"the Commission said that Nigeria does not meet the requirements for the status because of its refusal to ratify the Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide."
This is an interesting article that highlights the nuances of international trade agreements. According to the EU the primary aim of the "Generalized System of Preferences" that Nigeria was applying for,
"is to contribute to the reduction of poverty and the promotion of sustainable development and good governance."
But their refusal to grant Nigeria this privileged trade status is costing the country $4o0,00 a month from January 1st, 2008. Why Nigeria failed to meet the 27 specified conventions ranging from human rights to labor laws is unknown to us but looking at the list, you can ask yourself, is ratifying the Kyoto protocol a necessary step for trade especially for developing countries? What has it go to do with developing countries anyway since the protocol is intended for the 37 industrialized countries and the European community? The Kyoto protocol provides assistance to developing countries for,
"...development and deployment of techniques that can help increase resilience to the impacts of climate change."
through the Adaptation Fund but isn't this another "barrier"? Imagine that, sitting in your hut waiting for some good prices for your cocoa while men in suits are flying around making ink stains on pieces of paper, about a treaty that has little
to do with you. Why not start the fair trade, let us develop some independence and we won't even need the "adaptation" fund because we can do things for ourselves.
I'm beginning to think that these rules are made less for the common good but to build an intricate system of dependence in which developing countries will remain subservient despite their economic potential.