is not adequate given worsening threats. A new treaty could help promote peace as the foundation of relations between the two regions, which will share over 2.5 billion citizens by 2050. It would also help prevent, manage and resolve crises that impact both continents.

1. 1
UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA
Governance Innovation Week
Pretoria, 5 June 2015
EU-Africa Workshop: ‘Inter-regional dynamics: Re-framing Europe-Africa relations’
Keynote Address by Philippe Darmuzey
After « Charlie » and « Garissa »,
addressing the external dimension of global terrorism :
An Africa-Europe International Treaty on Peace, Security & Development
Dear colleagues, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Let me first of all, thank the Center for the Study of Governance Innovation for inviting me to
speak and for hosting me in the premises of this glorious University of Pretoria.
As you may have noticed, the recent dramatic events in Garissa have led me to change the
heading of my address whilst, unfortunately there was no reason to change the substance .
2015 Annus Horribilis
In a recent Round Table in Brussels, I have discussed with african diplomats The role of the
post-2015 EU Development policy in Addressing Peace, Security and Migration issues… The
first half of 2015 has offered dramatic circumstances on the two sides of the Mediterranean to
illustrate our debate. You will probably agree with me to call this year 2015 “annus horribilis”
regarding Peace.
On the two continents, security threats are now part of our daily life.
In our lifetime, we will never forget the horrifying terrorist attacks in Paris and Garissa, the
continued widespread criminal activity of Boko Haram1
of an unprecedented magnitude in
West Africa as well as the pursuit of unpunished war and terrorist acts by DAECH, Al
Quaeda in Islamic Maghreb, Al Quaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, MUJAO 2
and their
associates in Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere.
4 Million people marched in the streets of Paris, in other French cities and European capitals
on 11 January following the Paris terrorist attacks. But we should not forget either the attacks
1
BOKO HARAM : Boko Haram is a branch of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. It has been
active in Nigeria since 2009. The name of the group means "Western" or "non-Islamic" education is a
sin. The group is active in the north of Nigeria, and wants to impose Islamic law as the only law in
Nigeria. It also wants to outlaw education that is not based on Islam in the country.
2
MUJAO, le Mouvement pour l'unicité et le jihad en Afrique de l'Ouest, est un groupe armé
djihadiste salafiste issu d'une scission d'Al-Qaida au Maghreb islamique mi-2011 dans le but d'étendre
l'insurrection islamiste du Maghreb en Afrique de l'Ouest.

2. 2
of the Brussels synagogue, and a few days after January 11, the other attempts thwarted in
Belgium, in Copenhagen, the killing of 21 Christians in Egypt, the proliferation of terror acts
by the Lord's Resistance Army in East Africa, and by Al Sheebab3
in the Kenya-Somalia
region.
The latest massacre of 147 students in the Garissa University College on 2 April 2015 is only
the latest manifestation of a situation that continues to worsen. And what can then be said
about the desperate move underway on the Kenya-Somalia border to build a 700 km long wall
against terrorist attacks following Garissa ?
Beyond these events, Africa and Europe are now facing together a new type of threat in 2015.
I am referring to the dramatic Mediterranean migrants crisis linked to the business of human
trafficking (Migration-out-of-human trafficking) which has resulted in more than 1700 deaths
in shipwrecks since the beginning of 2015. And this, following a record of more than 3000
deaths in 2014. We know that the situation in Libya is simply an immediate cause of the
crisis, not its deeper roots.
The year 2015 has definitely taught Africa and Europe together that security threats require a
comprehensive approach based on the identification of root causes and a response strategy
which should address both the :
• Internal challenges within our societies, and
• External challenges between Africa and Europe
Today, let’s concentrate on the external challenge. And let’s assume that we all agree that
Africa and Europe share a common global public good : Peace…
Let me now turn to the background of this workshop and start with setting the international
scene.
Setting the scene : the 2015 International debate
On 25 April, The editorial in the French daily "Le Monde" headlined as follows: "Migrants:
the failure of the Europeans, not Europe" ...the European institutions are largely powerless
for good reason: the bulk of migration issues is not part of the EU’s jurisdiction ... It is not
the EU that fails miserably in this case. These are the European nations, rulers and voters."
This statement by Le Monde points to a first feature of the 2015 international debate: the need
to address the magnitude of current global threats through adequate collective capacity and a
revival of the political and regional integration processes both in Europe and in Africa.
My second remark is about the relevance of the recent tragic events of 2015 to the
international agenda. Indeed, in 2015 Development issues will be on top of 4 major
international milestones: (1) 2015 as the European Year for Development; (2) the United
Nations Summit of New York in September 2015 to adopt the Post-2015 Development
agenda; (3) the UN Conference on Climate Change (COP 21 or Paris 2015) to take place in
3
AL Shaabbab : est un groupe terroriste islamiste somalien d'idéologie salafiste créé en 2006 lors de
l'invasion éthiopienne. Ses membres sont couramment appelés « Shebab » ou « Chebab ». Le
groupe est issu de la fraction la plus dure de l'Union des tribunaux islamiques et a pour objectif
l'instauration de la charia dans la région.

3. 3
December; and finally (4) the launching of the debate on the future of ACP-EU relations after
2020 (expiry of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement).
As a third remark, I would like to underline the fast changing nature of development policies
and the politicisation of the development process over the past decade. This is particularly
true of the EU Development policy which has clearly become part of the European External
Action. In 2015 the international debate will have to urgently review the issue of
Development Cooperation as an effective means to meet the growing global challenges,
including Peace and Security. In Europe, as in Africa, development strategies will require a
stronger understanding and consensus regarding a Comprehensive and operational policy
approach, linking security-development-fragility. We can expect the rise of non-aid policies.
The emergence of new Development Goals to replace the MDGs, and non-aid instruments
will most likely reflect the rising need for new Partnership and Ownership approaches. The
ongoing UN debate on Sustainable Development Goals has already identified among the
proposed goals SDG16: ‘Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable
development’.
Against this background,
Does the Africa-EU Strategic Partnership meet the 2015 Peace challenges ?
The 4th Summit between Europe and Africa, held in Brussels from 2 to 4 April 2014, has
presented a mixed picture. If the link between security and development was again recognized
as a strategic priority, concrete progress is obviously not commensurate with the challenges.
The Libyan conflict, the Arab Spring(s), the situation in Somalia for two decades, the
Sudan(s) and Darfur, Chad and the Ivorian crises or past disasters, and other current crises
(Burundi) and conflicts or yet to come from eastern Congo (RDC), the Great Lakes, Central
Africa or Sahel beyond Mali, set the magnitude of the issue. The rapid oblivion of the Libyan
crisis after international intervention (France, United Kingdom, European Union, Atlantic
Alliance (NATO), the Arab League ...) in a context of strained relations with the African
Union, reminds us that the risk is to run a hasty military engagement based on a series of
insufficiently clear doctrinal and strategic terms.
The engagement of the African Union, the European Union and individual Member States
such as France in the Sahel, and other parts of Africa is ever intensifying. However, terrorist
attacks by Al Shabaab in Nairobi and in Garissa and Boko Haram in Nigeria, show the
general inadequacy of means and strategies deployed. Increasing security threats are
rekindling the debate on the need for an enhanced relationship between Europe and Africa in
the area of peace, security and development.
Beyond the issues of governance and corruption, political instability and institutional factors,
drug trafficking, arms trafficking, human trafficking and money-laundering are the raison
d’être of permanently organized groups especially in the Sahelo-Saharan and West Africa
regions. Strengthening links between drug traffickers and terrorist aggravates the porosity of
borders between Africa and Europe, notably through the complex ramifications of these
groups with their corresponding Camorra mafia of the kind in Europe. The attacks of Somali
sheebabs in Nairobi and Garissa recalls the current insufficient capacity of national, regional
or international responses to transregional acts of terrorism.

4. 4
On the European side, it is appropriate to make an opening up and a defragmentation of
multiple centers of decision making and institutional knowledge throughout the security and
development chain in Brussels (Commission, European External Action Service (EEAS),
Council, Parliament ) and in the capitals. The African Peace Facility is subject to a diversity
of legal decision-making, administrative, financial and political procedures that are
weakening its political visibility, scope and operational efficiency. Although the French
intervention in Mali through the Serval operation undoubtedly has had its positive effects, the
method used to involve the European Union has been inadequate
On the African side, already, the crisis in CAR, unlike Mali from the perspective of the
French intervention, illustrates the new responsiveness of the African Union which swiftly
took suspension measures from panAfrican bodies towards officials involved in
unconstitutional change resulting from the rebellion of the Seleka. Again, the Africans are
gradually realizing the need for a critical mass and a pooling of means of response to the
security challenges. Evidence of this is shown by the slow but steady progress of the African
Peace and Security Architecture and the creation and staffing (although symbolic ) of a
Panafrican fund for peace.
On both sides, it is time to elevate to a higher level the joint ambition to address security and
development in Europe and Africa. The current Africa-EU Strategic Partnership4
has
established a first momentum of a new type on political and institutional cooperation and
dynamics at continental and regional level. Progress in the area of Peace and Security is
particularly crucial. Nevertheless the speed of implementation of APSA and the results of the
political dialogue between the Africa and the EU is not adequate in the face of security threats
which keep worsening.
What next ?
Why the Joint Africa-EU Strategy (JAES) should be transformed into a political
Alliance and a security and development Treaty between the two Unions
I would like to review seven good reasons:
1. Peace as the mainspring of EU-Africa relations
The aftermath of the economic crisis in Europe and Africa call for a new pulse of both
continents in pursuit of the integration process and the revival of political Unions.
Persistent threats to security in Europe and beyond, as well as a time evoked fears of a new
Cold War in the Ukraine and Crimea, make it mandatory for the EU as a whole to rethink and
revitalize its security policy and common defense.
Beyond the current borders of the EU, the frequency of European intervention in conflicts and
crises, particularly in Africa continues to grow.
Sustainably address these long-term challenges is the purpose of the proposal for a Euro-
African Treaty for peace, security and development that I made in November 30, 2012 as part
4
Also called JAES : Joint Africa-EU Strategy

5. 5
of the Symposium of the University Montesquieu-Bordeaux: "Africa Peace and Security
Architecture, 10 years after Durban". My proposal analyzed the concrete elements and
feasibility of the establishment of a new Agreement. It was further detailed in a paper
presented at the Ouagadougou Conference on "APSA at the Crossroads", 25-26 October 2013
and updated in the journal "International Francophone Year 2014-2015 "published in
collaboration with Le Monde Diplomatique.
2. The common challenges of Europe and Africa in a space of 2.5 billion
citizens by 2050
Together, Europe and Africa will cover in the middle of the twenty-first century, a contiguous
economic area of 2.5 billion citizens, geographically, economically, culturally and
linguistically close. Despite the economic and democratic progress, crisis situations and
pockets of fragility at local, national or trans-regional level, with their multiple and complex
causes, are not about to disappear from political and strategic concerns of citizens, leaders,
institutions and governments in Africa and Europe. Many opinion leaders on the European
side are rediscovering the importance of peace, strategic partnerships with regional
organizations such as the African Union, which correspond to the configuration of a
multipolar world in which Africa is becoming an actor that counts, beyond the negative
stereotypes of the past.
We need to :
3. Prevent, manage and resolve crises and their consequences for Africa and
Europe
The ongoing conflicts, security threats and crises over the past twenty years , as well as the
emergence of terrorism as a new common public evil, teach us all critical or positive lessons
of the relationship between Europe and Africa in the prevention, management and resolution
of crises and their aftermath.
The consequences of the Arab Spring and the rise of terrorism, arms trafficking and traffick of
human beings, revive the relevance of a more ambitious approach, more comprehensive with
a time horizon of at least 10 years, which seriously questions the 'strategic' vision, patchy and
piecemeal actions of European politicians to this day.
In this context, how not wake up our leaders, asking them to watch, arbitrate and decide
beyond the time horizon of their democratic mandate - whatever the short-term political costs.
Let’s therefore work
4. Towards a post 2015 more politically sustainable Development strategy
Against this picture, there are a number of critical areas worthy of attention during this 2015
Development year:
First of all:
1. Deepening the knowledge & practice of the security-development nexus;
2. Strengthening Policy Coherence for Development;

6. 6
3. Addressing Coherence of Instruments in the Development process;
4. Rethinking the concepts and policies regarding Migration and making a clearer
distinction between “traditional” migration and Migration-out of- human trafficking;
(addressing root causes and appropriate responses);
There is a
5. Need for further integration in the EU and African political processes and their mutual
enrichment (European construction; PanAfrican integration process);
6. Need for new Partnership and Ownership approaches at:
• Global, intercontinental, regional levels;
• Putting emphasis and prioritising proposed SDGs as new Development goals in
particular those (SDG 16 and 17 ) which are supportive of a renewed strategy
between Africa and Europe on global issues; i.e.:
• SDG16: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development
• SDG17: Revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
(complemented by multistakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share
knowledge, expertise, technologies and financial resources to support the
achievement of sustainable development goals in all countries, particularly
developing countries ;
Let’s focus more systematically on
5. The security-development nexus: a demanding multi-dimensional
approach in the long term
The evolution of the international debate on the link between security and development has
led in recent years to the recognition of the need for a comprehensive, integrated and
sequenced approach combining military conflict management, diplomacy, humanitarian and
development policies and instruments. Challenges to peace and security in Africa affect
Europe, directly and indirectly, but are so complex that only a strong and united EU can
mobilize the necessary diplomatic skills (political, military, financial, and the arsenal of
instruments for state building and reconstruction). EU Member States individually have
neither the resources nor the sufficient critical mass. The toolbox of the EU should be further
developed to better complement the policies and instruments such as the African Peace
Facility. The Panafrican Programme (PAP) created in 2014 could usefully complement the
toolbox.
It is also desirable to better connect these tools with a view to their flexible rapid and
simultaneous use. This should make an opening up and a defragmentation of multiple centers
of decision-making and institutional knowledge throughout the security and development
chain in Brussels (Commission, European External Action Service EEAS, Council,
Parliament) and in capitals. Heaviness and arsenal of inter-service and inter-agency
procedures accumulated in community development in the external action of the EU are no
longer compatible with a critical response in crisis or fragility situations as well as peace and
Security strategies. The African Peace Facility is subject to a mix of legal decision,
administrative, financial and political procedures, weakening its political visibility, scope and

7. 7
operational efficiency.
My sixth reason for a new deal between Africa and Europe includes the concepts of
6. Critical mass, pooling of resources and mutual interest
The current context of the systemic financial and budgetary crisis adds urgency to the pooling
of EU funding for the deployment of a true Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and
European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) worthy of the name. The growing pressure in
France on the reduction of the Defense budget is also observed in most EU Member States,
particularly among those, like the United Kingdom, which have a predominant weight in
terms of defense. European integration has often been revived or developed out of crisis
cycles, and through successive pragmatic steps.
Recent developments in the political and international context make integrated alliances
between Africa and Europe more necessary and acceptable to each other, in particular
following the Arab Spring and, for example, the recognition that Algeria and the
Mediterranean countries of North Africa are more than ever essential players in the Sahel area
and in sub-Saharan Africa.
For the two Unions, there is a comparative advantage to go beyond the rethorics of political
summits and to pool resouces and mobilise a critical mass of instruments and means at
regional, continental and intercontinental level with a view to establishing a new type of
engagement on security and development.
A last element of this review relates to the
7. Need for sustainable and legally binding political framework.
The proposal of an International Treaty is not a theoretical construction from scratch. Since
2007, an institutional “acquis”, including political and policy framework has allowed the two
Unions, their eighty-two member states and "regional mechanisms" and African subregional
communities to interact at several levels.
The implementation of this institutional framework is coupled to a permanent political
dialogue at different levels: Summits, biannual ministerial dialogue on peace and security,
high level institutional dialogue between the two Commissions, AUC & EUC…
If the results are mixed in concrete terms, this ‘acquis’ is not disputed. It is even likely that
without this framework for dialogue and political action, as well as some institutional
parallelism between the two Unions, prevention, management and resolution of past or
ongoing crises in Africa would not have been discussed and progressively better understood
by Europe and Africa as a whole. Somalia, Mali, Niger, Guinea (s), Sudan (s), Ivory Coast,
Central Africa, Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC),
etc. are examples.
A common approach to international threats (terrorism, various forms of trafficking, Global
Challenges) is also developing. Despite limited progress, the African Union has strengthened
its credibility in Somalia and now takes a more systematic position and is involved in all
African crises. The European Union, through one or the other, or more of its Member States

8. 8
(France, United Kingdom, Poland, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Netherlands and others), has also
gradually made progress in its approach to crises and global threats. Individually, on the
external theaters, EU Members States, in spite of the nationalistic reflexes, often tend to make
explicit reference to the EU framework.
On this basis, there can be no turning back or status quo. Therefore, what other developments
should we expect?
Europe seems to move according to the principle "necessity knows no law" : every major
crisis has led to a decline in the integration process (the regression is a feature of the last five
years), but is followed by a significant recovery of the process and a new stage in the
european construction. This is true in the external action where, despite the failures of the
common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and the impact of the economic crisis, Europe
has a common diplomatic service embryo, and has just adopted a new "comprehensive"
approach to crisis and external conflicts. Moreover, recent months have seen a revival of the
old debate about the need for a (common) European Defense policy (successor to the current
European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP).
The ongoing mediterranean migration crisis and its pathetic human dimension, has added to
the need for the EU to accelerate on the path of further integration in the political, defense and
security domains. In an unprecedented posture the current President of the European
Commission, twice since recently taking office, has called for a revival of the formerly taboo
project of a european army. This was complemented by the official launching of a european
drone initiative
by French Defence Minister and his German and Italian counterparts, who have agreed to
finance a development study for a European drone. The joint decision was made on the
sidelines of a Council of Foreign Affairs and Defence, held in Brussels on May 18.
Furthermore, we should note the establishment in a record speed of the EUNAVMED force to
fight illegal trafficking of human beings over the Med sea following a major effort from the
New Italian EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security together with the Italian
PrimeMinister Mateo Rensi.
The African Union, meanwhile, received a truly supranational mandate in the area of peace
and security so that its governing body, the Council for Peace and Security, has been able to
develop an operational framework effective through the African Peace and Security
Architecture (APSA) and the regional economic Communities and "mechanisms" (RECs).
These achievements are little known and rarely made public. They were made possible
through the support of the European Union and its Member States.
Comparatively, other emerging partners, including China, will never be in a position to
provide the opportunity of an equivalent strategic and geo-cultural common destiny. But
Europe cannot rely on this comparative advantage forever. Partners will have to go quickly to
the evidence that multilateral interventions based on a political relationship between the two
Unions eventually replace commitments between individual States of the old ‘Françafrique’
type , always criticized, but never eradicated.
Finally, lessons learned from the Arab Springs and the Sahel crises gradually impose a less
fragmented approach between North Africa and sub-regions of sub-Saharan Africa.
CONCLUDING REMARKS

9. 9
Towards an Africa-Europe International Treaty on Peace, Security and Development
It is therefore necessary to go beyond the current policy framework of the strategic
partnership and the rhetoric of summits every three years. To be recognized and effective,
commitments by the partners on both sides of the Mediterranean, must be fixed in a legally
binding formal agreement. The future agreement should be based on mutual interest,
commitment, mandatory action and the pooling of resources and networks.
Forging an International Treaty between Europe and Africa for peace, security and
development can be a breakthrough of European and Panafrican building processes. It is
about time to consider a new, more integrated approach, more ambitious. It is even possible,
during the 2014-2020 period, to project an outline framework in financial terms. A starting
package of 2.5 billion euros could be put on the table with three main pillars: (1) the
strengthened Panafrican Programme which will be the center of gravity of the continent-to-
continent cooperation with Africa in the priority areas of mutual interest with a global,
regional and continental value added; (2) the African Peace Facility (APF), which must
evolve beyond its current purely instrumental nature; (3) the reformed arsenal of EU-AU
security and post conflict development policies and instruments. To assign this ambition
adequate resources is just a matter of political will from Member States, Institutions and Non-
State actors on the two sides.
On the African side, a gradual contribution to the financial architecture of the Treaty should
be enabled through a progressive fusion of the (EU) African Peace Facility and the African
Union Peace Fund.
This proposal would feature as a pragmatic and legal transformation of the Strategic
Partnership agreed in Lisbon in 2007. It would, on the other hand, facilitate the necessary
strengthening of common strategic interests shared by the EU and Africa as a whole (+ AU
Morocco). In doing so the two continents would create a framework of added value to their
relationships, that can offer no other partnership with emerging players, be they China and
other BRICS.
After Charlie and Garissa, a new common Africa-Europe impetus is
required to address global challenges.
As we speak today in Pretoria, Europe and Africa are bound together to elevating their
relationship to the next level. Responding to the main global challenges of Development,
Climate change and Security linked to international deadlines, urgently requires a new
commonly agreed approach.
After Charlie, After Garissa, it is urgent to convert the current Africa-EU Strategic
Partnership into an International Legally binding Treaty on Peace-Security & Development.
Tackling the external dimension of Terrorism and related security threats can only be
achieved through a new and mutually binding comprehensive strategy.
Unlike the NATO type agreements, based on a single military rationale, it should also build
upon public-private partnerships arrangements, a strong democratic and governance
mechanism and effective linkages to the civil society and private sector and academic
networks. All elements not properly operational in the current JAES.

10. 10
This would create a new narrative on Peace, Security & Development which Africa and the
EU should negotiate beyond both the existing Cotonou agreement and the Joint Africa-EU
Strategic Partnership. It would feature as a major building block of a forthcoming world
coalition.
Such a step would provide a new political platform for a more equal dialogue on the great
ambition of effectively dealing with conflicts and crisis exit towards economic and social
development. It would finish slowly but surely with own internal debates in both continents
on past bilateral relationships that must quickly embrace the challenges of the XXI century.
___________
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, Colleagues,
Let us not forget Garissa and Charlie !
____________