DEVELOPMENT: US Disagrees with UN on Roots of Asian Poverty

By Gustavo Capdevila Reprint | | Print |

Gustavo Capdevila

GENEVA, Jul 9 1999 (IPS) - The United States and the United Nations (UN) defend conflicting interpretations of the impact the recent Asian financial crisis has had on poverty.

Betty King, U.S. ambassador to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), criticised the idea of “new victims” – as they are described in UN documents – of globalisation and the economic crisis in the Asian regions.

“The passive psychology of victimhood is simply not part of an enabling environment for poverty alleviation with the current crises,” declared King.

Poverty and extreme poverty already existed long before the arrival of the globalised world economy, said King. We should not confuse the long-term problem of poverty alleviation with the present crisis, she added.

The objections made by the U.S. delegation were directed at UN secretary general Kofi Annan’s report on UN operational activities for international development co-operation.

Annan affirmed, in the paragraph questioned by the United States, that globalisation has produced “new victims” in countries that previously had stood out for their rapid economic growth. The region had recently been penalised by sudden capital flight while confronted with financial instability, he said.

Annan also stated that the description applies in particular to East and Southeast Asian countries, where the achievements of the last few decades in social progress are now in danger.

In her claim of a new “victimhood” trend, King maintained that pragmatic strategies are the best way to ensure that global integration does not mean social disintegration.

“When countries and people refuse to play the role of victims, they assume the primary responsibility for their own development,” said the U.S. representative.

In response to King, the UN assistant secretary general for Policy Co-ordination and Interagency Affairs, Patrizio Civili, stated that the term “new victims” was never intended in the sense of “passive psychology.”

The expression “simply reflects the reality of a very large number of people affected by the economic crisis,” said Civili, “who had been lifted out of poverty as a result of high growth rates over the past decade and who had fallen back into poverty due to factors not within their control.”

The Italian diplomat provided an example, saying these victims are not unlike a driver on a country road, surprised by a sudden storm.

Annan’s report to the ECOSOC maintains that the instensity of the current East and Southeast Asian crisis “has produced unfortunate consequences by creating new poverty and causing an explosion in unemployment rates.”

Other effects of the region’s crisis include the Draconian reductions in public expenditures, the marked increase in the prices of primary necessities and the drop in real wages, which also affect the millions of migrant workers coming from other countries in the region, said Annan in his report.

The UN secretary general indicated that in some cases there are signs of increasing malnutrition. “Basic social services have seriously deteriorated and school drop-out rates have suddenly increased,” he said.

The social fabric of all the Asian countries affected by the crisis has worn dangerously thin, warned Annan.

The ECOSOC, which is holding its annual session this year in Geneva, is examining the role of work and employment in eradicating poverty, and the empowerment and advancement of women.

Throughout her speeches before the ECOSOC, King, as well as Delores Crockett, acting director of the Women’s Bureau of the U.S. Department of Labour, both used the expression “alleviation of poverty” intead of “eradication,” the official term in UN documents.