KAMPALA, Uganda
The European Union (EU) lawmakers yesterday voted by a majority of 334 to pass the resolution that seeks to compel Uganda, Tanzania and the Total Energies SE to delay development of the proposed East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) for at least one year.
European Union (EU) lawmakers |
During the one-year period
Uganda and the French oil giant should go back to the drawing board to study an
alternative route with less environmental footprint.
However, the southern route to
Tanzania was chosen in early 2016 as the least cost route due to among others
least environment footprint.
One hundred and ninety-nine
(199) MPs voted against the resolution while 60 abstained during voting.
The seven-point resolution
also seeks to exert “maximum pressure” on Uganda and Tanzania SE to elevate
standards and adopt international best practices during development of the
project, including halting oil related activities in Murchison Falls National
Park to the northwest.
The devil is in the detail as
the EACOP becomes the latest frontier of tight rope pulling between the EU and
the French oil company. Brussels has long accused the French company of cosying
with Moscow, which attacked its former Soviet Republic neighbour, Ukraine,
eight months ago.
The resolution passed
yesterday is the sanitised version of the initial 16-point draft motion in
which the MPs upbraided French oil giant Total Energies SE of “corporate
colonialism of extracting as much profit as possible” at huge human and
ecological cost.
The original draft called for
completely halting development of the $3.8billion (Shs14trillion) Greenfield
project that will transport Uganda’s waxy crude oil from the oil fields in
mid-western Uganda to Tanzania’s Indian Ocean Tanga port en route to the
international market.
The draft among others also
demanded active participation of the EU in the UN negotiations on an
international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and
human rights.
It also wanted Uganda and
Tanzania to launch an independent investigation into the social and environmental
standards applied by European companies, in particular in the fossil fuel
sector.
In the latest resolution, the
EU lawmakers expressed grave concern about claims of human rights abuses
involved in the project.
These include wrongful
imprisonment of human rights defenders and the arbitrary suspension of NGOs.
Consequently, it called upon
Uganda and Tanzania to initiate concrete measures to ensure authorities,
security forces and policies respect and comply with human rights
standards.
The lawmakers also urged
proper compensation of project affected persons, and implored Uganda to allow
civil society organisations poking around the issues to operate freely.
On Wednesday, a section of EU
MPs talked tough against the multi-billion-dollar project. This sent quivers
among officials in Kampala, Dar es Salaam, Paris, and London, expecting the
worst to come out on Thursday.
The latest development will
fly as a slap in the face of both the project developers and anti-fossil fuels
campaigners and conservation aficionados, including a section of local and
international NGOs, which have for the past two years pushed to halt the
pipeline.
In the initial draft
resolution, the EU lawmakers even exalted international financial
institutions—banks, insurance companies, and export credit agencies—that have
distanced and walked away from the project.
Uganda’s ambassador to the EU,
Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, Mirjam Blaak described the hubbub by
EU lawmakers as “not informed by facts and fuelled by self-seeking groups.”
“Of course, we will continue
engaging them, but what they are doing is unfortunate,” Ambassador Blaak told
Daily Monitor.
The EU Parliament’s
resolutions are not binding but rather advisory to the EU Commission, the
executive branch of the 27-member trading bloc responsible for implementing
decisions and managing the day-to-day business of the EU.
In Kampala, the government
asked the EU lawmakers to stop interfering in the country’s internal affairs,
respect its sovereignty and transact diplomatic business on the basis of mutual
respect.
The state minister for International Relations, Mr Henry Okello-Oryem last evening described the lawmakers’ resolution as both “unfortunate and contemptible.”
“It is unfortunate because
most of those people who voted ‘Yes’ don’t have any clue about the terrain of
Africa. They are so gullible; they fell in the trap of goodie-goodies—those
NGOs feeding them lies—but are ignorant. They know nothing on the ground,” Mr
Oryem said.
He added: “So they (MPs) don’t
want Africa to develop its natural resources and yet it’s the only way to solve
some of our problems. Our people continue cutting trees as the cheapest form of
fuel. So if we don’t avail them opportunities like gas (LPG), who then will?”
Daily Monitor has learnt that
a group of EU legislators behind the motion visited Uganda early this year on a
fact-finding mission during which they engaged with among others the oil
pipeline company.
Italy’s Francesca Donato, a
co-mover of the resolution who was among the visiting delegation, on Wednesday
spoke glowingly about the visit.
Total Energies SE is the
parent company of Total Energies EP, which is developing oil fields in Nwoya
and Buliisa districts, and Total Holdings International B.V which holds
majority shareholding of 62 percent in the EACOP holding company.
Other shareholders are Uganda
National Oil Company (UNOC) and Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation
(TPDC), each with a 15 percent stake as well as China’s oil company—Cnooc, with
eight percent.
The EACOP Company managing
director, Martin Tiffen told Daily Monitor from Paris they will make a
statement in due course. A lot has been said and written about Uganda’s oil
project since exploration and appraisal from around 2012 when he Anglo-Irish
wildcatter, Tullow Oil, Cnooc, and Total EP—now Total Energies EP—intensified
seismic surveys and appraisals of oil deposits in mid-western Uganda.
But since February 1, 2022
when the government and the oil companies announced Final Investment
Decision—to invest $10billion (Shs36trillion)—in the Uganda oil project to kick
start the next phase of development and construction, what started as a
conservation campaign turned into fierce opposition.
Day-in and day-out,
international media is awash with fears, concerns, and environmental risks—real
and perceived. Some have even inferred that the country is on a path to
self-destruction with oil.
On Wednesday, one EU lawmaker
invoked President Museveni’s long stay in power to the equation, saying with Petro-dollars
will keep Uganda’s strongman in the saddle.
The MPs, and conservationists
opposed to the Uganda oil project, which encompasses the EACOP and Total
Energies EP’s Tilenga project in Nwoya and Buliisa districts and Cnooc’s
Kingfisher project in Hoima and Kikuube districts, claim that taking the
project forward will be an affront to the fight against climate change.
They cite carbon emissions,
which are blamed for catastrophic disasters around the world, including the
increasing frequency of mudslides on the Elgon ranges in eastern Uganda.
Between 2005 and 2015,
according to the ministry of Water and Environment’s Climate Change Department,
Uganda’s carbon emissions increased from 53 metric tonnes to 90 metric tonnes,
the upsurge attributed to agriculture, forestry, and land usage.
Energy usage and production
accounted for 10 percent of carbon, of which three quarters was attributed to
the transport sector—heavily-polluted air spilled in the atmosphere from
second-hand vehicle engines from Japan and China. Whether or not oil will lead
to a surge in these emissions remains a subject of debate.
Other pundits and researchers
opposed to the Uganda oil project have painted a grim picture, warning of among
others oil spills and drawing parallels to the beleaguered Niger Delta, and
adverse interruption to the eco-system—flora and fauna—which will deal blow to
Uganda’s tourism sector, the highest foreign exchange earner of $1.6b (Shs5.6t)
between 2018 and 2019 before Covid-19 upended life as we know it.
The repeated manoeuvres by
some developed powers to block developing countries from extracting their
natural resources, including oil, has also renewed debate on the Brandt line—
the gap in financial wellbeing, between richer developed countries and poorer
developing countries—commonly known as the North/South Divide.
Some pundits describe as
unfair and bewildering the notion to completely halt new oil projects in the
poorer south, in Africa and Latin America, for the sake of avoiding mistakes
committed by north/developed countries during the 1960s, 70s and 80s which
partly contributed to the current climate disaster.
Ugandan lawmakers led by the
Deputy Speaker, Mr Thomas Tayebwa, on Thursday, September 15, condemned Members
of European Union Parliament, accusing them of economic sabotage, racism and
interference over a motion seeking to block the Shs14 trillion oil pipeline
project.
“This motion seeks to curtail the progress of Uganda’s Oil and Gas developments and by extension, the country’s socio-econmic growth and development….the resolution represents the highest level of neo-colonialism and imperialism against the sovereignty of Uganda and Tanzania,” Mr Tayebwa’ s statement reads. - DailyMonitor
No comments:
Post a Comment