DEVELOPMENT: G-8 Sees Key Role for U.N. in Crisis Prevention

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Analysis - Ramesh Jaura

BONN, Jun 21 1999 (IPS) - Sidetracked in the Kosovo crisis, the U.N. is now poised to play an “important role” in crisis prevention around the world.

This has been signalled in a communique emerging from the three- day deliberations of the world’s seven major industrial nations and Russia, which concluded in the German city of Cologne on Sunday.

The communique was issued by the heads of state and government of the U.S., Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Great Britain and Italy, which together with Russia, constitute the G-8.

It said: “In order to improve our ability to prevent crises, it is necessary…to recognise the important role the United Nations plays in crisis prevention and seek to strengthen its capacity in this area.”

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation began air attacks on Yugoslavia in late March without getting an authority from the United Nations. Only when it was negotiating an end to the air strikes was the UN roped in, through its issuance of a resolution pushed by NATO countries.

Likewise, the rationale behind this recognition of the UN’s role in crisis prevention is that in many countries, violent conflicts and civil wars continue to be an obstacle to “making good use” of the opportunities of globalisation.

Effective crisis prevention and management must address the root causes of these conflicts. These causes, according to the G- 8, include the political manipulation of ethnic tensions, economic and social inequality, and extreme poverty as well as the absence of democracy, the rule of law and good economic and political governance.

They are often exacerbated by human rights violations, environmental degradation, scarcity of resources, rapid population growth and the rapid spread of diseases such as AIDS, malaria, polio and tuberculosis, and their drug-resistant forms.

Consistent with the U.N. charter, the G-8 said it will enhance the capacity to recognise and address the potential for conflict at an early stage, monitor the risks and causes of violent conflicts more effectively and share information to forestall them.

The G-8 will also ensure that its security, economic, environmental and development policies are properly coordinated and are conducive to the prevention of violent conflict. “We will, in our dialogue with other countries and international institutions, work to coordinate our policies.”

This would in practice mean monitoring “systematically military expenditures in the larger context of public expenditure patterns and in the more macroeconomic context for growth and development”.

According to the ‘Conversion Survey 1999: Global Disarmament, Demilitarisation and Demobilisation’, since the end of the Cold War in 1989, 29 percent of arsenals world-wide have been reduced.

However the momentum of the early years has deccelerated, says the report published beginning of the month by the Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC).

According to the report, military expenditures world-wide fell from a peak of more than 1,000 billion U.S. dollars in 1987 to only 683 billion dollars in 1996. The decrease in 1997 was however only minimal (3 billion US dollars).

“In the United States, which on its own accounts for well over a third of world-wide military expenditures, and also in some other countries, military expenditures are on the rise again,” the report noted.

Likewise, after a massive drop in the first half of the nineties, the global transfer of weapons is on the increase again, warned the report.

How far the G-8 countries succeed in implementing their plan remains to be seen, considering that they are major producers and exporters of weapons. Not all of them have shown a significant enthusiasm for the U.N. Arms Register.

At their summit in Cologne, the G-8 countries also undertook to encourage and support the efforts of regional organisations and arrangements to expand their jurisdictional and operational ability, in accordance with international law, to help control and resolve conflict in their area.

Analysts doubt that, in the absence of a powerful and well- oiled military machine, the Organisation for African Unity (OAU), for example, would be in a position – or even find it advisable – to resolve conflicts in the region, the way the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) did in Kosovo.

The G-8 countries also plan to promote a free press, establish fair electoral processes, help improve the democratic accountability and functioning of legislatures, of judicial systems and of the military and the police forces, and improve human rights monitoring and advocacy.

“We reaffirm our commitment to contribute to the achievement of economic and social development in Africa, Asia and Latin America,” says the Cologne communique. It added: “We will review the situation in that regard every year, on the basis of reports by the IFIs (international financial institutions) and the relevant regional development banks, on the alleviation of poverty.”

Alleviation of poverty is a major objective behind the 71 billion dollar Cologne debt cancellation package which involves write-offs of unpaid dues by some of the world’s poorest nations.

The debt forgiveness – considered a step in the right direction but far from sufficient by NGOs – however obliges countries eligible to “provide a greater focus on poverty reduction by releasing resources for investment in health, education and social needs.”

Besides, the countries concerned are expected to practice good governance and sustainable development.

Deepening the development partnership is in fact a major plank of the communique – which also stresses the need to strengthen social safeguards to stave off the untoward consequences of globalisation.

The G8 sees in the developing countries “essential partners in a globalised world”. Its membes also offer a vague commitment: “We will strive gradually to increase the volume of official development assistance (ODA), and to put special emphasis on countries best positioned to use it effectively.”

Analysts see the German hand behind this part of the communique. In fact, this is taken word for word from the contract signed between the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Greens when they formed a coalition government last October.

The only difference is that that they reaffirmed the U.N. target of 0.7 percent of the Gross National Product (GNP) of industrial countries going to ODA.

German ODA has however been declining over the past years. According to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Germany’s ODA comprised 0.26 percent of its GNP in 1998 and 0.27 percent the year before.

“It is unacceptable that a country economically as robust as Germany should be spending only 0.26 percent of its gross national income on official development assistance – in stark contrast to the target of 0.7 percent recommended by the United Nations,” said Bernd Dunnzlaff, spokesman of the Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development.

“The level we have reached now is the lowest since 1982, when ODA amounted to 0.48 percent,” he added. The European Union’s average is 0.36 percent of its 15 members’ combined GNP.