Power, Politics, and Higher Education in Southern Africa: Interna ...

The issue raised by the AAU must be understood in this context of a shared global perception and agreement in regards to the role of the WTO. The AAU does not contest the existence of the GATS, but it argues that the diffuseness of the term services in the GATS allows for interference in the area of education––thus services is a conceptual issue that needs redress––and it is concerned with a potential abuse of power through the “agreed hegemonic status” of the WTO, under which GATS operates.

Nonetheless, one should not assume that the AAU’s contestation reflects the perspective of all African scholars. Some African scholars have sided with the position taken by the WTO or have modestly accommodated it as possibly a sound alternative. Mthembu (AAU, 2004, p. 23), argued for the necessity but not sufficiency of GATS as a condition for transnational education, charged the African institutions with complicity in making education a service and in classifying it as a social and public good. Although different from the radical view that opposes GATS in higher education, Mthembu’s position reflects both the ambiguity of African scholars and the general view that raises awareness to the impact of globalization. Despite the ambiguity, there is a consensus among African scholars that globalization plays a role in higher education. Some go to the extent of arguing that the expansion of trade in services calls for greater dismantling of barriers to trade and consequently assures growth in the opportunities and capacity to expand the market for higher education (AAU, 2004, p. 9).