Eddie beat me to this, but he doesn’t have a cool map =)

The BBC reports that 26 African countries, which were previously split into three trading blocs, The Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (Comesa) and the East African Community (EAC), have signed a free trade agreement covering a vast part of the African continent.

While Africa is mostly a Gap continent, this is an important move towards the Core in the long term. The agreement also detailed further goals of the block, namely: a single customs union and harmonizing their transport, technology and energy infrastructure. A Free Trade Zone will begin to better integrate the continent, giving it more weight internationally and allowing it to deal as a bloc in negotiating agreements with the rest of the world. The free trade zone will not just integrate Africa economically, but slowly lead towards more political and popular integration as both governments and peoples better see their shared fates and interdependence. A South African government official hit the nail on the head:

“We don’t think its going to be an easy process… (but it’s) the only viable path the continent can take if it wants to play in this global environment,” Ntsaluba said.

African leaders have understood the Core/Gap divide and may be a long way from entering, but seem to have decided their path. It will be important to see how well the new group can effectively open and police their borders, coordinate and improve transportation infrastructure and fight corruption. Although the agreement is grounds for optimism, transportation and corruption will now be the two biggest factors in determining how well this agreement functions.

The WSJ has an op-ed on the recent Abkhaz-Georgian-Russian tensions which for anyone following it, offers mainly a summary of the situation up until now recounting especially Georgian mistakes while spending little time on Russia. In fact, it fails to clearly define Russia’s role. While most articles continue to refer to Russian “peacekeepers” it seems a glaring oversight not to note that ongoing and very public threats against Georgia by Moscow makes it clear there are no peacekeepers in Abkhazia or South Ossetia but instead occupation troops. In what other conflict has the side (UN, NATO, AU) whose job it is to maintain peace constantly threatened the other party while actively violating its airspace and shooting down its planes?

Nevertheless, the op-ed ends with a fascinating suggestion for Tbilisi:

Abkhazia is now virtually lost to Georgia—almost as lost as Kosovo is to Serbia. The only chance for Tbilisi to reverse this process and see Georgian refugees ever returning to their home is, paradoxically, to let go. Tbilisi should open up Abkhazia and free it from dependence on Russia. That means lifting sanctions and permitting a sea link to Turkey and the re-opening of a railway line connecting it with Western Georgia.

Such a policy would change the atmosphere and call the Abkhaz bluff—forcing them to negotiate in earnest and confront the issue that holds the key to their future status: Abkhaz responsibilities to their prewar Georgian population. And the rest of us would sleep a little easier if only this tinderbox in the Caucasus could be damped down.

Such a plan would make Thomas Barnett proud.

Thomas de Waal also wrote the fantastic book Black Garden which I read as research for my trip and can highly recommend.