By Andre Amaral
Africa-Press – Cape verde. From the impact of the changes announced by Donald Trump regarding US foreign policy, to the special partnership and the fisheries agreement with the European Union, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Communities, José Filomeno Monteiro, analyses the main current international issues affecting Cape Verde.
The US elections brought Donald Trump back to the White House and, immediately, there was a radical change in American foreign policy. Cape Verde had been nominated for an MCA pact. What is its current situation?
The worst thing we could do to ourselves and to Cape Verdeans would be to suffer in advance, because there are things we can control and others we cannot. If American foreign aid decreases as a result of President Trump’s decisions, there will be nothing we can do to change that. He was legitimately elected by the sovereign will of the American people and has latitude to act on the international stage within the possibilities of his mandate. President Trump has been in power and we have seen what he did and did not do, which were largely marketing and media-driven acts. America survived and now we face a new situation. Personally, I believe that Cape Verde is a small country with its own characteristics, which does not participate in major trade disputes and which will hardly be pressured in relation to tariffs or trade balances. The effects of American policies are more significant in relation to larger countries that have a direct impact on the US economy. Cape Verde has taken fundamental steps to establish itself in today’s world. It is a democratic country that respects human rights and firmly believes in rules-based multilateralism, with the United Nations at its core. We believe in the sovereignty of nations, in peace, security and the peaceful resolution of international conflicts. I see no reason why Cape Verde should be the target of any retaliation of any kind. Furthermore, in the United States, there is a Cape Verdean community that is now in its fifth generation, well-integrated, educated and composed mostly of Cape Verdean-American citizens, with no significant history of criminality.
But isn’t this a natural reaction?
It is a natural reaction for human beings to feel some fear, but it is precisely at this time that the public authorities and political leaders must intervene to reassure the population and, as far as possible, mobilize Cape Verdean community associations to act to protect their members. If we were to find ourselves in a situation where there were deportees within our community, we already have a task force in place, involving several ministries, such as the Family, Infrastructure, Defense and Home Affairs ministries, which are developing a contingency plan. Thus, if a Cape Verdean is deported, they will be received with all dignity in their own country.
Isn’t the scenario of a mass deportation a possibility?
I don’t think so. As a diplomat, I can tell you that diplomacy is something formal. It has its own channels. It really is a matter of waiting and seeing and being prepared for whatever may happen. If you ask me personally, I don’t think so. We already have a list of deportations from the previous administration, of Cape Verdeans who were in an irregular situation, but there is no news of new deportations.
Another controversy was the alleged accession or rapprochement of Cape Verde to NATO. What is this personalized partnership that Cape Verde is developing with NATO, after all?
A personalized partnership corresponds to the English concept of individually tailored, which means that Cape Verde has a wide margin of choice within a set of options — just as the partner also chooses what is of interest to it and what is not. Previously, NATO had the ITTP (Individually Tailored Partnership Programme), an individually tailored partnership, in which there were different programmes (A, B, C), allowing each country to join or not join a previously defined cooperation package. The new instrument is more flexible and creative, as it allows for the selection of the most relevant aspects for each party. Cape Verde faces serious security challenges in the Atlantic, especially maritime security. Any interruption in the global supply chain would have disastrous consequences for an importing country like Cape Verde, possibly worse than the famines we have already faced. Maritime piracy, by putting at risk the ships that guarantee this supply, could have similar impacts. In addition, the country actively combats drug trafficking and, more recently, human trafficking. Thus, Cape Verde has a moral obligation to contribute to maritime security in the Atlantic and, in this search for solutions, it has no alternative but to dialogue.with its neighbours. That is why we have dialogue with NATO, which is a neighbour, but also with Senegal, Togo and Brazil, and we participate in initiatives such as ZOPACAS (South Atlantic Peace and Cooperation Zone), among other cooperation programmes. The relationship with NATO is not new: in 2006, we hosted the Steadfast Jaguar exercises, which brought around seven thousand soldiers to the country. At the time, as the opposition, we did not make political use of this event, as we believed that Cape Verde should guarantee its strategic anchors, and if these anchors are our neighbours, so much the better.
I was saying that this partnership with NATO is tailored to each country. In which areas will this cooperation focus the most?
When defining the partnership, which is why it is tailored, there will be a committee that will identify the areas and negotiate what is in the interests of each partner. I can assure you that Cape Verde has no interest in having military bases here and I would like to take advantage of this interview to reassure Cape Verdeans that NATO has not expressed any interest in our membership. There has been an abusive interpretation of the term integration, because integration into NATO is achieved in two ways. There is integration through what they call a Partner Country. NATO has several, 32 member states that have joined, and this will not be the case with Cape Verde, I can assure all Cape Verdeans. Cape Verde will be a partner state and a partner state does not join, it develops a partnership programme that will constitute an anchor. In our specific case, what we have in mind is maritime security, because less than 1% of our country is land mass, therefore, more than 99% of our territory is water. This is our territorial sea, our contiguous zone and our Exclusive Economic Zone. And if the blue economy, let’s say, is going to be our future livelihood, we have to protect what is in our fundamental interests. And this is not something we can discuss with anyone in the Mediterranean, but with our neighbours. In the Atlantic, we share the same problems. There is no intention of joining NATO or choosing who we like or dislike. States do not have feelings, they have interests. It is in our interest to have a secure anchorage and to cooperate with our neighbours in the Atlantic. We are cooperating within the framework of the ZOPACAS. With the countries of West Africa, we are cooperating within the framework of the Yaoundé architecture, the recently inaugurated zone G of maritime coordination, and so on. We are discussing with our neighbours, we are concerned about the Gulf of Guinea, we are concerned about the South Atlantic, which is also our neighbour, we are concerned about the safety of our fishermen who disappear at sea. Cape Verde has no alternative other than to anchor itself to its neighbours to solve the real problems that arise. We even cooperate on the issue of climate vulnerability, atmospheric phenomena that could devastate us at any time without us having access to satellite information. Therefore, Cape Verdeans have every reason to discuss and cooperate with their neighbours and the country will not have, in fact, at least I do not see it, anything that we have to lose, having this anchorage that will protect us, I only see here a possibility of a win-win partnership. There are those who have spoken out against it and to date, apart from ideological reasons and romanticising possible cooperation in the Atlantic, they have not presented a single valid reason why Cape Verde should not be protected and anchored in its requirements and its aspirations of being a stable, safe and prosperous country.
In what way is this rapprochement between NATO and Cape Verde, and vice versa, not also a response to the rapprochement of African countries with Russia, which has been exercising increasing influence in this area?
What I can assure you is that Cape Verde’s desire to cooperate with its Atlantic neighbours, including NATO, predates the geopolitical phenomenon that is taking place in West Africa. In our view, in the search for governance models, some political actors opt for disparate alignments that provide them with greater comfort from a purely ideological perspective of governance. As I said a moment ago, Cape Verde hosted the Steadfast Jaguar exercise long before this offensive that we are witnessing. Furthermore, I would dispute the idea that we are witnessing a growth in NATO’s interest in Cape Verde. There is also a reciprocal interest from Cape Verde in NATO, which has existed for quite some time. If you notice, even in the First Republic, one of Cape Verde’s first statements to the world was that the country was not interested in and would not tolerate military bases. This policy remains unchanged. Therefore, all those who claim that there is a deviation in Cape Verde’s diplomatic line, as if it were fixed and immutable, are mistaken, because this isThe line has not changed. Warsaw is the capital of Poland and was also the capital of the Warsaw Pact, a bloc made up of socialist countries. Warsaw is now a member of NATO. Thus, Cape Verde could not remain static in the face of the changes that have occurred in the world. Today, talking about non-alignment is a daydream, a mere dream.
Is there no longer room for non-alignment?
Before, there were blocs and the Cold War. Today, non-alignment would mean non-alignment with what? Cape Verde is an aligned country. I would like to make this clear: Cape Verde is an aligned country. It is aligned with rules-based multilateralism, with the principles defended and adopted by the United Nations. Basically, it is the concert of nations. Cape Verde is also aligned with the principle of state sovereignty. Whenever a problem arises, we turn to the United Nations to resolve it. Cape Verde defends human rights, because human beings should be treated with dignity and not instrumentalized in the name of a particular governance or maintenance of power.
Furthermore, Cape Verde is aligned with a political system based on democracy. Paradoxically, Cape Verdean democracy is often criticized, including by those who publish daily about its existence — or alleged lack thereof — in the country. However, I do not know of any other country where there is such a proliferation of opinions and freedom to express them, even when they are not very informed or correct.
The government recently signed a new fisheries agreement with the European Union. It has been said that it is false that Cape Verdean tuna is sold at 3 escudos per kilo. What are the main advantages of this new fisheries agreement?
It would be very unusual to have a special partner willing to provide Cape Verde with financial support, either in the form of a donation or, as in this case, through a combination of a donation and a soft loan, in the amount allocated by the European Union, and then that same partner would “steal” 5,000 tons of tuna. I recently saw an analyst on television say that I had said that the fish does not belong to us, that it is migratory, which is absolutely false. This is an unfortunate attempt to distort my words. What I said was that the agreement applies exclusively to highly migratory species that live temporarily in our exclusive economic zone (EEZ). This migratory fish, the tuna, that passes through our EEZ, does not in fact belong to us permanently, because tomorrow it will be in the waters of another country, which will trade, fish and sell it. If Cape Verde does not seize this opportunity, it will be left without the fish and without the financial compensation, since it does not yet have the capacity to carry out high-seas fishing, given that this type of activity requires significant investment. The acquisition of surface longliners, for example, can cost up to 40 million euros. Unfortunately, our shipowners have not yet reached this level of investment. However, a possible partnership with the European Union could facilitate this development, through a cooperation model in which Cape Verde would provide sovereignty and the European Union would provide the equipment. Why do I say that the agreement is beneficial? Because it guarantees compensation that is invested in coastal communities. It is false to say that the agreement does not benefit our fishing communities, as it provides for development programmes and improvements to the conditions of these communities. The agreement also provides for the involvement of the Cape Verdean scientific community, the employability of our fishermen on board European vessels and the integration of our fisheries inspectors, who will act as officers on board, with food and accommodation paid for by the shipowners. The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas establishes a catch quota of 30,000 tonnes for Cape Verde. Therefore, as long as we fish up to this limit, we will be within the parameters of sustainable fishing. The new agreement covers only 7,000 tonnes, and it is common knowledge that total fishing in Cape Verde does not exceed 12,000 tonnes per year. Therefore, there is a significant margin of unexploited resources, due to our limited fishing capacity on the high seas. The next step for this government is to form partnerships with other countries that already have this capacity. There is currently a net negative balance: even with the European Union’s fishing activity, Cape Verde continues to lose resources, because either we catch migratory tuna or it continues on its way. Our main concern should be illegal fishing in our waters, because as far as the European Union is concerned, there are effective self-regulation mechanisms. All European vessels are equipped with the VMS (Vessel Monitoring System) monitoring system, and Cape Verde also has the ERS system to control catches. Thus, fishing reports are submitted daily, not out of any specific concern.It is with Cape Verde, but due to the European Union’s own environmental requirements. However, this also represents additional protection for a country like Cape Verde. Critics of this agreement may be motivated by ignorance or an outdated understanding of reality. The old agreement, mentioned a few days ago by the President of the Republic, covered 71 vessels and provided for a compensation of just 2.1 million euros. The current agreement covers only 56 vessels, but provides for a direct compensation of 3.9 million euros, in addition to revenue from licensing fees. Therefore, I do not consider the agreement to be detrimental to Cape Verde. No one is “stealing” our fish.
You mentioned a negative balance in fishing earlier. Is that why you will be in Morocco soon?
Fishing is one of the issues we have on the agenda with Morocco, but there are also issues related to Royal Air Maroc, the blue economy and other aspects, some of which are even more sensitive – and I am not referring to the Saharan issue. I am referring to economic objectives and Morocco’s support in certain international issues that Cape Verde is facing in its region. Morocco is a strategic partner that we cannot ignore because of merely ideological differences. It is clear that, in our aim of cooperation, we must take into account our own alignment. As I said before, Cape Verde is aligned with rules-based multilateralism and will not violate the right of peoples to self-determination. We are a country aligned with fundamental values, such as human rights and democracy. We will be careful to maintain the necessary balance, not to get bogged down in a lost war and to follow the United Nations trend in promoting effective and lasting peace. Cape Verde will follow the fundamental principle of the United Nations: the peaceful resolution of international conflicts through dialogue. Some may, for ideological reasons, claim that we are leaving our Saharan brothers behind. Nothing could be further from the truth. What we are doing is making our contribution to the promotion of peace and the search for lasting solutions that allow for the growth, development and well-being of the populations of that region of the world.
You were also in Brussels recently. What was the reason for that visit?
We have an annual statutory meeting, which we call a high-level political dialogue, a ministerial meeting. I co-chaired the Cape Verdean delegation and the Belgian Foreign Minister co-chaired the European delegation, on behalf of the High Representative, Kaja Kallas. We had two objectives: to assess the status of the Special Partnership between Cape Verde and the European Union and to look ahead to its future. This partnership has proven to be an instrument of enormous importance for the Cape Verdean people. We ended 2024 with the largest funding package ever allocated to Cape Verde under the Global Gateway, totaling 319 million euros – and this amount may still increase. As you know, the Global Gateway is a global programme worth 300 billion euros, half of which is earmarked for Africa. We still have the opportunity to present new projects. During the meeting, we also discussed Cape Verde’s desire to obtain full mobility with the European Union.
Speaking of regional foreign policy, ECOWAS is going through one of its worst crises since its creation. Is there still a way out for the organization?
That is the big challenge, because Africa is the continent of the future. ECOWAS is currently facing a context of instability, both due to extremist movements in the Sahel region and the rise of political models that may seem more attractive to those who defend more authoritarian regimes. Even so, I am convinced that ECOWAS will find its way. Military intervention was considered to restore constitutional order in countries where coups d’état took place, but that option was ultimately discarded. ECOWAS will have to find new ways to strengthen itself and reaffirm its role in the stability of the region.
Source: expressodasilhas
For More News And Analysis About Cape verde Follow Africa-Press
