NO 94 OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2002
| UN UPDATE | NGO NEWS | FOCUS |
| SG Endorses
Counter-Terrorism Strategy SG Calls for Concerted Action on Poverty Ethiopia Faces Famine UNAIDS/WHO Release AIDS Epidemic..2002 WFP Launches Africa Hunger Crisis.. GA President Observes World.. FAO/WFP Commemorate World Food Day WHO Releases Study on GM Foods BWC Ends Fifth Review Conference Climate Change: COP-8 Meets in New.. GA Considers the Cloning Con.. GA Discusses Financing for Dev.. UNCTAD Releases World Inv. Report 2002 WIDER/UNU Report Calls for Reform World Economic and Social Survey..02 World Bank/IMF Hold Annual Meeting FAO Estimates Toxic Waste at 500,000 Ton.. DDA Holds Roundtables on Disarament GA First Committee Discusses... Peacekeeping in Bosnia-Herzegovina Winds.. Landmine Convention Meets World Health Report 2002: Preventing Risks WHO Publishes World Report on Violence.. Int. Day Examines Environment/War UNEP/WCMC Releases Mountain Watch.. UNEP Finance Initiatives Warns of Risks WFP Atlas on Food Security of Urban India S-G’s Report on Composition of the Secreta.. UN Population Division Releases Migration.. |
Enabling
Environments for MDGs FIM Holds Conference on Governance Worldwatch Reports on Resource Wars Reporters Without Borders Publishes.. AWID Holds 9th International Forum CUTS Launches Jubilee 2010/2020 |
African Development:
UNCTAD Calls for.. GA Addresses African High-Level Plenary Meeting FAO Releases State of Food Insecurity, Agriculture 2002 General Assembly Debate Opens on Economic Issues Globalization: How to Manage the Prevaling Economic Forces Pre-ExCom and ExCom 53rd Session Calendar |
|
Using the World Bank/IMF annual meetings
held in late September as a backdrop, over 200 government, donor agency
and NGOs representatives came together in Washington DC on 2 October
2002 to draw linkages between the trade and finance policy discourses
emanating from the Doha Ministerial meeting, the International Conference
on Financing for Development (FFD) and the World Summit on Sustainable
Development (WSSD)
in Johannesburg, and to consider those policies under the framework
of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
The symposium, Creating an Enabling
Environment for Achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, was
cosponsored by several NGOs active around the FFD process: the Friedrich
Ebert Foundation, the Heinrich Böll Foundation, InterAction and the
Interim Facilitating Group on FFD.
In one panel, Mark Malloch Brown, Administrator
of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),
pointed out that the most effective element for achieving the MDGs
would not come simply from better economic policies, but rather from
a “broad political energy and power exercised by civil society
through its organizations.” Mr. Malloch Brown said the impact
of this would ultimately be felt though votes at the ballot box, “demanding
better results from their policy makers.” He said ideally he
would like to see the MDGs used universally in policy planning processes
such as the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs),
and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)/Development
Assistance Committee (DAC)
peer reviews. In this way, he said, the MDGs would become the “common
language” used by all development practitioners.
Mr. Malloch Brown pointed out, however,
that the US’s recently created Millennium Challenge Account (MCA)
was undermining the unity and political power of the MDG framework
by seemingly establishing its own independent system of measurement.
The MCA was established in early 2002 when US President George Bush
announced that the US would increase its core assistance to developing
countries by 50% over the next 3 years, resulting in a US$5 billion
annual increase over current levels by 2006, and that this increased
assistance would go to the new account to fund initiatives in “qualifying”
developing countries. Shortly after creating the account, the US outlined
three related criteria that developing countries would have to meet:
a strong commitment to good governance, the health and education of
their people, and sound economic policies that foster enterprise and
entrepreneurship.
In the second panel, which focused on
the role of US foreign policy in achieving the MDGs, Cynthia Rozell,
MCA Senior Advisor at the US Agency for International Development
(USAID), announced that “effective
immediately,” USAID “will begin monitoring and tracking
all of its development assessments through the lens of the Millennium
Development Goals.” She said USAID would do this “very transparently.”
A fellow panellist, Steven Radelet of the Center for Global Development,
pointed out, however, that relative to that of trade policies, the
impact of bilateral assistance is quite small. “Trade policies
of the European Union and United Sates always have a much, much greater
impact on achievement towards the MDGs,” he said, “than
any bilateral assistance programme we can come up with.” Panellists
also identified other factors that inhibit the achievement of the
MDGs, including a lack of emphasis on essential services, low levels
of ODA, over reliance on market access, and misguided multilateral
agreements.
This meeting was the first in a series
of three. Two others were held in November, just prior to the Second
Committee of the UN General Assembly’s discussion of the follow-up
to FFD Contact: Emira Woods, Programme
Manager, InterAction, 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 701,
Washington DC 20036, USA, telephone +1-202/667 8227, fax +1-202/667
8236, email <ewoods@interaction.org>,
website (www.interaction.org).
|
||
|
Meeting from 14-16 October in Montreal
(Canada), the Global Governance 2002: Civil Society and the Democratization
of Global Governance—Redefining Global Democracy (GO2) Conference,
organized by the Montreal International Forum, brought together some
400 representatives, mainly from NGOs.
UN Under-Secretary-General Nitin Desai,
in his keynote speech, emphasized the shift in international relations
over the last decade from one of inter-State relations mainly between
the executive branches of governments to one of global relations,
which he described as “moving away from the traditions of secret
society to those of open society.” He highlighted three key features
of present-day international relations: the influential role of transnational
corporations; the growing importance of networks and activists—“global
civil society”; and the emergence of shared values at the United
Nations.
Mr. Desai argued that the main challenge
currently facing the UN was that of implementation of the agreements
that have been reached over the last decade, mainly in major UN conferences
and summits. Within this context, he pointed to two areas of increasing
concern for civil society: the UN’s growing relations with the
Bretton Woods institutions and also with the corporate sector. “We
must bring those with influence into the tent,” he said. “We
are trying to bring them into our agenda and be sure that the outcomes
of the conferences are not diluted.”
A number of NGO representatives questioned
the emphasis on implementation, indicating that more was needed in
the area of standard setting and that there was also a need to address
the lack of democracy in the institutions of global governance. Drawing
on a paper prepared for the meeting, “Futures beyond Threats,”
and citing NGO dissatisfaction with the outcome of the International
Conference on Financing for Development, John Foster of the North/South
Institute said that, in some cases, the UN was moving prematurely
to implementation.
In the final plenary, Canadian Minister
of Foreign Affairs, Bill Graham, faced forthright questions about
Canadian foreign policy from participants seeking a more independent
Canadian role, especially regarding Iraq. Participants also questioned
the priority of Canadian trade policy over policies of human rights,
health and the environment.
In a plenary session addressing the
crisis situation of Iraq, a number of NGO representatives from industrialized
and developing countries spoke with different but complementary perspectives
of the apparent domination of self-interest in national policies and
expressed their concern about the undermining of civil liberties.
A representative from South Asia spoke movingly about the pressures
and isolation felt at national and local levels by those living in
communities experiencing violence and religious tensions. Common themes
and future directions that emerged from the session included the importance
of working with US civil society; strengthening the role of women
in decision making; and the vital need for an independent media.
In addition to the plenary sessions
and self-organized workshops, the programme of GO2 was developed around
eight thematic “tracks,” each with its own programme coordinator,
workshops and reports. The tracks include the United Nations; Human
Rights; Parliamentarians; Trade, Global Corporations; Local Government;
Transnational Civil Society; Non-Dominant Groups; and Financial Flows. Contact: Montreal International
Forum, 407 McGill Street, Suite 800, Montréal, Québec H2Y 2G3, Canada,
telephone +1-514/499 9468, fax +1-514/987 1567, e-mail <info@fimcivilsociety.org>,
website (www.fimcivilsociety.org).
|
||
|
The world’s insatiable demand for
cellular phones and other consumer luxuries is fueling violent conflict
and killing millions in developing countries, according to a recent
report from the Worldwatch Institute. The Anatomy of Resource Wars
says that wars over natural resources, such as coltan—a mineral
that keeps cell phones and other electronic equipment functioning—diamonds,
tropical woods, and other rare materials have killed or displaced
more than 20 million people and are raising at least US$12 billion
a year for rebels, warlords, repressive governments, and other groups
around the world.
“From Columbia to Angola to Afghanistan
people are dying every day because consumer societies import and use
materials irrespective of where they originate,” said Worldwatch
Institute senior researcher and report author Michael Renner. “If
you purchase a cell phone, for example, you may very well be paying
to keep the war going in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where
rival armies fight for control over deposits of coltan, a commodity
that just over a decade ago had little commercial value, but is now
vital for the one billion plus cell phones in use today.”
The report suggests that the expansion
in global trade combined with lax or corrupt customs officials has
made access to key markets relatively easy for warring groups. “Companies
and rich nations that benefit from cheap raw materials have long turned
a blind eye to the destruction at their source, and most consumers
don’t know that a number of common purchases bear the invisible
imprint of violence,” Mr. Renner said.
According to the institute, most of
the violence in resource-related conflicts is directed against civilians,
with young boys often turned into child soldiers and girls into sex
slaves for older fighters. Child and slave labour is used to extract
the resources. More than five million people were killed in resource-driven
conflicts during the 1990s, between 5-6 million fled to neighbouring
countries, and anywhere from 11-15 million people were displaced inside
the borders of their home countries.
The report makes a number of recommendations,
including: developing strong global certification systems; improving
the capacity of international organizations and governments to monitor
compliance; developing corporate codes of conduct in resource extraction
industries; reducing the availability of small arms; promoting democratization,
justice, and greater respect for human rights; and facilitating the
diversification of the economy away from a strong dependence on primary
commodities. Contact: Worldwatch Institute,
1776 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite 800, Washington DC 20036, USA,
telephone+1-202/452 1999, fax +1-202/296 7365, e-mail <worldwatch@worldwatch.org>,
website (www.worldwatch.org).
|
||
| Reporters Without Borders Publishes Index | ||
|
Reporters Without Borders (Reporters
sans frontières) has published, for the first time, a worldwide index
of countries based on their respect for press freedom that takes into
account events between September 2001 and October 2002. The index—drawn
up by asking journalists, researchers and legal experts to answer
50 questions about the entire range of press freedom violations, such
as murders or arrests of journalists, censorship, pressure, State
monopolies in various fields, punishment of press law offences and
regulation of the media—includes 139 countries. The other countries
were not included in the absence of reliable information.
The index indicates that press freedom
is under threat everywhere, with the 20 bottom-ranked countries drawn
from Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe. The situation is particularly
worrisome in Asia, which contains the five countries at the bottom
of the list.
Four countries share the first place—Finland,
Iceland, Norway and the Netherlands, and not only do these four scrupulously
respect press freedom in their own countries, but they also speak
up for it elsewhere in the world, most recently in Eritrea and Zimbabwe.
The highest-scoring country outside Europe is Canada, which comes
in fifth. Reporters Without Borders says Costa Rica (which ranks above
the US) and Benin (which ranks above Italy) are examples of how growth
of a free press does not only depend on a country’s material
prosperity. They also attribute the poor ranking of the US (17th)
to the number of journalists arrested or imprisoned there, often because
the journalists refuse to reveal their sources in court. Furthermore,
since the 11 September attacks on the US, several journalists have
been arrested for crossing security lines at official buildings.
In the worst-ranked countries, independent
newspapers do not exist, while the only voice heard is of media tightly
controlled or monitored by the government. Reporters Without Borders
say the very few independent journalists are constantly harassed,
imprisoned or forced into exile by the authorities, while foreign
media is banned or allowed in very small doses, always closely monitored.
Cuba came 134th and is the only country
in the region where there is no diversity of news and journalists
are routinely imprisoned. In Haiti, which ranked 106th, journalists
are often targeted by informal militias.
At the other end of the spectrum, Benin
is in 21st place despite being classified by the UN Development Programme
as one of the world’s 15 poorest countries. Other African States,
such as South Africa (26th), Mali (43rd), Namibia (31st) and Senegal
(47th), also have genuine press freedom. Contact: Reporters sans frontières,
5, rue Geoffroy-Marie, 75009 Paris, France, telephone +33-1/44 83
84 84, fax +33-1/45 23 11 51, e-mail <rsf@rsf.org>,
website (www.rsf.org).
|
||
| AWID Holds 9th International Forum | ||
|
The Association for Women’s Rights
in Development (AWID) held its
ninth International Forum in Guadalajara (Mexico) from 3-6 October
2002. It provided a platform for a solutions-oriented approach to
current global issues, and also served as an opportunity for the global
women’s movement to examine their successes and failures in terms
of building alliances, effecting institutional and policy change and
making institutions and organizations more accountable for equality
and justice. More than 1,200 policy makers, practitioners, researchers,
academics, grassroots organizers, NGOs and other representatives of
civil society participated from over 100 countries.
The Forum was organized around four
plenary sessions and some 150 panels and workshops. The opening plenary,
Re-inventing Globalization for Women’s Rights in Development,
explored new strategies towards a ‘fair globalization’ that
would support women’s human rights and sustainable human development.
Participants highlighted the contradictions within the new economic
global order and explored paths for achieving economic justice, including
engendering macro-economic policy, increasing women’s capacity
to influence economic policy and access to market opportunities, as
well as efforts to incorporate human rights principles into economic
models and policies. The second plenary, Women Challenging the New
Political and Military Order, explored challenges associated with
militarization, racism, censorship, religious fundamentalism and US
foreign policy. Participants sought to define new forms of governance
and leadership.
The third plenary, Human Rights for
All: Understanding and Applying Intersectionality to Confront Globalization,
explored the diversity of women’s identity, examining the intersection
of class, race, religion, ethnicity, age, ability, caste and gender,
as well as geographical barriers, that have caused less privileged
women to become further marginalized. The session made use of the
lessons learned at the UN World Conference against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (WCAR) held in
Durban (South Africa) in September 2001, in order to provide concrete
and holistic strategies for human rights for all.
The final plenary session, Transformative
Leadership: The Now and the Future of the Movement, looked at the
challenges facing the women’s movement, while highlighting how
young women are transforming human rights and development work. Challenges
of this leadership were also illustrated.
Other major issues taken up by Forum
participants included: human rights perspectives on the global HIV/AIDS
crisis; women’s initiatives to address the Free Trade Area of
the Americas (FTAA) trade and investment policies; finding solutions
to armed conflicts; sexual rights and risks; the genetic revolution
and biotechnology; UN and other international interventions in post-conflict
situations and their impact on women; feminist perspectives on human
security; and financial crises, macro-economic policy and economic
restructuring.
The Forum also launched the campaign
for the coming three years with the theme “Globalize This! Women’s
Rights in Development.” Contact: AWID, 96 Spadina Avenue,
Suite 401, Toronto, ON Canada, M5V2J6, telephone +1-416/594 3773,
fax +1-416/594 0330, email <awid@awid.org>,
website (www.awid.org).
|
||
| CUTS Launches Jubilee 2010/2020 | ||
|
The Consumer Unity and Trust Society
(CUTS) launched its Jubilee
2010/2020 Campaign during the World Summit on Sustainable Development
held in Johannesburg (South Africa). The Campaign, drawing on the
success of the Jubilee 2000 campaign for debt relief, aims to help
developing countries reap the benefits of international trade. In
order to be more effective, it will focus on the single issue of tariffs
as it brings together a worldwide alliance of civil society groups
under the leadership of the CUTS Centre for International Trade, Economics
and Environment.
“There is growing disillusionment
with trade liberalization in the South,” said Hafiz Pasha, Assistant
Secretary-General and Director of the United Nations Development Programme’s
(UNDP) Regional Bureau for Asia
and the Pacific. “These countries may retreat from liberalization
if the North maintains protection in all the areas where Southern
producers are competitive,” he said. Jubilee 2010/2020 calls
for dirty tariffs on labour-intensive goods, especially textiles,
clothing and leather goods to be dismantled by the year 2010, and
dirty tariffs and subsidies on agricultural products by the year 2020.
According to CUTS, the Uruguay Round
of world trade negotiations promised benefits to developing countries
which have not materialized, and, while many countries in the South
have lowered their trade barriers, the North has not reciprocated
in the most important areas. Even the European Union’s “Everything
But Arms” initiative to offer zero tariffs to least developed
countries (LDCs) excludes key agricultural products, according to
CUTS.
“Protectionism is one of the global
problems that has actually grown worse in the last decade,” said
Ricardo Melendez, Executive Director of the International Centre for
Trade and Sustainable Development in Geneva. “Subsidies on agriculture
in the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development]
countries are now six times as much as overseas development aid flows,
which means a huge flow of resources from South to North, further
exacerbating inequalities between countries.”
CUTS Secretary-General, Pradeep Mehta,
said, “We also need to empower people to participate in trade
policy making in both the rich and the poor countries, so that people
can bring pressure on their governments to be fair in the conduct
of their trade policies.” Contact: Bipul Chatterjee, CUTS
Centre for International Trade, Economics & Environment, D 217
Bhaskar Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur 302 016, India, telephone +91-141/207482,
fax +91-141/207486, e-mail <cuts@cuts.org>,
website (www.cuts.org).
|
||
|
|
||
