This week, leaders from the African Union (AU) and European Union (EU) gathered in Luanda, Angola, for the 7th AU-EU summit. It marked 25 years of partnership - yet instead of bold action, the meeting delivered more of the same well-worn pledges. At a time of mounting debt, an accelerating climate crisis and continuing conflict, progress is not just stalling—it’s sliding backwards.

The outcomes of the summit fail to tackle the debt crisis

The chair of the AU used this summit to address the debt crisis by calling for a reform of the global financial system with an emphasis on debt restructuring mechanisms. The latest IMF reports show that 20 African countries are in debt distress or at high risk. At the G20 summit, the South African presidency had also put this on the agenda, but the exclusive G20 club, dominated by creditors, failed to deliver reforms. 

The debt crisis is becoming a development crisis and worsening the climate emergency, with countries lacking both the fiscal and domestic policy space to address the impacts of climate change. Meanwhile, those in the Global North responsible for creating the crisis in the first place refuse to contribute a fair share of climate finance in line with climate justice principles. National budgets are increasingly forced to prioritise debt servicing, while economies are driven towards export-oriented models (fossil fuels and or agri-bussines) just to earn foreign currency needed to cover those payments.

While the summit’s declaration does acknowledge African countries’ high level of debt payments, and even calls for a “reform of the international debt architecture”, it falls short of providing a sustainable solution to the debt crisis. Instead it places the burden on African countries by calling for "additional efforts to implement growth-enhancing reforms, with domestic resource mobilization at their core" and it emphasises the G20 Common Framework as a positive initiative. The reforms backed by the AU in the Common African Position on debt, including the proposal for a UN framework convention on sovereign debt, and longstanding criticism of the notoriously inefficient Common Framework, are not mentioned. 

In parallel to the Summit, discussions on a resolution on sovereign debt took place in New York. The EU voted against this resolution as it included a reference to the intergovernmental process to discuss debt architecture reforms agreed in July at the Fourth Financing for Development conference. 

If Europe is serious about contributing to a truly multilateral world - and their narrative this week suggests they are - they should stop blocking truly multilateral processes. Experience has shown that it is under the auspices of the UN where these goals can be reached, and the challenges the AU and EU face can be jointly addressed. 

The mobilisation of private finance remains a central theme

One of the central messages coming from the EU during the summit was the desire to make the African market more accessible via, for example, the establishment of an African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and a single African air transport market. The question throughout the summit was: more accessible for whom? The overall focus on trade and transport was linked to the EU’s main offer, the Global Gateway - its strategy to mobilise investments in infrastructure projects that has been found to divert EU aid to business based in Europe. 

The summit’s official declaration highlights the Global Gateway Africa Europe Investment Package as a “mutually beneficial investment”. And yet, civil society have criticised this strategy as less than mutually beneficial or equal. The recent European Commission proposal for a larger budget in the period 2028-2034 will also mean little for Africa if Global Europe - the EU external instrument - continues to swap its development commitments for geopolitical priorities. Africa is home to 32 least developed countries that rely heavily on aid flows. Yet there is no reference in the summit’s Declaration to Europe’s obligations in this regard. This is deeply concerning.

Ultimately, the declaration promotes the mobilisation of private finance as a solution for climate and development needs. This includes the promotion of false solutions like carbon markets and prioritising the use of public finance to lower the risks of private investments rather than emphasising the public financing of universal, high-quality public services. 

The road ahead for the AU-EU summit

Voices at the summit’s Civil Society and Youth Forum, which took place the week prior to the summit, as civil society was excluded from the official talks, were critical of the lack of meaningful engagement in shaping the AU-EU partnership. Yet, they did recognise a more balanced involvement this year between AU and EU. Nevertheless, there is still much work to be done to ensure that the CSO/Youth Forum is truly co-owned by African and European civil society and that it serves as a real platform of participation.

Another point of contestation between civil society and the AU and EU has been the monitoring and evaluation of the partnership and follow-up from these summits. At the last AU-EU summit in 2022, a promise was made to produce  a monitoring report. But to date, the final report has never been released. Instead, only a preliminary report was published in May of this year. 

A solid AU-EU partnership requires proper follow-up processes on commitments made and discussions had, including with civil society. As the AU–EU partnership enters its 26th year, civil society will intensify its efforts to hold summit organisers accountable and to safeguard the progress made toward a more equitable partnership. It will continue to monitor implementation closely and assertively defend the achievements secured to date.