Mamadou Koulibaly, president of the National Assembly of Côte d'Ivoire and professor of economics, sheds light on the damage caused in the member states of the franc zone due to the indexation of their currency to the French franc, today today on the euro. In this interview conducted by Ruth Tete and Soh Tadhieu of New African, Mamadou Koulibaly does not mince his words and calls for the creation of an independent currency, unrelated to the colonial past.

Could you explain to our readers what are the main mechanisms of the Franc zone?

MK: The CFA franc zone is a union of monetary cooperation whose levers of control are located in Paris where the interests of France take precedence. The satellite states, members of this zone, are West and Central African countries. The logic behind the operation of this zone is reminiscent of the way Eastern European states were linked to the former Soviet Union through the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War era.

The principles of monetary cooperation between France and the Member States of the franc zone were set out in the 1960s within the framework of a colonial pact. This pact was amended by the monetary cooperation agreement of 23 November 1972 between the member states of the Bank of Central African States (BEAC) and France on the one hand, and by the cooperation agreement of 4 December 1973 between the member countries of the West African Monetary Union (UMOA) and the French Republic on the other hand.

Just before France acceded to the demands for independence from African countries in the 1960s, it obliged these States to place 65% of their foreign exchange reserves in a French Treasury account, after having defined a fixed exchange rate of the franc CFA.

Although the management of this currency has been entrusted to common central banks [BEAC and BCEAO, editor's note], these banks are only African in name. In reality, they have no power and are nothing more than gigantic bureaucratic institutions that do not decide monetary policies. They are there to make the countries of the franc zone believe that they are masters of their destiny.

The countries of the franc zone continue to perpetuate a system put in place by the former colonial executioner.

How would you describe the financial situation of the franc zone countries since they joined this monetary union?

MK: The franc zone generated a long debate. In general, it should not be forgotten that this union has brought France immense advantages in terms of markets for its goods and services. The monetary situation of the countries of the franc zone is a long history of secrets jealously guarded by France, whose only concern is to preserve its interests.

For example, the foreign exchange reserves of the states of the franc zone are placed in a common account of the French Treasury, but no African country is able to say which part of this hard-earned money belongs to it. Only France has the privilege of accessing this information.

And yet these funds, placed in “operations accounts”, generate interest each time their amount exceeds the import needs of the African countries concerned.

These operating accounts, by virtue of the monetary cooperation agreements signed by France and the countries of the franc zone, are in theory accompanied by the principle of unlimited overdraft. However, the French authorities have included, in the statutes of the African central banks, measures, sometimes preventive, intended to avoid that the accounts of operations become constantly in debt.

Operations related to the CFA franc are secret and only the French Treasury knows the amount of funds belonging to the countries of the franc zone placed in the operations accounts. Only the French Treasury can indicate the level of remuneration as well as the account management fees. The system is therefore opaque and authoritarian.

The economies of the Franc zone are very vulnerable. The effects caused by the functioning mechanism of the CFA franc are asymmetric. The biggest spenders in the franc zone can use the foreign exchange reserves of countries that have more prudent management. In fact, the monetary unit benefits the richest countries and encourages the exploitation of the poorest countries. The existence of a stable and unified monetary system has not led to the emergence of an efficient banking and financial system in the African countries of the franc zone. Of the 107 banks in these countries, 42 had gone bankrupt in 1990. The banking networks, which were formed subsequently, depend heavily on French banks.

France encourages the countries of the franc zone to live well beyond their means. What is the difference between Gabon, whose foreign exchange reserves are placed in France, and Ghana, which has its own currency? Or between Cameroon and Kenya? Benin and Tunisia? These questions raise legitimate questions about the merits of the franc zone.

The franc zone has existed for more than sixty years. How do you explain that it persists despite the negative effects it continues to produce in African countries?

MK: In my opinion, this is due to the influence that France exerts on the countries of French-speaking Africa, even if the partisans use the following arguments to defend their position: monetary guarantee, which generates an influx of capital, measures of austerity limiting the risk of inflation and making it possible to maintain the equilibrium of the external balance, and credibility of the currency.

Supporters of the CFA franc pretend not to see the political and financial repression that successive French presidents have exerted on African countries that have tried to withdraw from the franc zone. We have witnessed repressive measures aimed at cutting short any attempt to emancipate the system: the protection of French interests has recently led to crises over uranium in Niger, gold in Mali, oil in Chad , raw materials and the transfer of shares of public service companies in Côte d'Ivoire, to which must be added other crises in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Senegal.

When Senegal recently announced that it had discovered oil in Saint Louis, the country asked Venezuela to help in its exploitation, and not France. Paris perceived this gesture as a betrayal and a violation of the cooperation agreements linking France to the countries of the franc zone and their resources.

Moreover, African elites and politicians have only made the situation worse by claiming that they do not have the necessary skills to manage their own currencies responsibly and efficiently, unlike Western or Asian countries. .

They are satisfied to see African States being reduced to the state of taxpayers for the benefit of France, with the 65% of foreign exchange reserves that they deposit each year with the French Treasury! And yet, our citizens do not have French nationality, nor do they have access to the public services enjoyed by other French taxpayers. This led to a situation that can only be described as voluntary enslavement, and which encouraged the population and economic actors to believe that they could not do without France.

It's a shame because this idea is totally false. The world is vast: it is enough to want to integrate into it in a free and responsible way through trade and not through foreign aid which reduces people to the situation of beggars. Every day, globalization creates thousands of opportunities that we do not take advantage of, because we are trapped in an inefficient system.

A meeting of the finance ministers of the franc zone countries was held in Paris on October 14, 2007. This traditionally precedes the autumn conference of the World Bank and the IMF. You were finance minister of Côte d'Ivoire, and perhaps you had the opportunity to take part in these meetings. Many Africans that nothing positive for the African people comes out of these meetings. Is it true ?

MK: I never participated in this type of meeting when I was Minister of Finance. But most countries in the franc zone are weak. With savings on the drip, they have no say in the decisions made at these meetings. One can therefore wonder why they continue to go to these meetings in which they have no voice. By acting in this way, these countries show that they are convinced that France can do everything for them. Our countries prefer to choose the easy solution even if it endangers employment, incomes, savings and private investments. We are complicit in the poverty trap into which we have been pushed.

Could you cite at least three reasons why African states should free themselves from the CFA franc?

MK: First, the CFA franc is coercive, unfair and morally indefensible. He encouraged state corruption. At the time of the French elections, the countries of the franc zone are constantly asked to give donations to French politicians, an obligation that cannot be justified. These "gifts" have been the source of many conflicts and pave the way for many other forms of corruption.

It is these relations that perpetuate the French monopoly in the countries of the franc zone, despite globalization. Under the pretext of helping poor countries with French taxpayers' money, it is the French and African political class that is enriching itself illicitly. This reality alone justifies the abandonment of the franc zone.

Economic and financial liberalization cannot occur with a fixed exchange rate and an artificially created zone of economic influence.

In fact, the emergence of tensions that have appeared within the international monetary system and the financial crises of recent years lead one to believe that the choice of exchange rate regime depends on the system of commitments entered into with the monetary authorities. And yet, the restriction of the freedom of the countries of the franc zone in the field of monetary policy does not protect against the risk of devaluation of the CFA franc. Thus, in the 90s, ignoring the unlimited overdraft clause, France ordered the devaluation of the CFA franc. Before the devaluation, 1 French franc was exchanged for 50 CFA francs. In 1994, after the devaluation, 1 FF will be exchanged against 100 FCFA. The French authorities nevertheless managed to make people believe that the devaluation rate was 50%, whereas we had just suffered a 100% devaluation!

After abandoning the system, what monetary future do you propose to African countries from a monetary point of view?

MK: Given the stakes, it is necessary to undertake financial and monetary reforms. Money must serve the economy. It must adapt to the current economic context. To this end, countries must be enabled to protect themselves against asymmetric shocks, to improve macroeconomic convergence and adjustment and to finance development.

It is vital today that the CFA franc acquires autonomy, that it frees itself from the colonial yoke. It is high time for African countries to assume the consequences of a freely chosen macroeconomic policy. There is no secret. All we have to do is choose our own policies and take responsibility for them. Freedom only makes sense if it comes with responsibility.

Once the break has been accomplished, the countries of the former franc zone will have to create their own system based on simple principles: direct access to international markets without a tutor, i.e. France, establishment of a simple tax system without incomprehensible tax rules, flexible exchange rates against major currencies. To achieve this objective, the countries concerned have two options. The first would consist in creating independent national currencies, with a flexible parity like the currencies of the European Union before the introduction of the euro. This solution can only work if banks are private and independent and central banks have the freedom to implement credible monetary policies.

The second option is for African countries to unite and create a common currency, but this supposes a single government, controlled by a single central bank and independent of political power, as well as a single monetary and budgetary economic policy.

Whatever solution is adopted, States must be democratic. They must make clear to their citizens their property rights and allow them the freedom to decide whether to mortgage those rights. It all starts with giving citizens the right to property, a right that will lift them out of poverty. Free trade will do the rest.

In 2005, you published a book entitled “Les servitudes du pacte colonial”. Could you briefly explain the subject of this book and the message it conveys?

MK: The aim of this book was to make the public aware of the “colonial pact”, the basis of the Franco-African cooperation agreements. This is a model instituted by France under De Gaulle on the eve of the independence of the French-speaking African states, intended to indirectly control the affairs of these countries in a subtle way, without appearing in the front line as during the long colonial period. The book publishes the texts used to organize the interventions of the French State, despite the end of the colonial era in the 1960s. According to this colonial pact, the presidents of the States of French-speaking Africa must lead their countries according to the interests from Paris.

Independence therefore came down to the transfer of powers from the Elysée to African heads of state, who must pledge allegiance to France, and not to the peoples they govern.

Paris is responsible for dictating the policies to be adopted. This book reveals how the Defense agreements are in reality only commercial agreements obliging the States of French-speaking Africa to maintain French military bases on their soil, with soldiers ready to intervene to drive out recalcitrant leaders in order to replace them with individuals. more docile.

In this book, we discover that France holds a monopoly on all the raw materials of French-speaking Africa. We learn how France took steps to ensure that it would retain all its colonial prerogatives after granting “independence” to African countries.

Through this colonial pact, France remained omnipresent in French-speaking Africa and retained the advantages of yesterday. Paris confiscated the true independence of the countries of French-speaking Africa.

We must collectively denounce this colonial pact. During his visit to Senegal in July 2007, newly elected French President Nicolas Sarkozy acknowledged that colonization was a crime against humanity, but refused to repent. Africans must denounce all agreements and systems that drive Africa away from markets. The colonial pact constitutes a violation of African property rights.

Did you manage to convey this message through this book?

MK: I think so. I wanted to share my convictions with a large number of Africans. And friends of Africa, so that they are in a better position to measure the dangers of the colonial pact, of state control, and above all to realize that the management of the economy under the influence of colonial pact is a source of poverty in our countries. We don't want alms; our problem is not lack of money. I am convinced that above all we must clearly claim our property rights over our lands and resources, which were alienated by the settlers, and from which the colonial pact dispossessed us today. Finally, I wanted to say that Africa urgently needs individual freedoms, limited state control, free markets, an open society and peace, which can only exist if economic freedom and policy is followed.

In New African, January 2008