|
NO
99 August — September
2003 CALENDAR
|
TOP
|
Implementation
of United Nation Millennium Declaration |
|
On
8 September, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan released his 37-page
report (A/58/323) entitled Implementation of the United Nations Millennium
Declaration. His introduction calls attention to the 19 August 2003
bomb attack of UN headquarters in Baghdad and how the attack clearly
involves issues relating to the kind of mandates entrusted to the
United Nations, and the UN’s capacity to carry them out.
The Secretary-General’s introduction,
Section I, points out that the report is not a report on the United
Nations as such, “but rather on the distance travelled by humanity
as a whole towards—or away from—the objectives set for
it by the [189] world leaders who met in New York in September 2000.”
It also notes that in the area of peace and security, the “consensus
expressed or implied in the [Millennium] Declaration now looks less
solid than it did three years ago.” Mr. Annan notes that a
stronger consensus has been forged in the area of development but
“grave doubts” remain as to whether Member States are
sufficiently determined to act on it. In what concerns human rights
and democracy, there is a “danger we may retreat” from
some of the important gains made in the previous decade.
Section II, on peace and security, singles out events from the 11
September terrorist attacks on the US to the reconstruction of Afghanistan
to the war against Iraq in Spring 2003—which “brought
to the fore a host of questions of principle and practice that challenge
the UN and the international community as a whole”—noting
that the climate of cooperation and consensus has been “seriously
eroded.” The section looks at weapons of mass destruction (WMDs)—nuclear,
chemical and biological— noting that a major flaw of all WMD
regimes is their weak enforcement provisions which essentially leave
the penalties for non-compliance unspecified. The report notes that
“there are no multilateral means in place to deal with the
threat posed by non-State actors seeking to wield nuclear or other
weapons of mass destruction....” The section also looks at
the issues of small arms, sanctions, terrorism, preventing violent
conflict, peacekeeping and peace-building. Its conclusion calls
for a collective security system built on “fairness and consistency”
as the best way to meet both old and new challenges.
Section III, with development as its theme, identifies progress
made towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), and examines
extreme poverty and hunger; universal primary education; gender
equality; child mortality; maternal health; HIV/AIDS, malaria and
other diseases; and environmental sustainability. It also contains
a section on “Progress towards Goal 8: building a global partnership
for development,” which states that the most important components
of this Goal relate to trade, debt relief and aid. “It is no
exaggeration to state that the success or failure of all the Millennium
Development Goals hinges on whether developed countries meet their
commitments in these areas,” the report says.
Human rights, democracy and good governance are the subject of Section
IV, which stresses that “None of the pledges dealt with in
the previous chapters of this report are likely to be realized unless
the effort to achieve them is firmly based, at both the national
and the global levels, on the common values reaffirmed in the Millennium
Declaration, namely: freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, respect
for nature and shared responsibility.” The report suggests
“Greater respect for human rights, along with democracy and
social justice, will, in the long term, be the most effective prophylactic
against terror.” It also says, “Suppression of peaceful
dissent is never an effective way for a State to strengthen itself,
since truly strong States derive their strength from the freely
given consent of the governed.”
Section V, entitled “Conclusion: reinforcing multilateral institutions,”
notes that the leitmotiv throughout the report has been the need
for stronger international solidarity and responsibility, together
with greater respect for decisions reached collectively and greater
determination to put them into effect. “The composition of
the Security Council—unchanged in its essentials since 1945—seems
at odds with the geopolitical realities of the twenty-first century.”
Speaking at the 8 September press conference in New York where the
report was launched, the Secretary-General said, “[o]n peace
and security I felt that this year a simple progress report would
not be enough. Events have shaken the international system. I am
not even sure whether the consensus and the vision that the Millennium
Declaration expressed are still intact....
“But I also have an uneasy feeling that the system is not working
as it should….In this report I put forward my own analysis
of what is wrong, and some suggestions about what is needed. I think
all States need to take more account of global realities, and of
each other’s views and interests. They must set a higher priority
on finding common ground and agreeing on common strategies, rather
than striking out on their own. And if they do not want others to
strike out on their own, they need to show how multilateral systems
really can deal with the problems that are of concern and worry
to others.
“I also suggest that we need to take a hard look at our institutions
themselves, including especially the principal organs of the United
Nations—the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Economic
and Social Council, and maybe even the Trusteeship Council. If they
are to regain their authority, they may need radical reform.
“The report contains many questions. That is deliberate. My
intention is to start a debate, not to finish it. But I believe
this is a debate we must have, and one that must lead to real change
in the way we manage our affairs,” the Secretary-General told
reporters.
The report—which contains an Annex on the Millennium Development
Goals and their targets and indicators—is available online
(www.un.org/millenniumgoals).
|
|
TOP
|
First-ever
UN Conference of Civil Society in Support of the Palestinian People
Held
|
|
The
Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian
People convened an International Conference of Civil Society in Support
of the Palestinian People under the theme “End the Occupation!”
at UN headquarters in New York from 4-5 September 2003. The conference,
which was mandated by GA resolutions 57/107 and 57/108, reflected
the Committee’s deep concern with the latest cycle of violence
and the urgent need to address the humanitarian crisis facing the
Palestinians.
Four plenary discussions were held
during the conference, focusing on the situation on the ground and
obstacles to peace; civil society under siege; the international
community, civil society and the political process to end the occupation;
and civil society initiatives to end the occupation. Participants
also discussed the issue of the “Wall” built by Israel
as part of its settlement activities. They then adopted an Action
Plan, agreeing on a “Bring Down the Wall” campaign and
committed themselves to combining resources to educate the public,
increase pressure on governments to condemn the Wall’s illegality,
and to demand its immediate destruction. A “Week of Action
Against the Wall” is now planned for 9-16 November 2003, for
which civil society organizations (CSOs) working with the Committee
will supply speakers and other resources to support the campaign.
Participants also expressed broad support for a central United Nations
role to end the occupation, citing the international community’s
obligation to protect Palestinians living under occupation. In a
letter addressed to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the Presidents
of the General Assembly and Security Council, CSOs pledged to work
with governments to ensure the authorization of an international
protection force as a first step to ending the occupation and implementing
outstanding UN resolutions.
With a well-defined mandate and clear timeline, the letter said,
such a force would spare Palestinian civilians further death and
destruction at the hand of the occupying Israeli military forces.
It would also protect Israeli civilians from future acts of violence,
which the letter said were a consequence of the brutal 36-year occupation.
In a statement read by Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs
Kieran Prendergast, Mr. Annan called on conference participants
to support the “Road Map” for peace, the goals of which
he said were clear: to achieve an end to terrorism and violence;
an end to occupation; a permanent settlement of the conflict; and
the realization of the vision of two States, Israel and Palestine,
living side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders
(see Go Between 97).
“Your support is indispensable if that vision is to be achieved,”
Mr. Annan stressed.
Among the serious impediments to the Road Map, both Mr. Annan and
Committee Chair Papa Louis Fall (Senegal) identified Israeli settlement
expansion, the construction of bypass roads, and the construction
of the Wall in the West Bank that would separate Palestinians from
their farms and other Palestinian communities. The Secretary-General
also called on the Palestinian Authority to halt terrorist attacks,
which he termed “harmful to the Palestinian cause.”
Not all participants were in favour of the Road Map, however. Naim
Ashhab of the Joint Action Group for Israeli-Palestinian Peace based
in Jerusalem lamented that the Road Map did not seem to promote
a true settlement but rather reflected the ambitions of other States
to achieve relative order in the region so as to be able to better
protect their own strategic and economic interests.
Phyllis Bennis, a Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and
Co-Chair of the Steering Committee for the conference, said that
while an important gain of the Road Map was the acknowledgement
of the goal to end the occupation, the definition of ending occupation
had been left out. She emphasized that both civil society as a whole
and the UN had been ignored in the Road Map process and stressed
the need for partnership to demand UN centrality and “a new
map based on the existing map, namely the existing UN resolutions
and existing international law.”
Lev Grinberg, Professor at Ben-Gurion University asserted that Israelis
working for peace had urged the UN Secretary-General to deploy effective
peace task forces in the occupied lands since 2002. “It is
difficult to build an effective civil society under military occupation
and Palestinian violent resistance,” he said. “In the
absence of an organized and empowered civil society, the public
space is occupied by its rival: military society.”
Noting that the conflict was currently defined as a question of
security and terror, rather than of occupation and resistance, Mr.
Grinberg observed that insecurity was merely a symptom, not the
illness. “Ending the occupation cannot be an issue of internal
Israeli politics,” he said. “It is a matter of international
responsibility.”
Contact: Department of Political Affairs, Division for Palestinian
Rights, Room S-3350, United Nations, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone
+1-212/963 1800, fax +1-212/963 4199, website (www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/committee.htm).
|
|
TOP
|
ECOSOC
2003 Substantive Session
|
|
At
this year’s annual meeting of the United Nations Economic and
Social Council (ECOSOC) which focused on rural development, UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan told the opening session that in the wake of recent world
trade and development conferences which have defined the path to erasing
poverty, especially in rural areas, the challenge now “is not
to decide what to do, but rather, simply, to do it.”
Running from 30 June-25 July in Geneva,
ECOSOC’s 2003 substantive session focused on rural development
with a high-level segment on the theme “Promoting an integrated
approach to rural development in developing countries for poverty
eradication and sustainable development.” Following the conclusion
of the high-level segment, ECOSOC’s work was divided into four
segments: operational activities; coordination; humanitarian affairs;
and a general segment, in which the Council considered a wide variety
of topics, ranging from indigenous issues to gender mainstreaming
to international financing for development.
High-Level Segment
During the high-level segment, held from 30 June-3 July, four ministerial
roundtables were held focussing on rural development and natural
resources in developing countries; an integrated approach to implementation
of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs); global partnerships
for rural development; and rural/urban interface and slums.
Many speakers from developing countries highlighted specific national
constraints they faced in implementing an integrated approach to
rural development including the HIV/AIDS pandemic; the lack of infrastructure;
environmental degradation; lack of natural resources; extreme poverty;
and war and conflict. They urged the international community to
increase-in moral, material and financial terms-solidarity extended
to developing countries, and to address asymmetries in trade between
rich and poor countries by progressively eliminating barriers to
markets.
During the high-level policy dialogue held with the executive heads
of the Bretton Woods institutions on 30 June, Mamphela Ramphele,
Managing Director of the World Bank, said the key thrusts in implementing
rural development and poverty reduction were to raise the profile
of rural development in national policy, including raising the voice
of the rural poor in national planning processes, as well as scaling
up innovations and successful investments in rural development.
She also said rural areas needed to be addressed in their entirety,
with a multidisciplinary approach to dealing with poverty, social
and gender equality, local economic development, natural resources
management, good governance and effective delivery of services to
poor people.
Heated Debate on Trade and Agriculture
Senior UN officials and diplomats attending the high-level segment
engaged in a frank exchange on one of the most difficult issues
under negotiation in the build-up to the 5th Ministerial Conference
of the World Trade Organization
(WTO) held in Cancun (Mexico): the dismantling of northern agricultural
subsidies which harm the development prospects of developing countries.
In his opening remarks, the UN Secretary-General said rural development
was rightly the theme of the high-level segment as it was in rural
areas that three-quarters of the world’s poorest people lived.
He emphasized how rural populations were on the forefront of drought,
desertification and environmental degradation. While domestic measures
such as secure land tenure and land reform, as well as improved
agricultural productivity could help, Mr. Annan stressed the responsibility
of developed countries to allow agricultural products from developing
countries to reach their markets unimpeded by direct or disguised
barriers such as subsidies.
On the same opening panel, the Secretary-General of the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Rubens Ricupero, took
up in considerable detail the question of northern agriculture subsidies
and how they aggravate poverty. He first noted that the small farmers
of the world’s wealthiest countries face “distress and
misery” even as these countries spend nearly US$1 billion a
day on subsidies. “Over the past 15 years, as subsidies expanded
relentlessly,” he said, “small farmers in these countries
have become poorer and poorer in relation to the rest of the population,
so much so that they are now a vanishing species.” The increase
in subsidies in rich countries occurred even after the Uruguay Round
(from an average of US$238 billion in 1986-88 to US$248 billion
in 1999-2001) despite agreement by these countries to reduce subsidies.
He said it coincided precisely with the period when peasants were
vanishing and the average farm size doubled.
Quoting a study produced by OXFAM, he said that, far from benefiting
small farmers, subsidies go overwhelmingly to large, capital intensive
agriculture as support is closely linked with production or land
ownership. The subsidies are skewed towards the rich farmers, as
15% of farms receiving in excess of 20,000 Euros account for 60%
of total payments. Mr. Ricupero thus stressed that if the most forceful
moral and political justification for subsidies is that they are
needed to save the peasants, then the facts show that these measures
are not achieving their purpose. “They should thus be abandoned
altogether, or replaced by something more effective,” he urged.
Subsidies not only cruelly failed to help the poor in the North,
Mr. Ricupero continued, they also seriously harm poor peasants in
the South. As a result, “promoting an integrated approach to
rural development in developing countries for poverty eradication
and sustainable development” can only be achieved if a central
element of this integrated approach is the prompt elimination of
the external constraints that presently make it “an absolute
impossibility.”
He explained how subsidized food from rich nations enter the markets
of the poor, compete unfairly with local producers who are often
driven out of business altogether. Such patterns also create artificial
dependency on foreign suppliers, aggravating food security problems
in times when food aid disappears and prices go up. However, he
noted that the reforms announced by the European Commission by decoupling
subsidies from production and prices were encouraging signs in the
right direction. He said he had hoped that the same inspiration
would prevail in the United States where the last Farm Bill went
in the opposite direction of the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act and re-established
the link between subsidies and production.
In response, John Richardson of the European Commission said that
the European Union had been accused of being the main obstacle to
the success of current trade negotiations due to its agricultural
subsidies. First export subsidies had been criticized, he said,
but as they declined, the emphasis switched to “trade distorting”
domestic subsidies. “We were told it had to stop,” he
said, “and we have stopped it; we’ve cut the links between
production and subsidies. This was a major change in our whole philosophy
and it was pushed through against strong opposition. On Mr. Ricupero’s
remarks on the distribution of payments between rich and poor farmers
in the North, Mr. Richardson said this was an “internal problem”
and it was up to the countries concerned to think about it.
Mr. Ricupero said that he respected the view of the European Commission
delegate that this was an internal problem, but he highlighted this
point because the need to protect small farmers in the North has
been the most frequently used argument in international trade debates
and negotiations to defend subsidies. In doing so, he said, “the
North has opened itself to international scrutiny and we have to
see whether what it says happens in practice or not.”
Subsequent to the high-level segment, ECOSOC adopted a Ministerial
Declaration (E/2003/L.9) that called for the reduction and elimination
of agricultural subsidies and urged developed countries to implement
the commitments made at the WTO’s Ministerial Meeting held
in Doha in November 2001 to facilitate market access for the products
of developing countries.
The declaration stresses the need to support the efforts of commodity
dependent developing countries to diversify their exports as a means
of increasing export earnings and improving the terms of trade,
given the market fluctuations to which they are vulnerable. It also
urges developed countries to make concrete efforts towards the target
of 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development
assistance (ODA) to developing countries.
Operational and Coordination Segments
In its operational segment, ECOSOC focused on the UN’s operational
activities for international development cooperation and stressed
that predictable financial contributions to the core/regular resources
were the bedrock of its activities. During this segment, two panels
were held-one on resources for operational activities for development
and another on lessons learned from field-level evaluations. During
these discussions, heads of UN funds and programmes, government
ministers and high-level officials called on donor countries to
substantially increase their contributions to the operational activities
of the UN development system.
During its coordination segment, ECOSOC focused on the coordinated
and integrated implementation of the outcomes of and follow-up to
major UN conferences and summits. Participants stressed that without
urgent and effective implementation of the agreed goals and commitments
made during the International Financing for Development Conference
held in Monterrey (Mexico, see NGLS Roundup 91) and the Johannesburg
World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD, see NGLS Roundup
96), the MDGs would not be reached.
Humanitarian Segment
In its humanitarian segment, ECOSOC held three panels on the themes
of humanitarian financing and effectiveness of humanitarian assistance,
the transition from relief to development, and the impact of HIV/AIDS
and other widespread diseases on humanitarian relief operations.
Particular attention was paid to developing countries facing complex
emergencies, including conflicts and natural disasters, and the
importance of strengthening the coordinating role of ECOSOC in humanitarian
assistance. The need for assistance in the transition from relief
to development and humanitarian financing was also stressed. ECOSOC
called on the UN system to improve and increase consistency in the
way in which humanitarian needs were assessed and urged the Emergency
Relief Coordinator to develop a global humanitarian financing tracking
system.
A Focus on LDCs
A general discussion on the review and coordination of the “Implementation
of the Brussels Programme of Action 2001-2010” was held from
16-17 July in order to assess progress made since the Third UN Least
Developed Countries Conference (LDC-III) held in May 2001. Half
or more of the population in the 49 LDCs are estimated to live at
or below the absolute poverty line of one dollar a day.
Anwarul K. Chowdhury, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative
for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries
and Small Island Developing States (OHRLLS), said some of the major
challenges facing LDCs include the widespread prevalence of diseases,
slow progress in debt relief and continuing low levels of foreign
investment and trade. With 11% of the world population, LDCs account
for a bare 0.42% of global trade, he said.
During the general discussion, several participants noted that despite
some notable exceptions, few governments had taken any notice of
the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA). This was put down to LDC
governments’ lack of “ownership” and a general lack
of interest from development partners and the international community.
It was also agreed that more work needed to be done in order to
urge governments into action. The representative from Zambia stressed
that it was important for LDCs to establish a focal point at the
national level to ensure implementation of the BPoA. The representative
from Nepal said that despite the assurances of a “promised
land” through the process of globalization, poverty and under-development
continued to be the bane of LDCs as rapid globalization had left
the LDCs even more vulnerable. Without massive efforts at the national
level and the creation of a supportive environment at the international
level, the fight against poverty could not be waged on a sustained
basis, he stressed.
LDC Watch, a network of NGOs in Least Developed Countries (LDC),
sent a delegation to the general segment, including NGOs from Benin,
Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Nepal and Uganda. During the debate, the
NGO delegation lobbied for the role of civil society to be recognized
and urged governments to include civil society in their future plans.
ECOSOC, in its draft resolution (E/2003/L.15/Rev.1) on the Programme
of Action for LDCs, calls on governments to fulfil their commitments
“with the involvement of civil society.”
Preceding the general segment, LDC
Watch co-hosted a civil society dialogue on 15 July, in conjunction
with OHRLLS and the UN Non-Governmental Liaison Service (NGLS).
The dialogue debated civil society’s role in the follow-up
process and how the UN system could support the implementation of
the BPoA at the national level. Mr. Chowdhury introduced the dialogue
that drew over 100 participants. Although some were critical of
NGO participation, they agreed on the need to strengthen government-civil
society collaboration, and suggested partnerships which concentrated
on concrete aspects, such as working together to combat AIDS.
Also on 15 July LDC Watch launched its report which aims to provide
a grassroots view of how the BPoA is working, based on NGO feedback,
and to serve as a watchdog vis-ŕ-vis governments and their commitments.
The report assesses the progress of each of the Programme’s
seven commitments, and endorses a “bottom-up” approach
to development. It maintains that additional training of civil society
leaders will enhance the contributions currently being made by NGOs
in the poor countries. It also highlights the importance of post-conflict
development—largely omitted in the BPoA—while on the trade
side, it shows how free trade has led to growing income disparity
within LDCs. The report can be found online (www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/ldc/ngo.htm)
on the OHRLLS website.
LDC Watch says it plans to organize regional workshops to raise
awareness of the LDC process and to help select national NGO focal
points to liase with governments. For ECOSOC 2004, it will work
with the OHRLLS to organize a parallel civil society forum during
the LDC discussions.
NGOs
On 24 July a debate was held on the suspension of the NGO Reporters
Sans Frontičres’ consultative status. The Committee on NGOs,
in its report to ECOSOC, had recommended, at the request of Libya
and Cuba, the suspension for one year of Reporters Sans Frontičres
because of its actions during the 59th session of the Commission
on Human Rights held in March 2003. As Reporters Sans Frontičres
was not given the opportunity to explain its actions before ECOSOC,
the French Government criticized the failure to respect sanction
procedures, and lodged a request for postponement of any decision
to suspend the organization. Following extensive deliberations,
the Council approved the suspension of Reporters Sans Frontičres
by a vote of 27 in favour, 23 against, with 4 abstentions. A roll-call
vote was called for by Cuba.
Within the context of the Report of the Committee on NGOs on its
2003 regular session (E/2003/32 Part 1), the Council adopted, without
a vote, a decision by which it granted consultative status to 57
non-governmental organizations.
Closing Session
During the closing session, ECOSOC President Gert Rosenthal (Guatemala)
noted that it had been a “long and intensive session.”
He said that the high-level segment in its exchange with the Bretton
Woods institutions and the theme of rural development had been satisfactory,
and would have an impact on the priorities in policy development
due to its cooperation vector and domestic policy focus. Patrizio
Civili, Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and
Interagency Affairs, said the high-level segment had brought unprecedented
participation of development agencies, social agencies and technical
agencies, and said he hoped this tradition would continue in future
years.
ECOSOC adopted the themes for its 2004 substantive session. The
two themes for the coordination segment will centre on the implementation
of gender mainstreaming and coordinated approaches to promote rural
development in least developed countries. The high-level segment
theme will be “resource mobilization and enabling environments
for poverty eradication in the context of the implementation of
the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the
Decade 2001-2010.” A resumed substantive session will be held
before the end of 2003 to deal with matters that were deferred during
the session.
The Council is made up of 54 members with geographical distribution
as follows: 14 members from African States; 11 from Asian States;
six from Eastern European States; ten from Latin American and Caribbean
States; and 13 from Western European and Other States. Eighteen
members of the Council are elected each year to serve three-year
terms of office.
Contact: Division for ECOSOC Support and Coordination, Department
of Economic and Social Affairs, One UN Plaza, Room 1428, New York
NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963 4628, fax +1-212/963 1712, website
(www.un.org/esa/coordination/
ecosoc/document.htm).
Daphne Davies, LDC Watch Project Office, Rue Stevin 115, B-1000
Brussels, Belgium, telephone +322-234/6228, fax +322-230/3780, e-mail
<ldcwat@attglobal.net>.
|
|
TOP
|
NGO Confer on Human Security and Dignity
|
|
UN
Secretary-General Kofi Annan has stated that “Achieving human
security requires a dynamic, innovative partnership among the United
Nations, governments and non-State actors.” The 56th Annual UN
Department of Public Information (DPI) NGO Conference, held from 8-10
September in New York, focused on “Human Security and Dignity:
Fulfilling the Promise of the United Nations,” allowing 2,000
NGO representatives from around the world to explore a broad notion
of security centered on human beings rather than on traditional concepts
that rest on relations between States.
The 56th Annual DPI NGO Conference,
through its seven plenary sessions and 31 midday NGO workshops,
addressed many issues including insecurity emanating from the global
economic system, the power of education in attaining secure societies,
and the role of individual struggles in gaining empowerment.
In one plenary session on Global Trends and Strategies, participants
debated reforms needed at the UN, political changes at the national
level and the role of civil society in bringing them about. In response
to a question about whether new configurations in the Security Council
could create divisions among developing countries, Jeffrey Sachs,
Special Advisor to the Secretary-General on the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs), said the concern was less about divisions among the
global South than about the unbelievable imbalance in the world,
where only rich countries seemed to have a voice. He challenged
the developing country Heads of State that get invited to the Group
of Eight (G-8) Summits to hold their own summit in order to address
issues involving global poverty, disease and the environment, which
he said never seemed to make it onto the agenda of the G-8.
Kingsley Moghalu, Director of Resource Mobilization at the Global
fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, said one of the most
important elements of reform at the United Nations involved bringing
people to the UN and giving civil society a greater voice in debates.
The UN was dominated by “we the governments” and “we
the diplomats” rather than “we the people.”
This view was reiterated by Mary Racelis, a member of the High-Level
Panel of Eminent Persons on UN-Civil Society Relations (see
Go Between 98), who said that governments needed to have
high-level NGO offices to understand issues of poverty from the
perspective of different vulnerable groups. Coming from the Philippines,
with a robust civil society, she said she was surprised at how little
the civil society sector in the United States spoke out about issues
of concern to them and said that the media and government should
not control the voices of NGOs.
The closing address was delivered by Sadako Ogata, Co-Chair of the
Commission on Human Security and former United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees. Reflecting on the findings of the Commission presented
to the UN Secretary-General on 1 May 2003, she said that over the
last decade, the understanding of State security and the many types
of threats had broadened. In addition to securing borders and people
from external attack, they now included the dangers of environmental
pollution, the spread of infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, and
more recently severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), massive
population movements, and particularly the threat of transnational
organized crime.
When she was High Commissioner for Refugees, she said she had realized
that security threats to people emanated more often from the very
States that should be protecting them. Similarly, threats to national
and international security came much more from internal than external
aggression. This was certainly true of the post-cold-war era of
the 1990s, which had been marked by internal communal conflicts
with heavy ethnic undertones. It therefore became important to shift
attention to the security of people and the responsibility of individuals
to complement the capacity of the State.
The idea of an independent Commission on Human Security had been
launched at the 2000 Millennium Summit, she said. The Commission
viewed human security in terms of protecting people’s vital
freedoms from critical and pervasive threats and in ways that empowered
them to fulfill their potential and aspirations.
In its report, the Commission examines the situation of people in
conflict, emphasizing the importance of a firmer application of
human rights and humanitarian law. A second area deals with people
on the move-refugees, internally displaced and migrants. The report
also addresses the transition between war and peace, with greater
institutional and financial concentration on the transition phase.
Other areas dealt with include economic security, health and education.
In his closing remarks, Paul Hoeffel, Chief of the DPI NGO Section,
said that 3,500 representatives of more than 700 NGOs from more
than 100 countries had pre-registered for the Conference and that
despite financial and safety concerns and visa difficulties, a record
number of over 2,000 were able to participate. Eight hundred, or
40% had come from developing regions, he continued, which is more
than double from last year. The Conference had been fundamentally
about communications, he said, and one of the underlying themes
emerging from discussions was the need for consultations, for feedback,
and for guidance from those with whom the United Nations interacted.
Contact: Paul Hoeffel, Chief, NGO Section, Department of Public
Information, UN, Room S-1070L, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone
+1-212/963 8070, fax +1-212/963 6914, e-mail <hoeffel@un.org>,
website (www.un.org/dpi/ngosection).
|
|
|
TOP
|
Commission
on Human Security Presents Report |
|
The Commission on Human Security
(CHS) was launched in June 2001 to prepare a report on human security
issues and promote public understanding of the concept of human
security and its use as an operational tool for policy formulation
and implementation. The idea of an independent Commission of Human
Security grew out of the UN Millennium Summit, which focused on
securing “freedom from fear” and “freedom from want.”
The Commission on Human Security
is chaired by former United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
Sadako Ogata, and Nobel laureate in economic science Amartya Sen,
and is an initiative of the Government of Japan. On 1 May 2003,
Ms. Ogata and Professor Sen presented the report of the independent
Commission on Human Security to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
The report notes that people’s security around the world is
interlinked, and that political liberalization and democratization
opens new opportunities but also new fault lines, such as political
and economic instabilities and conflicts within States. More than
800,000 people a year lose their lives to violence. About 2.8 billion
suffer from poverty, ill health, illiteracy and other maladies.
Conflict and deprivation are interconnected. Deprivation has many
causal links to violence, although these have to be carefully examined,
the report notes. Conversely, wars kill people, destroy trust among
them, increase poverty and crime, and slow down the economy. Addressing
such insecurities effectively demands an integrated approach.
Policies and institutions must respond to these insecurities in
stronger and more integrated ways, the report says. The State continues
to have the primary responsibility for security, but as security
challenges become more complex and various new actors attempt to
play a role, a shift in paradigm is needed. The focus must broaden
from the State to the security of people—to human security.
The report says that human security means protecting vital freedoms:
protecting people from critical and pervasive threats and situations;
and building on their strengths and aspirations. It also means creating
systems that give people the building blocks of survival, dignity
and livelihood. Human security connects different types of freedoms—freedom
from want, freedom from fear and freedom to take action on one’s
own behalf. To do this, it offers two general strategies: protection
and empowerment. Protection shields people from dangers, the report
notes. It requires concerted effort to develop norms, processes
and institutions that systematically address insecurities. Empowerment
enables people to develop their potential and become full participants
in decision making. Protection and empowerment are mutually reinforcing,
and both are required in most situations, the report specifies.
Human security complements State security, furthers human development
and enhances human rights, the report finds. It complements State
security by being people-centred and addressing insecurities that
have not been considered as State security threats. Respecting human
rights are at the core of protecting human security. Promoting democratic
principles is a step toward attaining human security and development.
It enables people to participate in governance and make their voices
heard.
Ways to advance the security of people
Human security seeks to strengthen and bring together efforts to
address issues such as conflict and deprivation. Attempts are being
made, for example, to realize the United Nations’ Millennium
Declaration and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Achieving
human security requires building on and going beyond the MDGs, the
reports says, by undertaking efforts to address the full range of
critical and pervasive threats facing people.
Protecting people in violent conflict
Civilians are the main casualties in conflicts. Both norms and mechanisms
to protect civilians should be strengthened. This requires comprehensive
and integrated strategies, linking political, military, humanitarian
and development aspects.
The Commission proposes placing human security formally on the agenda
of security organizations at all levels. There are critical gaps
in how human rights are upheld, in respect for citizenship and humanitarian
law. These gaps need to be closed as well as attention given to
ending the impunity of perpetrators of human rights violations.
Community-based strategies to promote coexistence and trust among
people will support these efforts. Equally urgent is meeting the
life-saving needs of people through humanitarian assistance. Special
attention should be given to protecting women, children, the elderly
and other vulnerable groups. Disarming people and fighting crime
through preventing the proliferation of weapons and illegal trade
in resources and people has to be a priority.
Protecting and empowering people on the move
For the majority of people, migration is an opportunity to improve
their livelihood. For others, migrating is the only option to protect
themselves, such as those forced to flee because of conflicts or
serious human rights violations. Others may also be forced to leave
their homes to escape chronic deprivations or sudden downturns.
Currently, the report notes, there is no agreed international framework
to provide protection or to regulate migration, except for refugees.
The feasibility of an international migration framework should be
explored, through establishing the basis of high-level and broad-based
discussions and dialogues on the need to strike a balance between
the security and development needs of countries, and the human security
of people on the move. Equally important is to ensure the protection
of refugees and internally displaced persons, and identify ways
to end their plight.
Protecting and empowering people in post-conflict situations
Cease-fire agreements and peace settlements may mark the end of
conflict, but not necessarily the advent of peace and human security.
The responsibility to protect people in conflict should be complemented
by a responsibility to rebuild. A new framework and a funding strategy
are necessary to rebuild conflict-torn States—one that focuses
on the protection and empowerment of people. Such a human security
framework emphasizes the linkages among the many issues affecting
people, such as ensuring people’s safety through strengthening
civilian police and demobilizing combatants; meeting immediate needs
of displaced people; launching reconstruction and development; promoting
reconciliation and coexistence; and advancing effective governance.
To implement such a framework, a new fundraising strategy should
be designed for post-conflict situations, at field level, to ensure
coherence in the planning, budgeting and implementation of human
security related activities.
Economic insecurity—the power to choose among opportunities
Extreme poverty remains pervasive. The proper functioning of markets
as well as development of non-market institutions are key to poverty
eradication. Efficient and equitable trade arrangements, economic
growth reaching the extreme poor and a fair distribution of benefits
are essential. Together with addressing chronic poverty, human security
focuses on sudden economic downturns, natural disasters and the
social impacts of crises. To make people secure when crisis hits
or to enable them to move out of poverty, social arrangements are
needed to meet their basic needs and ensure an economic and social
minimum. Three-quarters of the world’s people are not protected
by social security or do not have secure work. Efforts to ensure
sustainable livelihoods and work based security for all need to
be strengthened. Access to land, credit, education, and housing,
especially for poor women, is critical.
Health for human security
Despite the progress in healthcare, 22 million people died of preventable
diseases in 2001, and HIV/AIDS will soon become the greatest health
catastrophe. In their urgency, depth and impact, global infectious
diseases, poverty-related threats and health deprivations arising
from violence are particularly significant, the report stresses.
All health actors should promote health services as public goods.
It is essential to mobilize social action and invest in supportive
social arrangements, including the access to information, to remove
the root causes of ill health, to provide early warning systems
and to mitigate health impacts once a crisis occurs. Providing access
to life-saving drugs is critical for those in developing countries.
An equitable intellectual property rights regime needs to be developed
to balance incentives for research and development with ensuring
people’s access to affordable life-saving drugs. The international
community must also form a global network of partnerships for health,
promoting, for example, a global surveillance and control system
for infectious diseases.
Knowledge, skills and values—for human security
Basic education and public information that provide knowledge, life
skills and respect for diversity are particularly important for
human security. The Commission urges the international community
to actively help the achievement of universal primary education,
with a particular emphasis on girls’ education. Schools should
not create physical insecurities, but protect students from violence
including sexual violence. Education should foster respect for diversity
and promote the multiplicity of cultural identities by employing
a balanced curriculum and method of instruction. Public media are
important as they can provide information on life skills and political
issues, and give people voice in public debate.
Policy conclusions
Based on the foregoing the Commission has arrived at policy conclusions
in the following areas:
— Protecting people in violent conflict;
— Protecting people from the proliferation of arms;
— Supporting the security of people on the move;
— Establishing human security transition funds for post-conflict
situations;
— Encouraging fair trade and markets to benefit the extreme
poor;
— Working to provide minimum living standards everywhere;
— According higher priority to ensuring universal access to
basic health care;
— Developing an efficient and equitable global system for patent
rights;
— Empowering all people with universal basic education; and
— Clarifying the need for a global human identity while respecting
the freedom of individuals to have diverse identities and affiliations.
Linking the many initiatives
For each of these policy conclusions joint efforts are necessary—a
network of public, private, and civil society actors who can help
in the clarification and development of norms, embark on integrated
activities, and monitor progress and performance. Such efforts could
create a horizontal, cross-border source of legitimacy that complements
traditional vertical structures.
Effective and adequate resource mobilization is also required. Not
only must there be greater commitment to providing additional resources
but also a shift of priority assistance to people in greatest need.
In this respect, the Commission recognizes the valuable contribution
of the UN Trust Fund for Human Security and encourages the broadening
of its donor base. It also recommends the establishment of an Advisory
Board on Human Security to provide orientation to the UN Trust Fund
and follow-up on the Commission’s recommendations.
The Commission proposes the development of a core group made up
of interested States, international organizations and civil society,
around the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions, as
a part of its critical initiative—in which a small input of
resources might have great impact—to forge links with disparate
human security actors in a strong global alliance.
The report finds that “at a time when the consensus on the
meaning of security is eroding, there is growing fear that existing
institutions and policies are not able to cope with weakening multilateralism
and global responsibilities. Nevertheless, the opportunities for
working toward removing insecurities facing people are greater than
ever.”
Contact: Commission on Human Security, 1 United Nations Plaza,
Room 1102-5, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-917/367 2250,
fax +1-917/367 2332, e-mail <chs-secretariat@un.org>,
website (www.humansecurity-chs.org).
|
|
|
TOP
|
WTO 5th Ministerial Conference
in Cancún |
|
“We are told that free trade
brings opportunity for all people, not just a fortunate few. We
are told that it can provide a ladder to a better life, and deliverance
from poverty and despair. And we are led to hope that the current
round of trade negotiations will deliver on this promise. Sadly,
the reality of the international trading system today does not match
the rhetoric. Instead of open markets, there are too many barriers
that stunt, stifle and starve.” —UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan
Meeting in Cancún (Mexico), the 5th
Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) closed
on 14 September without any agreement being reached. Ministerial
talks broke down over issues ranging from the speedy elimination
of agricultural subsidies by rich countries that undercut farmers
in the world’s poorest nations, to the so-called Singapore
issues—investment, competition policy, transparency in government
procurement and trade facilitation—which emerged from the 1st
Ministerial Conference held in December 1996. Developing countries
said such issues might interfere with their domestic policies.
In his message delivered at the opening session, UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan implored the ministers “to say ‘no’ to
trade policies that aggravate poverty” and urged them “to
say ‘yes’ to bold but sensible steps that will revive
the global economy and set a new course for development.”
In a second breakdown in talks since that of the WTO’s 3rd
Ministerial Conference in Seattle in 1999, a number of delegates
blamed the collapse of the talks in Mexico on the failure to resolve
serious differences between rich and poor nations, particularly
on agriculture, non-agricultural market access and the Singapore
issues. Also at stake were issues crucial for the Doha Development
Agenda process—negotiated in Qatar at the 4th Ministerial Conference
in November 2001—including agricultural trade, industrial tariffs,
poor countries’ access to medicines, and other areas of importance
to developing countries. WTO Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi
said there was no hiding the fact that the deadlock was a setback.
New Alliances
Many developing countries—including the African, Caribbean
and Pacific (ACP) group, the African Union (AU), the Least Developed
Countries (LDCs) which entered into an Alliance of 92 countries,
61 of which belong to the WTO—and Asian countries such as India
and Malaysia said they would like the conference not to launch negotiations
on the Singapore issues. These countries stood firm even after the
EU agreed to drop two of these issues, retaining only trade facilitation
and transparency in public procurement on the agenda. On 13 September,
the Alliance of 92, in its statement, said, “The challenges
facing the poor countries and the risk that their economic and social
situation may be worsened because of heightened disequilibrium,
require the WTO to take necessary measures to promote the harmonious
integration of those countries in world trade.”
Just prior to and during Cancún, another new negotiating bloc representing
different interests came together to counterbalance the United States
and the European Union. Led by Brazil, China and India, the Group
of 21+ (G-21+) also included Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia,
Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico,
Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, South Africa, Thailand,
Turkey and Venezuela. More than 51% of the world’s population
and 63% of farmers live in the G-21+ countries, which produce more
than one-fifth of global agricultural output and more than one-quarter
of farm exports. The G-21+ negotiated for greater liberalization
of farm trade through deeper cuts in farm subsidies in the rich
countries, counter to what the EU-US proposal called for and what
had served as the basis for the draft Ministerial Declaration.
Rubens Ricupero, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference
on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), said that after the consolidation
of the G-21+, the positions became “clear.” In that respect,
Cancún was “beneficial,” he said, adding that he was “optimistic”
that the process to continue in Geneva would take the new power
reality into account.
The emergence of the G-21+ opens “a new era in global trade
negotiations,” stated a communiqué issued by Consumers International,
the global federation of consumer organizations. The G-21+ “paves
the way for the creation of other blocs of developing countries,
to strengthen their bargaining power vis-ŕ-vis the industrialized
North,” Leo Stutman, an economist and technical consultant
to the Brazilian Institute of Consumer Defence (IDEC), said.
Difficult Negotiations
During the first day of negotiations, the lack of agreements on
agricultural subsidies and tariffs made WTO Director-General Supachai
Panitchpakdi intervene in the debate on negotiations to end cotton
subsidies by rich countries, especially hard felt in the countries
of Benin, Mali, Chad and Burkina Faso. The four countries were asking
for a cut in cotton subsidies as well as for US$300 million in immediate
compensation for losses they are suffering. The Director-General,
who noted that he did not usually intervene, observed that the countries
were not asking for special treatment, but for a solution based
on a fair multilateral trading system. He also said the proposal
underscores the need for ambitious results in the agriculture negotiations
as a whole, based on the Doha mandate.
On 11 September, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) called on trade ministers to dismantle barriers to fair international
trade, saying a level-playing field for trade in agricultural products
was vital for food security in developing countries. Its statement
urged industrialized countries to “substantially cut export
subsidies,” lower tariffs and reduce trade distorting domestic
support in order to increase imports of agricultural products from
developing countries.
“Enormous untapped agricultural potential exists in developing
countries to meet the twin challenges of hunger and poverty. What
we need is a renewed focus on effective North-South cooperation
so that available resources are used efficiently,” FAO’s
Assistant Director-General Hartwig de Haen said.
The second day of the conference saw the approval of Cambodia and
Nepal’s membership of the WTO, bringing the total to 148 members.
Both countries, the first least-developed nations to join the organization,
still need to ratify the agreement before becoming official members.
Nepal, which applied to join the organization in 1989, exported
US$645 million worth of products in 2002, while imports corresponded
to US$1.4 billion. Last year, Cambodia’s exports totalled US$1.4
billion, while imports were US$2 billion. The country applied to
join the WTO in 1994.
On 13 September, government delegates commented on the newly revised
draft declaration, acknowledging that it was limited in scope as
it merely stated that the 146 WTO member countries reaffirmed their
commitment to moving towards the objective of reducing the farm
subsidies of industrialized nations, without setting timetables
or targets for doing so. It also stated that the eventual phasing
out of subsidies would apply only to certain products.
“They are trying to reinterpret the mandates set out in the
Doha Declaration,” which is unacceptable, said Brazilian Foreign
Minister Celso Amorin, who also coordinated the G-21+. The Doha
Round of trade talks was to have been completed by 1 January 2005.
Belize’s Statement to the Conference
Eamon Courtenay, Minister of Investment and Foreign Trade (Belize),
in his statement on 13 September said, “When we are asked to
compromise for the sake of ‘success at Cancún,’ we have
to ask: ‘success’ for whom? Consensus for its own sake
is not ‘success.’ A bad deal at Cancún will be a catastrophe
for billions of people the world over-and for generations to come.
“Yet, there is no sign yet of a good deal at Cancún. We know
that the basic ‘Ministerial text’ from Geneva is damaging
to the interests of the developing countries, particularly in the
areas of ‘agriculture,’ ‘industrial tariffs’
and the ‘Singapore issues.’ We know that it is grossly
inadequate in the areas of ‘implementation issues’ and
‘special and differential treatment.’ We know this in
the Caribbean, in the ACP and in the G-77; the African group knows
this; the LDCs know this; Brazil, China, India and the rest of the
Group of 21 know this. And so do many others.
“In a Commentary on Cancún published at the start of this week,”
continued the Minister, “the Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz
made the point which has always been fundamental to developing countries,
namely, that the Cancún Ministerial is essentially an opportunity
for assessment—assessment of where we are since Doha; of where
we are being induced to go; of where we must not go. He is right,
it is time for stocktaking.
“For insisting on stocktaking and not going blindly forward
on a ‘rich country’ agenda and a ‘road map’
drawn up mainly in Washington and Brussels, poor countries have
been accused of being ‘spoilers.’ I for one am willing
to spoil the party if it is one that cooks the future of Belize
and the developing world.
“But genuine success here is still attainable. We can succeed
if our final text includes appropriate provisions for smaller economies;
if we recommit ourselves to special and differential treatment for
developing countries; we can succeed if the text provides for the
retention of preferences for an appropriate period of time; and
if we provide for technical assistance and capacity building for
developing countries. There is no consensus on launching negotiations
on the Singapore issues—Belize is not ready to agree to such
a launch. Above all, we must remain faithful to the Doha Development
Agenda,” said Minister Courtenay.
Negotiations Deadlocked
On 14 September, Chairperson Luis Ernesto Derbez, the Mexican Foreign
Minister, formally closed the Conference, announcing that it no
longer seemed “possible” that the 146 member countries
could finalize any agreements. He said that in spite of considerable
movement in consultations, members remained entrenched on the Singapore
issues.
The trade ministers then issued a one-page Ministerial Statement,
the only official document to emerge from the meeting, instructing
WTO Director General Supachai Panitchpakdi to convene a meeting
of the General Council, the WTO’s highest level decision-making
body, in Geneva by 15 December 2003 “to take the action necessary
at that stage to enable us to move towards a successful and timely
conclusion of the negotiations.”
“If the Doha Development Agenda—adopted in 2001 in the
Qatari capital of Doha in an effort to achieve freer trade worldwide—fails,
the losers will be the poor of the world,” Mr. Supachai warned.
Although Cancún had failed, the Doha Development Agenda remained
intact, he said. Official representatives of the EU, the US and
Japan said they also shared this view.
On 16 September, The Washington Times reported that developing countries
might now risk being “frozen out” of bilateral trade agreements
with the United States. The US will pursue closer trade ties with
countries “who want to move ahead, who are interested in the
future,” a senior US trade official said. Bilateral trade agreements
or less extensive trade programmes can include significant access
to the US market, which is especially important to developing countries
with industries like apparel manufacturing.
NGOs at Cancún
An estimated 5,000 anti-globalization demonstrators—including
farmers, labour unionists, social activists, students and NGOs—filled
the streets of Cancún protesting against the current model of economic
globalization as embodied by the WTO. During the talks, demonstrators
mourned the death of the South Korean farmer, Lee Kyang-Hae, who
had killed himself on 10 September as a sign of protest. The protesters
were kept more than six miles away from the conference centre by
a barricade.
A joint NGO statement was circulated which described the WTO drafting
process as “outrageous and offensive,” reflecting the
positions of wealthy countries and corporate interests. The NGO
statement pointed to the lack of transparency and democracy in the
WTO, and questioned who had written the draft Ministerial text.
In its statement, the International Gender and Trade Network (IGTN)
called for the rejection of the revised ministerial text. “It
is better to have no text at all than to sign a bad one.” The
Third World Network’s comment on the draft called it “deeply
and seriously anti-development in substance and process,” which
would bury the Doha Development Agenda.
Oxfam circulated briefing papers pointing to the destruction of
the livelihoods of thousand of Chinese sugar farmers, as a consequence
of the inflows of EU subsidized sugar immediately following China’s
accession to the WTO. Mexican corn farmers have also suffered as
a result of the liberalization of Mexican markets under the North
America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the continuation of US
subsidies.
Many Mexican peasants argued in Cancún that agriculture should be
removed from the WTO framework. However, many developing countries
along with NGOs such as ActionAid and Oxfam said that the fight
to protect small farmers must take place within the WTO. “We
don’t like the WTO as it is, but the realpolitik is that there
is currently no more tolerable alternative,” said Gonzalo Fanjul,
head of policy for the Spanish Oxfam, Intermon. “The alternatives
are bilateral and regional trading agreements which actually make
poor countries even more vulnerable,” he said.
“Of course the WTO is facing a real crisis of legitimacy, but
at least a rules-based regime provides the potential for leverage
on the part of developing countries. This conference has been an
example of how developing countries standing together in the WTO
can exercise real power,” Mr. Fanjul concluded.
New Architecture for Trade Negotiations?
UN-NGLS held a briefing, entitled “New Architecture for Trade
Negotiation? NGOs on Cancún and the G-21+,” on 24 September
in New York in which Mark Ritchie of the Institute for Agriculture
and Trade Policy (IATP) and Goh Chien Yen of the Third World Network
(TWN) provided their accounts of the WTO Ministerial meeting and
its political dynamics.
Goh Chien Yen said that the causes for the breakdown were many and
complex, some of which were evident long before the Cancún meeting.
The positions of developed and developing countries were clearly
polarized going into the meeting both in the obvious areas of agriculture
and the Singapore issues, but also on implementation, non-agricultural
market access (NAMA), and special and differential treatment provisions
(S and D). Developing countries had two main priorities, Mr. Goh
said, progress on agriculture and agreement that no discussion would
begin on the so-called Singapore issues (government procurement,
trade facilitation, investment and competition). He said that while
unfavourable movement in these two areas was the immediate reason
for the collapse of the meeting, a flawed decision-making process
and the organization of the WTO Ministerial meeting were as much
to blame. He cited the lack of transparency in the process of negotiations,
the biased appointment of facilitators, and unpredictable access
to rooms for developing country delegates as factors that contributed
to the meeting’s outcome.
Mark Ritchie, who had been present at four out of five WTO Ministerial
meetings, said that Cancún represented a maturing of sorts for both
the process at the WTO and the involvement of civil society. The
Seattle meetings, he said were all about the process and how bad
it was. Doha allowed for a greater discussion over issues such as
access to essential medicines. Mr. Ritchie said that in contrast
Cancún allowed for real debate over both the process and issues
and the result was a collapse in the talks. He said that while NGOs
were more able to raise their concerns before and at the Cancún
meeting, they had to do a better job in communicating real solutions
to governments over practices like dumping.
In response to a question about the prospects for improving governance
at the WTO, Mr. Goh explained that national parliaments were crucial
and that civil society and NGOs were developing alliances with like-minded
parliamentarians to effect changes in the negotiations process both
in Geneva and at Ministerial level meetings. The WTO secretariat,
he pointed out, would also have to become more vigilant and more
impartial in order to improve governance structures.
Contact: WTO, Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, CH-1211
Geneva 21, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/739 5111, fax +41-22/731
4206, e-mail <enquiries@wto.org>,
website (www.wto.org).
|
|
TOP
|
5th International Conference of New or Restored
Democracies |
|
“A
principle underlying this conference is that while democracy cannot
be imposed from abroad, it can be encouraged and assisted through
international efforts. Since the future of democratic government cannot
be divorced from the global context in which each society must function,
a global dialogue is essential. That means not only that new or restored
democracies can learn from each other, but that old and established
democracies can and should learn from newer ones….” —UN
Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s message to the Conference.
The Fifth International Conference
of New or Restored Democracies (ICNRD-5) took place from 10-12 September
2003 in Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia) under the theme “Democracy,
Good Governance and Civil Society.” ICNRD-5 reflected on three
main themes: civil society around the world; what are the opportunities
as well as the challenges for building democracy; and how to strengthen
and build civil society and partnerships for democracy.
This year’s conference was immediately preceded by a meeting
of the International Civil Society Forum (ICSF) on Civil Society
Partnerships for Democracy. Fifty representatives of the Forum participated
in the ICNRD, during which recommendations from the ICSF were formally
presented (available online at www.icsf-2003.mn). Analysis was focused
on the role of international organizations and the donor community
in the democratization process, and how they might improve and democratize
their involvement in domestic reform processes so as to enhance
their positive impact.
In his welcoming address to the ICNRD-5, Mongolian President Natsagjin
Bagabandi noted that some two-thirds of the world was now democratic.
“Democracy is not a fairy tale,” he said. “It is
a political choice and can only be sustained politically, economically
and intellectually by the will and efforts of the people.”
He highlighted the need to expunge corruption, correct market distortions,
ensure freedom of the media and judicial system, and to “prevent
the vulnerable from losing faith in democracy because of the ravages
of unemployment and poverty.” He called on the international
community to address international terrorism in a cooperative manner
in order to eliminate the root causes of violence, and to enhance
the scope of civil society and citizen participation in public affairs.
UN Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs Danilo Turk
conveyed a message from UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan applauding
the progress made in democratic development, but also cautioning
against “triumphalism.” Mr. Annan noted that among the
current setbacks to democratization, were the “weakening of
the substance of democracy, the abuse of the electoral system, and
the alienation of a growing number of people who are being marginalized
and excluded.”
Over 70 countries took part in the general debate on democracy,
good governance and civil society. Although there were subtle points
of difference on some aspects of democracy as a mode of governance
and as a political process, there was a broad consensus on the main
themes of the conference. Many speakers returned to defending the
fundamental values of democracy as a system of governance based
on the rule of law, allowing free expression through electoral and
other participatory mechanisms, the independence of the judiciary,
freedom of expression and the media, and the promotion of human
security through the maintenance of basic human needs. Emphasis
was also placed on the need to make globalization work for all people,
by minimizing its negative impact on the poor and vulnerable groups.
Participants also addressed the question of threats to democracy,
old and new. These included international terrorism, transnational
economic crime and HIV/AIDS. On the question of terrorism, it was
agreed that action must be taken without the erosion of civil liberties.
Delegates emphasized that the roots of terrorism thrive upon extreme
poverty, and asserted that democracy was not only the best way to
address poverty, but also the most effective weapon against terrorism.
Many governments agreed that the UN should take a greater role in
fighting terrorism. Concerning the situation in Iraq, others pointedly
reminded the plenary that democracy could not be imposed upon people,
but must arise from people themselves. Delegates also cited occupation
as a cause of terrorism, stressing that democracy was not possible
under occupation.
Some older democracies described new challenges, such as the declining
trust in authorities, and the need for new mechanisms to encourage
participation by those who are, or feel themselves to be, disenfranchised.
It was noted that democracy is in essence continually perfectible,
and should not be allowed to stagnate or to backslide on issues
such as human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Many speakers asserted the importance of a vibrant, active civil
society. Government support for the varied elements of civil society,
including NGOs, individuals, political parties, the media, and others
was deemed vitally important. Access to information and gender equity
were also seen as key to the effectiveness of civil society, and
to the ability of all citizens to participate in political decision
making at every level.
Developing countries called for increased economic support from
donors and the international financial institutions (IFIs) to enable
the development of democracy and the achievement of the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs). Some delegates also called for a general
review of the role of IFIs and the UN with a view to reforming these
institutions.
Contact: Executive Secretary of the National Preparatory Committee,
Director-General of the Department of Multilateral Cooperation,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, telephone +976-11/311
311, ext. 251, fax +976-11/322 127, e-mail <mongmer@magicnet.mn>,
website (www.icnrd5-mongolia.mn).
NGO Core Group for the Civil Society Forum, The National CEDAW Watch
Network Centre, PO Box 636, Ulaanbaatar 46A, Mongolia, telephone/fax
+976-11/328 798, e-mail <mmsa@magicnet.mn>,
website (www.icsf-2003.mn).
|
|
TOP
|
SIDS Begin Regional Meetings
in Preparation for 10-year Review |
|
Small Island Developing States (SIDS)
often share similar sustainable development challenges, including
small population, lack of resources, remoteness, susceptibility
to natural disasters, and excessive dependence on international
trade. In addition, they suffer from high transportation and communication
costs, and costly public administration and infrastructure. The
Barbados Plan of Action, adopted in 1994 following the Earth Summit
in Rio in 1992, sets forth specific actions and measures in support
of the sustainable development of SIDS.
Pacific Island Nations Meet
The Pacific Regional Meeting in preparation for the August 2004
ten-year Review of the Barbados Programme of Action (BPoA) for the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States (SIDS)
was held in Apia (Samoa) from 4-8 August 2003. Over 100 government
and civil society representatives from Pacific Island nations attended
the meeting to discuss progress in implementing the BPoA, which
seeks to address the problems SIDS must contend with as they work
towards economically, socially and environmentally sustainable development.
“The road ahead is full of challenges,” said Manuel Dengo,
Chief of the UN Water, Natural Resources and Small Island Developing
States Branch, citing rising sea levels, geographic isolation, environmental
degradation, limited resources and poor trading opportunities in
a globalizing economy. “The key aspect is for island nations
themselves to carefully explain the policies and measures that they
wish to utilize in their quest for achieving sustainable development.”
Solutions may not be that straightforward, however. Noting that
the vulnerabilities of SIDS have increased over the last decade,
delegates identified causes beyond the specific control of Pacific
SIDS that have impeded the full and effective implementation of
the BPoA, including: the overall decline in official development
assistance (ODA); a decline in commodity prices; loss of preferential
trade agreements; global pressure to reduce the size of the public
sector; increases in the cost of imported fossil fuels; and the
instigation of some donor-driven projects that are inconsistent
with the BPoA guidelines.
In ensuing discussions, meeting participants agreed on the objectives
of the draft Pacific regional position that will be a crucial element
for the Inter-regional Preparatory Meeting taking place in the Bahamas
in January 2004, as well as central to the formulation of the Alliance
of Small Island States (AOSIS) negotiating position:
— to ensure the sustainable development priorities of the Pacific
region are fully acknowledged and integrated into the BPoA+10 outcomes;
— to secure and strengthen political support from the international
community for programmes and initiatives that are essential to sustainable
development of the region’s people, their environment and natural
resources;
— to promote new and existing partnerships beneficial to sustainable
development of the region;
— to enhance the efficient use of existing resources and secure
and mobilize resources to build capacity for sustainable development;
— to set targets by which to measure implementation as well
as to provide input into other reporting requirements, including
the integration of those from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
and the World Summit on Sustainable Development’s (WSSD) Johannesburg
Programme of Action (JPOI).
The need for improved outreach and information sharing on the access
to and availability of funding sources for sustainable development-related
activities was emphasized. Participants also recommended that SIDS
seek an innovative financial mechanism to support activities under
the BPoA.
New and emerging issues identified at the Apia meeting as worthy
of attention included:
— the increase of relative poverty and scarcity of opportunity;
— the increasing incidence of emerging health issues like HIV/AIDS,
and drug-resistant malaria, and their impact on sustainable development;
— the accelerating break down of the diverse agricultural and
food systems that have been a foundation of sustainability, food
security and nutritional wellbeing;
— the increasing dependency on imported food, fuel, medicines
and the related increase in nutrition-related ill-health.
Among the actions recommended were:
— relevant food and agriculture initiatives should include
components that build on and enhance time-tested systems rather
than replacing or degrading them with monoculture systems and imported
foods;
— the Pacific Islands Regional Information and Communications
Technologies Policy should be fully and effectively implemented
with emphasis on the use of information and communications technology
(ICT) to inform and connect Pacific Island populations for education
and training;
— cooperation should be strengthened to ensure good governance,
develop the private sector and improve service delivery;
— sustainable tourism initiatives should be based on community
consultation and effective capacity building;
— the Pacific Islands Regional Energy Policy should be implemented
to ensure available, reliable, affordable and environmentally sound
energy for sustainable development across the region;
— concerted action should be taken to address the environmental
and social effects of trading regimes on SIDS;
— the key role of youth should be recognized in promoting sustainable
development for the future.
Contact: Coral Pasisi, South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme,
Apia, Samoa, telephone +685-21-929, email <coralp@sprep.org.ws>,
website (www.sidsnet.org) .
Secretariat for Mauritius 2004, Department of Economic and Social
Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development, United Nations, New
York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963-8563, fax +1-212/963-4340,
email < Mauritius2004@sidsnet.org>.
|
|
|
TOP
|
Development
Financing and Democratic Governability |
|
José Antonio Ocampo, who formerly
served as the
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
Executive Secretary, has recently been appointed as Under-Secretary-General
and Head of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social
Affairs. Development Financing and Democratic Governability originally
appeared in ECLAC Notes No. 29.
The relationship between democratic
governability, equity and economic growth, and, in turn, between
these dimensions and financing for development is arousing increasing
interest. The Consensus of Monterrey, the best developed version
of the international consensus in this area, stressed the responsibility
of each country to guarantee suitable conditions for financing development,
but also stressed the essential role of international cooperation.
International cooperation is a vital support mechanism for national
efforts and a tool for compensating the imbalances caused by factors
exogenous to national decisions. In relation to democratic governability,
it ranges over at least five closely-related areas, providing: support
for building democratic institutions; financing for integrated development
strategies, complementing national resources; concessional financing,
with clearly defined objectives; a contribution to managing economic
cycles and effective anti-cyclical macro-economic policies; and
support for overcoming problems of high indebtedness.
Within this framework, significant support programmes for consolidating
democratic institutions are being run by the IDB [Inter-American
Development Bank] and other multilateral banks, providing financing
for processes such as judicial reform, parliamentary modernizations,
stronger supervisory bodies and improved record-keeping on individuals.
In relation to integrated development strategies, the multilateral
bodies must take into account the complementary nature of their
financing, which must thus be subject to the political processes
and social participation mechanisms of the beneficiary countries.
With regard to concessional financing, and inline with the commitments
made at Monterrey, the trend in official development aid over the
past 15 years must be reversed. In Latin America, the consolidation
of medium-income democracies continues to need support and international
cooperation given their vulnerability, particularly to financial
crises and destabilizing capital movements, and it is essential
that this be recognized.
The experience of pronounced financial cycles underlines the importance
of the mechanisms created by the multilateral financial organizations
to compensate for the effects of sharp shifts in the capital account
and the contagiousness of financial crises.
The international financial bodies should not only promote the design
of anti-cyclical macro-economic policies but also provide financing
for such purposes. One of the most vital political decisions the
Group of Rio should take is to give firm support to consolidating
the existing sub-regional multilateral development banks, and the
Latin American Reserve Fund (Fondo Latinoamericano de Reservas).
To reduce the risks of external financing, debt issues can usefully
be encouraged to include contingency clauses linked to cyclical
movements of GDP [gross domestic product] and/or commodity prices
or terms of trade.
The multilateral institutions must be asked, finally, to continue
seeking viable solutions to the problems of high indebtedness. Such
solutions must go beyond the collective action clauses that Latin
American countries have begun to use in new bond issues, and specifically
should seek to resolve satisfactorily the problem of high risk sovereign
debt. In the case of collective action clauses, it is essential
that these be universally adopted and that the Group of Seven countries
employ them in all debt issues, to avoid the mechanism being transformed
into a new form of discrimination against developing countries in
the private capital markets.
|
|
|
TOP
|
Publications
and Online Resources |
|
New Women and Economy Video Available
“Banging Down the Door: Women and the Economy” is a new
video exploring women’s experiences of the economy, where a
diverse group of women discuss their experiences in the economy
from forest to office to kitchen. As Melody explains, “Economy
is something you need a key for, you need a key to get in. Either
you already have that key or you have to bang the door down.”
The 26-minute video serves as an introduction to the economic system
and women’s experience in it, while also looking at how the
environment is treated in mainstream economics. The women featured
on the video discuss their own strategies for survival. The video
is suggested for use in classrooms and workshops.
“Banging Down the Door” is produced by the United Nations
Platform for Action Committee—an organization of Manitoba women
committed to the ideals of equality, development and peace articulated
in the 1995 UN Conference on Women in Beijing. The group has also
produced a comprehensive website on women and the economy (www.unpac.ca)
and a 2-part resource book based on the website. The video sells
for US$10 and the resource books are available for US$25/set or
US$15/each.
Contact: UNPAC, PO Box 36, Station L Winnipeg, MB R3H 0Z4, Canada,
e-mail <orders@unpac.ca>,
website (www.unpac.ca).
The Interdependent
The Interdependent, the UN-USA magazine which has been published
for almost 30 years, was re-launched in October 2003. The redesigned
format will feature more indepth content and a stronger media presence.
The new publication, still to be called The Interdependent, will
cover the same domestic and international issues, while also introducing
more profiles, features and essays.
UN-USA is a non-profit organization that supports the work of the
United Nations and encourages active civic participation in social
and economic issues. Former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt founded
it in 1943, with the establishment of the American Association for
the United Nations (AAUN). AAUN merged with the US Committee for
the United Nations in 1964, creating UNA-USA, which today has more
than 20,000 members spread among 175 local chapters in 43 states
Contact: UNA-USA New York Headquarters, 801 Second Avenue, New
York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/907 1300, fax +1-212/682 9185,
e-mail <unahq@unausa.org>,
website (www.unausa.org/index.asp).
Information Guide on Preventing Discrimination, Exploitation and
Abuse of Migrant Women Workers
The guide—part of the International Labour Organization (ILO)
Employment Sector Gender Promotion Programme’s (GENPROM) series
on Gender and Migration—aims to enhance knowledge and contribute
to the development of tools for protecting and promoting the rights
of female migrant workers. It was produced in collaboration with
the ILO International Migration Programme (MIGRANT) and the Special
Action Programme to Combat Forced Labour.
The guide seeks to build understanding of the vulnerability of women
migrant workers to discrimination, exploitation and abuse through
all stages of the international migration process, including being
trafficked. It aims to promote and improve legislation, policies
and actions to prevent such discrimination, exploitation and abuse,
and to better protect women migrant workers who are vulnerable.
The guide also explains the reasons and ways for addressing these
issues.
Individual migrants—both women and men—can also refer
to the guide to better understand the risks involved in labour migration,
know their rights, and protect themselves. In addition to background
information, the guide provides practical guidelines and checklists,
case studies, examples of both “good” and “bad”
practices, as well as reference materials.
Contact: Gender Promotion Programme (GENPROM), ILO, 4 route des
Morillons, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/799 6090,
fax +41-22/799 7657, e-mail <genprom@ilo.org>,
website (www.ilo.org/genprom).
International Migration Programme (MIGRANT), ILO, 4 route des | |
