|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Print this page
|
Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published
by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action
from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived
document may not work.
|
Africa: Geneva Dissensus
Africa: Geneva Dissensus
Date distributed (ymd): 000807
Document reposted by APIC
+++++++++++++++++++++Document Profile+++++++++++++++++++++
Region: Continent-Wide
Issue Areas: +economy/development+
Summary Contents:
The debate this year on responses to the global development crisis
is being reflected in various venues of the "international
community." Last month APIC reposted documents concerning the
controversy over the World Bank's development report
(http://www.africafocus.org/docs00/wb0007.php>). The posting below
contains documents concerning the release of a joint report from
the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the United
Nations, entitled "A Better World for All." Many critics charge
this report reflects a worrying 'tilt' of the UN towards the
agenda of the Bretton Woods institutions, Defenders of the report
claim it is part of pressure on the rich countries to adopt more
development-friendly policies,
The full text of the report is available, in PDF format, at:
http://www.unog.ch/ga2000/esa/socdev/geneva2000/docs/bwa_e.pdf
The report was released on the eve of World Summit on Social
Development in Geneva, June 26-30, 2000. Official information on
the summit can be found at:
http://www.unog.ch/ga2000/socialsummit/nav/main.htm
and
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/geneva2000/news
For a variety of other links related to the summit, including
official, non-governmental and alternative meetings, see
http://www.mandint.org/links/en/lsommdse.htm
+++++++++++++++++end profile++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
26 June 2000
Press Release SG/SM/7465
ECONOMIC GROWTH ABOUT PEOPLE -- THEIR HEALTH, EDUCATION, SECURITY,
SAYS SECRETARY-GENERAL TO FORUM GENEVA 2000
Following is the address of Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the
opening ceremony of the Forum Geneva 2000 in Geneva on 25 June:
[excerpts; for full text see http://www.un.org]
I remain convinced that globalization can benefit humankind as a
whole. But clearly at the moment millions of people -- perhaps even
the majority of the human race -- are being denied those benefits.
They are poor not because they have too much globalization, but too
little or none at all.
And many people are actually suffering in different ways -- I would
say not from globalization itself, but from the failure to manage
its adverse effects. Some have lost their jobs, others see their
communities disintegrating, some feel that their very identity is
at stake. Even in the richest and most democratic countries, people
wonder if the leaders they elect have any real control over events.
I think these fears can be answered, but not by any one nation
alone, and not by governments alone either. The State and civil
society should not see each other as enemies but as allies. The
strongest State is one that listens to civil society, and explains
itself to civil society in a way that encourages people to work
with the State, of their own free will.
When I speak about civil society, I don't mean only
non-governmental organizations, though they are a very important
part of it. I also mean universities, foundations, labour unions
and -- yes -- private corporations.
Private corporations produce most of the wealth in the world. If
only for that reason, we would be foolish to ignore them. We would
be foolish not to seek to engage them in a search for something
beyond short-term profit -- the search for a better, more equitable
world in which everyone has the chance to participate in the global
market, as both consumer and producer.
On their side, many corporations now recognize that they have
something to learn from us, as well as we from them. We all have to
learn from each other, and it is only through dialogue that we can
bring about change.
But partnership between the United Nations and the corporate sector
will not exclude others. Labour unions, and you, the
non-governmental organizations, will also have an important role to
play.
Similarly, the Bretton Woods institutions, and the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and World Trade
Organization (WTO), are there to help manage the world economy and
ensure that its benefits are more widely enjoyed. If some of them
have pursued mistaken policies, haven't we all at one time or
other? If some have not always paid enough attention to the views
and interests of developing countries, how are we going to change
that, except through dialogue?
At a press conference tomorrow I shall launch a report signed
jointly by the United Nations, the World Bank, the International
Monetary Fund and OECD. This means that the other three
institutions accept the targets for reducing extreme poverty in the
world adopted at United Nations conferences, including Copenhagen.
It means they have come together with us to review progress towards
these goals, and so give us a better idea of how to move faster
towards them in the years ahead. But of course we will only be able
to do that if, as I have repeatedly urged them, the OECD countries
do more to open their markets to products from developing ones, as
well as giving more generous debt relief and official development
assistance.
The report is called "A Better World for All", and that indeed is
the objective we all share. All these institutions have a part to
play -- as do multinational corporations and labour unions -- in
seeing that the new global market is embedded in a true global
society, based on shared global values.
World Council of Churches Office of Communication
Press Update
150 route de Ferney, P.O. Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
For more information contact:
Karin Achtelstetter, Media Relations Officer
tel.: (+41 22) 791 6153 (office);
e-mail: [email protected]
28 June 2000
NGOs Call on the UN to Withdraw Endorsement of "A Better World
For All"
In a joint statement released 28 June 2000, approximately 80
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and people's movements
following the Geneva 2000 process expressed outrage at the
report "A Better World for All", a joint document of the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and United Nations
released earlier this week.
A summary of the joint statement follows:
"NGOs, peoples' organisations and movements, organised in
Caucuses for the WSSD+5, are outraged about "A Better World for
All", a joint document of the OECD, IMF, World Bank and United
Nations.
Our specific objections are as follows:
Process Derailed: The document is presented as a new consensus
between the United Nations, the OECD, the IMF and the World
Bank, thereby reinforcing Northern perspectives and disempowering
the South while undermining the concept of political
inclusiveness that defines the UN.
UNGASS Undermined: The timing of the release of these biased
messages, by the Secretary-General to opening sessions of the
General Assembly and Geneva 2000 forum, pre-empted the UNGASS
negotiations and devalued its very process.
Secretary-General Surrenders to Bretton Woods: The UN Charter
makes a clear distinction between the UN and its specialised
agencies, including the Bretton Woods Institutions. We therefore
take issue with the equal status accorded the signatories.
Patronising the Poor; Ignoring Poverty in the North: The document
promotes an image of poor people living only in the South who
will be grateful for assistance, as opposed to empowering people
living in poverty to demand their rights. This is a clear
violation of the recognition in Copenhagen that social
development can only be achieved in an enabling economic and
political environment.
Contradictions: The introduction of a "pro-poor growth" concept
puts the responsibility of coming out of poverty on the backs of
the poor in the South.
Backward Steps: The document not only fails to recognise the role
of IFI liberalisation policies in generating poverty, but instead
proposes to eradicate poverty with more of the same medicine -
despite the recent failure of these very same policies in East
Asia.
Bretton Woods for All?
The release of this document raises the stakes of the UNGASS
outcome against the setting of new initiatives, including demands
that the wealthy nations put in place measures to honour their
commitments in Copenhagen. We therefore call on all Member States
to:
- Re-commit to the UNGASS process by analysing the root causes of
poverty and gender inequality within the current macro-economic
framework of globalisation.
- Reverse the decline in ODA and set a target of 2005 to meet the
UN target of 0.7%.
- Pledge to immediate and full debt cancellation for the poorest
countries so resources can be released for investment in social
development.
- Introduce a Currency Transfer Tax (CTT) to counter the
instability of global capital transactions and mobilise further
resources for social development.
Unachievable Goals
The goals of Copenhagen cannot be achieved if developing
countries are marginalised in the decision-making process of
international institutions, nor can national efforts to
eradicate poverty succeed without an international enabling
environment.
NGOS Call for 2005 Summit
Monitoring the concrete results of Copenhagen is imperative.
Therefore world leaders must gather again in 2005 - the mid-point
between the Summit and many of the targets set - to assess
achievements and set new goals.
NGOs call on Member States to reject "A Better World for All"
which does not reflect the spirit, opinion and positions of the
United Nations as a whole, particularly that of civil society.
NGOs further pledge to intensify a global campaign against the
document."
The full text of the NGO joint statement is available on the WCC
website (http://www.wcc-coe.org/wcc/what/jpc/ngo-state.html).
26 June 2000
Press Release SG/SM/7466
Transcript of Press Conference Given by Secretary-general Kofi
Annan and Other Officials to Launch Joint Report "A Better World
for All"
[excerpts: full text available on http://www.un.org]
Following is a transcript of the press conference given by
Secretary- General Kofi Annan and other officials at the Palais des
Nations on Monday, 26 June, to launch the report entitled "A Better
World for All", which is a joint report by the United Nations, the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)....
During the 1990s, United Nations world conferences set major goals
for economic and social development. All countries, developed and
developing alike, signed on to this agenda, often at the highest
political level. Since then, people have been asking whether the
world has made good on these commitments. What has worked? What did
not, and why? And what can we do better?
This report provides some answers. It is the product of an
unprecedented collaboration among four major multilateral
organizations. And it responds to a specific request from the G-8
countries that such a report be prepared -- to help monitor
progress in the reduction of poverty worldwide and to guide them in
their partnership with developing countries.
The result is a common understanding -- a score card and policy
road map with which to measure progress in banishing extreme
poverty from our world and in achieving the targets set by the
world conferences of the past decade.
We are launching the report today -- in Geneva and in Paris --
because it addresses the very same issues being examined by the
"Copenhagen Plus Five" special session that began today. We hope
that the two events will reinforce each other, and serve as a
springboard for action.
The report has three main messages:
First, considerable progress is being made in achieving each of the
seven international development goals that the report outlines. In
recent decades, most countries have seen big improvements in life
expectancy, and big declines in infant and maternal mortality. We
have seen more and more children, especially girls, gain access to
education. But progress has been uneven. Some countries and regions
are taking big steps, while others see little improvement -- and a
few see none at all, or even a decline.
Secondly, the targets can be met. The goals are not utopian. They
are ambitious, but achievable. To reach them, we will need to work
hard. In every region of the world there are some countries which
have made rapid progress, showing others what can be done. That
brings me to the report�s third message, which is that, if we are
to succeed, developed and developing countries must work together
-- in ways that, up to now, they have not been willing to do.
Developed countries, especially, must do more to open their markets
to products from the developing ones, as well as giving more
generous debt relief and official development assistance (ODA).
Poverty is an affront to our common humanity. It also makes many
other problems worse. Poor countries are far more likely to be
embroiled in conflicts. It is in poor countries that the worst
effects of HIV/AIDS and other diseases are concentrated. And it is
poor countries -- especially the least developed, and those in
sub-Saharan Africa -- that most often lack the capacity and
resources to protect the environment.
In an interdependent world, that is something that should be a
concern for all of us. That is why the United Nations, the World
Bank, the IMF and the OECD have joined forces. We believe a better
world can be ours. We believe we can put the great new global
market within reach of the poor. We believe globalization can be a
positive force for all the world's people.
That message is also at the heart of my own Report - "We, the
Peoples" -- which I have put before the Member States in
preparation for the Millennium Summit in September. That report,
too, deals with poverty -- but also with conflict and the
environment. It is aimed at helping world leaders to arrive in New
York ready to make concrete commitments -- to their peoples, and to
the United Nations.
Question: Mr. Secretary-General, non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) have nicknamed this report. They call it not a better world
for all but a Bretton Woods for all, and their critique is that the
recipes are too one-sided, making demands only to the countries of
the South. What is your response to this critique? And secondly,
why does this report not contain the old United Nations goal of
having the industrial countries paying at least 0.7 per cent of
their gross national product for development aid?
The Secretary-General: Let me first start by saying that we stand
by the target of 0.7 per cent. It is regrettable that very few
countries have met that target and this is a point I make often in
my own statements. And so we have not moved away from that target.
That figure is actually there, my colleagues tell me it is there on
page 23. But let me say that I think it is unfair to treat the
report as a Bretton Woods institution. Bretton Woods for all.
Yesterday, I had the chance of speaking to the NGO Forum and I made
the point that we all need to work together. This is a point I made
on the first day in office from the General Assembly podium, that
as Secretary-General, I would want to work in partnership with
everybody, stressing the fact that the United Nations alone can do
very little or can do nothing, and that we needed to reach out and
work in partnership with NGOs, with the private sector, with civil
society generally, foundations and universities and link up with
all the international organizations to have greater impact and
expand our reach. The NGOs are a very essential part of this
partnership, so are the Bretton Woods institutions and so are the
private sector, and I think we ought to be careful not to
necessarily sow dissent, but find ways of pooling everybody
together and, by pooling our efforts, we will have a really great
impact on the problems we are dealing with. I did not expect
everyone to agree with everything in the report as I do not agree
with everything in many reports that I read, but I think the
general thrust is right. I think it is a clever slogan, but I do
not think it really analyses the report effectively. Thank you very
much.
Mark Malloch Brown, UNDP Administrator: Let me just, if I may, say
a few additional words and then each of my colleagues is also going
to say something very quickly, then we can get questions. I think
the first good news about this report is now you have a story,
because it is extraordinarily important that at this summit, which
is about the tensions and trade-offs and fights to get better
social development in the world, that these issues are posed
occasionally in a way which forces the debate and allows some
confrontation. Because there are differences of opinion between
civil society and international organizations and between
international organizations, and that is part of the valid debate
to improve the commitment to social development.
Let me just say, though, that the origins of this report lie in a
request from the G-8 to have a tool each year when they meet to
benchmark progress towards the development goals. The goal here for
us is to create a report which will annually ensure that at the G-8
summit these issues of development and the failures of development
are addressed and that is no bad goal, because in many of the
recent years development has rarely appeared on the agenda of the
G-7. This is an effort to create an annual bench marking exercise
which, at their request -- which is the good news -- will put it in
front of them every year, and when you see the weak level of
attendance by heads of government from the developed countries at
this Conference, you know that a bench marking advocacy tool of
this kind has to be a plus. So, second, as to its content, does it
somehow bias the goals in favour of actions by the South? Everyone
of these goals are the goals acclaimed by the United Nations
conferences and in the case of one by the Secretary-General -- I
mean six by the United Nations conferences and one by the
Secretary-General in his Millennium report: The income poverty
goal, which we expect to be adopted by the Millennium Assembly. So
these are goals adopted by the South as much as the North. And they
are aimed at a northern audience, the G-7, to force them to do more
to support poverty reduction in the South. So I don't think it is
a bad goal, and finally on the language which has caused most
concern, the language about open markets.
As the Secretary-General said, we in the United Nations are
internationalists, we believe in an open global society, a society
where ideas, trade and everything can flow across borders -- but we
believe in a managed one. The language which has caused such
concern is, if you compare it to the language of the Copenhagen
Declaration five years ago, almost the same. It is balanced in this
report as it was at Copenhagen, with language about social
protection, social investment, the inclusion of the poor. So please
take the document as a whole. Thank you. ...
This material is being reposted for wider distribution by the
Africa Policy Information Center (APIC). APIC provides
accessible information and analysis in order to promote U.S.
and international policies toward Africa that advance economic,
political and social justice and the full spectrum of human rights.
|
