The impetus for regional integration draws its rationale from the standard international trade theory, which states that free trade is beneficial to all. Free trade among two or more countries or preferential trade will improve the welfare of the member countries as long as the arrangement leads to a net trade creation in the Vinerian sense. The history of regional economic integration in Southern Africa (SADC) reveals that it has not yet achieved the economic benefits that are attributable to developing regions, namely: higher levels of welfare exemplified by low poverty levels, economic development and industrialisation. Regional economic integration in Southern Africa is constrained by high tariff and non-tariff barriers, archaic infrastructures and multiple memberships among different regional economic communities. A SADC-wide customs union can be successful, provided that countries are allowed to join, when their economies have adjusted and the South African Customs Union (SACU) is used as a nucleus. / Economics / M. A. (Economics)

The regionalisation of politics on a global scale, Call be seen as one of the defining features of contemporary international relations. Given this phenomenon, the tasks which confronted this thesis, was to consider the conditions and requirements necessary within the Southern African region to build an all-embracing developed regional order. The urgency with which the latter task should be undertaken, is premised on an increased realisation that the region, and indeed the continent as a whole, are becoming of lesser significance in international affairs. However, a number of impediments will have to be overcome, before the goal of a developed regional order can be achieved, which will contribute to lasting security in the region. Foremost amongst many issues, is how to employ the approaches to integration, in attempting to explain how the goal of a developed order should be achieved. A second problem which this thesis was confronted with, relates to which organisation shoulO be' considered the best vehicle, to drive the integration process forward- COMESA, SACU or SADC. The decision take SADC as the organisation to drive the integration process forward, is premised on a number of factors. Amongst many, it qualifies in geographical terms as a region, the historical linkages of the countries of the region (based on their fight against apartheid, division of labour, etc.), serves as a basis for building a sense of community. Thirdly its institutions can be developed to achieve the goal of an all-embracing regional order. Lastly and most importantly, SADC realises that regional integration will remain unattainable without the involvement of the peoples of Southern Africa. The identification of the organisation to drive the integration process forward, serves to bolster moves towards a maximalist order. However, significant changes in the structure and institutions of SADC is necessary, before it can be considered an all-embracing and developed regional order. Not suprisingly, therefore, we have witness a number of institutional changes to the SADC structures. Amongst many, the establishment of the Organ on Politics, Defence and Security , the signing of the SADC Trade Facilitation Protocol, and the commitment to democracy and a human rights culture, are most significant and will, it is hoped, provide the building-blocks for deeper integration in Southern Africa. Apart from the above, which occur between and among the states of the region, steps are underway between and among the agents of civil society to work closely with each other, to establish a regional civil society. Most notably, the establishment of a media society for Southern Africa, the calls by COSATU for a Social Charter with a regional flavour, the establishment of environmental and human rights networks, and the support for the Gay and Lesbian Movement of Zimbabwe (GALZ), represent landmarks, in the search for a developed regional order. However, the reluctance of the governments of the Southern African countries, to consult with the NGOs, before the adoption of the Organ Politics, clearly bears testimony to their present inability to take the necessary steps needed to move from a minimalist to a maximalist conception of regional organisation. The suggestion of this thesis is that the move-away from minimalism to maximalism can be facilitated by the development of a political centre-around which both governments and NGO activities can be articulated, since both are primarily concerned with the security and welfare of the Southern African region.

Thesis (MA (Political Science. International Studies))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / Europe and Africa share a long history that is characterized both by oppression and development. The relationship between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries is a particularly important aspect of EU development cooperation policy. The developmental history between the EU and Africa started with the Yaoundé Conventions of 1963 and 1969, which were replaced by the Lomé Convention. Unfortunately, the favourable terms and preferential access for the ACP countries to Europe failed and the Lomé Convention was replaced by the Cotonou Partnership Agreement (CPA) in 2000. As a result of a WTO-waiver, the discriminatory non-reciprocal trade preferences, which were previously enjoyed under the Lomé Convention, continued until December 2007. The Cotonou Agreement points out that these trade preferences will be replaced by joint WTOcompatible Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). During the EPA negotiations, the EU preferred to negotiate on a regional basis instead of negotiating with the ACP as a whole or with individual countries. Consequently, Sub-Saharan Africa formed two negotiation groups; the Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) EPA group and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) EPA group, represented by the five Southern African Customs Union (SACU) countries, together with Mozambique and Angola. Although Southern Africa is the region that leads the continent; from an economic perspective, the Southern African states show considerable disparities. Due to the economic differences between South Africa and the BLNS countries (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland), the interests of the individual SACU countries are diverse and often contradictory, which resulted in complicated EPA negotiations. However, maintaining a favourable long-term trading relationship with the EU is of great importance to the economic and political well-being of the SADC, since the EU is the main trading partner of most African countries. By December 2007, an interim EPA (IEPA) was initialled by the BLNS countries as a result of the pressure to fall back to the unfavourable Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). Due to the bilateral Trade Development and Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) that is in force between South Africa and the EU, South Africa was not negatively influenced by the expiry of the WTO-waiver. The EPA will have a negative impact on regional integration within SADC and will promote distinction within the regional economic communities. Duty free, quota free access was offered to the BLNS countries, but the EU did not extend this offer to South Africa because of the developmental status of the country and the pre-existing TDCA. Consequently, South Africa will be required to export at higher prices and will experience increased competition within the region. The downside of the removal of import tariffs for the BLNS countries is that government revenues will decrease, which might result in income losses and will accentuate poverty. The standstill-clause of the IEPA prevents the SACU countries from diversifying economically and from developing new industries. The Most- Favoured Nation clause primarily impacts negatively on South Africa, since it prevents South Africa from negotiating freely with other countries such as Brazil and China. Furthermore, the strict intellectual property rules of the IEPA undermine access to knowledge and hereby fail to support innovation. The content of a chapter on liberalization of services, that will be included in the full EPA, is still being negotiated. Liberalization of services might lead to more foreign investments in the BLNS countries, as a result of which the quality of services will increase, leading to better education, infrastructure and more job opportunities. However, foreign companies will gain power at the expense of African governments and companies. South Africa is the main supplier of services in the BLNS countries and will therefore be confronted with economic losses when the services sector is liberalized. From an economic nationalist perspective, the EU included numerous provisions in the IEPA that were not necessary for WTO compatibility. However, the EU is aware of the importance of trade agreements for the BLNS countries and found itself in the position to do so to fulfil its own interests. By making use of the expiry date of the WTO waiver; the IEPA was initialled by the BLNS countries within a relatively short period of time. South Africa, in its own national interests, opposed the provisions of the IEPA, which has led to the negotiations deadlock. Because of the economic power and negotiating tactics of the EU and the selfinterested attitude of South Africa in this respect, regional integration is undermined and the poorest countries are once again the worst off. Although Economic Partnership Agreements have to be established, the partnership-pillar is, in my opinion, hard to find.