Press Release
GA/9971
Fifty-sixth General Assembly
Plenary
57th Meeting (PM)
TERRORISM MUST BE ADDRESSED IN PARALLEL WITH POVERTY, UNDERDEVELOPMENT,
INEQUALITY, GENERAL ASSEMBLY TOLD, AS GENERAL DEBATE CONCLUDES
Forty-one Heads of State and Government
Among 188 Speakers Heard in Assembly?s Week-long Debate
The general debate had been held in a most extraordinary setting
in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 11 September, the
President of the General Assembly, Han Seung-soo (Republic of Korea),
said as the Assembly concluded its general debate this afternoon.
He said that, almost without exception, speakers highlighted the
need for concerted common action to combat terrorism, expressing their
support of Assembly resolution 56/1 and Security Council resolutions
1368 and 1373. A number of delegations also underscored their support
for the current military campaign in Afghanistan, and many expressed
the view that a broad-based post-Taliban government should be
established, representing all the Afghan people. It had been stressed
that terrorism could only be eliminated if conditions creating a
fertile breeding ground for terrorism, such as poverty and
marginalization, were removed. Some delegations had said that any
definition of terrorism must distinguish between acts of terrorism and
acts in the exercise of the legitimate right to self-determination and
defence against foreign occupation.
The broad consensus on addressing terrorism went hand in hand with
a recognition of the need to deal in parallel with the many concerns
that had already been on the United Nations agenda, he continued,
including the fight against poverty, underdevelopment, inequality,
disease, and other economic and social problems. It was widely agreed
that the international community should proceed expeditiously with
implementing the Millennium Declaration. Many speakers drew
attention to the role of the United Nations as a focal point of
multilateralism. Emphasis was placed on the central position of the
Assembly and the need for continuing reform of the Organization.
Concern was expressed that, as the impact of the economic slowdown
is most acutely felt by developing countries, issues, such as the
continuing lack of full access to the markets of developed countries
for products from the developing countries, insufficient and declining
official development assistance volumes, unsatisfactory levels of
foreign direct investment, and unsustainable debt levels, must be
urgently addressed. The threat of HIV/AIDS was also a focus of
concern. Several speakers welcomed the adoption, by the thirty-seventh
summit of the Organization of African Unity, of the New Partnership
for African Development.
During the general debate, which started on Saturday morning, 10
November, the Assembly heard from 188 speakers, including 41 heads of
State and government, two vice-presidents, nine deputy prime ministers
and 96 ministers for foreign affairs. The Secretary-General spoke at
the opening of the debate. Saudi Arabia and Kiribati declined to
speak. The debate, scheduled for 25 September to
5 October, had been postponed because of the 11 September
terrorist attacks against the host country and host city. During the
general debate, heads of delegations may state the views of their
governments on any item before the Assembly.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs of Estonia asked if there was
some way to speed up the reform of the Organization to better deal
with the prevailing situation. The common goal was to increase the
transparency and efficiency of the Council. In the confrontational
context of the cold war, the veto had been a means for the great
Powers to protect their interests. Even then, a light-handed use of
the veto resulted in condemnation by the international community. By
now, the sense of trust among Council members had grown immensely, and
a limitation on the use of the veto would be an appropriate reflection
of this improved atmosphere. The composition of the Council, which
still reflected the power relationships current in 1945, was another
issue that cried out for resolution.
The representative of Australia said his country, a tolerant
multicultural society, was increasingly a target for illegal
immigration, assisted by individuals and criminal syndicates engaged
in the crime of people smuggling. There was a need for coordinated,
comprehensive approaches to address the issue in all its aspects.
Root causes of that problem, as well as humanitarian and other needs
of displaced persons in countries of first asylum, needed to be
addressed, and transit and destination countries needed to cooperate
more effectively.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of
Guinea Bissau and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Eritrea also
addressed the Assembly, as did the representatives of Latvia and
Georgia.
The representatives of Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia,
Cyprus and Eritrea exercised the right of reply.
The Assembly will meet again Monday, 19 November, at 10 a.m., to
start its consideration of follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium
Summit.
The General Assembly met this afternoon, expecting to conclude its
general debate.
Statements
GINTS JEGERMANIS (Latvia): We must act on all levels to succeed
in the fight against terrorism. Today the need for international
cooperation has reached a new dimension, and joint international
action is needed to eliminate terrorism. My country fully shares the
position of the European Union that our efforts in fighting
international terrorism must be redoubled. In defending the world
from terrorism, the international community must also do its utmost to
spare the innocent people of Afghanistan from further suffering.
Latvia fully supports Special Representative Brahimi, as well as all
other parties in their efforts to bring about a fully inclusive
political system in Afghanistan.
Latvia attaches great importance to the implementation of the
Millennium Declaration, especially in relation to issues of human
rights, fundamental freedoms, rights of the child, conflict prevention
and preventive diplomacy. We consider that the follow-up process to
the Millennium Summit should be an integral part of the United
Nations? work. International relations in the twenty-first century
must be based on the values and principles of the Declaration.
This year, Latvia is celebrating a decade since it joined the
United Nations as a free and independent country. The accession of
Latvia to the Organization demonstrated its commitment to rejoin the
international community, and take an active part in international
events. During the past 10 years, Latvia has come a long way in its
development in a variety of realms. Its foreign policy is rooted in
the observance of international law, the development of human rights
and democracy, and the protection of universally accepted human
values. The top priorities of Latvian foreign policy continue to be
accession to the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO). Foreign policy priorities also include good
neighbourly relations, bilateral cooperation, as well as active
participation in international organizations.
JOHN DAUTH (Australia): We all have a deep interest in a stable,
secure, viable and democratic East Timor. But much more needs to be
done. East Timor remains vulnerable, and the United Nations? role is
not complete. We need, after independence, an integrated United
Nations mission of civilians, police and peacekeepers, under a single
Security Council mandate, funded from United Nations assessed
contributions. Australia, therefore, welcomes the Security Council
President?s statement on 31 October endorsing the Secretary-General?s
recommendations for a United Nations successor mission in East Timor.
We look forward to working with others over the coming months to set a
solid and sensible mandate for a successor mission.
Cooperative relations between East Timor and Indonesia are key to
resolving East Timor?s longer-standing issues. Australia welcomes
progress by the Indonesian Government to resolve the situation in
refugee camps in West Timor and we urge continued efforts to ensure
security and to facilitate the safe return of refugees. Australia
will continue to support East Timor generously, and we have an
agreement to share resources from the Timor Sea. We are helping to
reduce poverty in East Timor. We are also building East Timorese
capacity to govern peacefully and democratically.
Australia has a proud history as a major country of migration. We
are, as a result of over a century of planned and managed legal
migration, a tolerant multicultural society. Regrettably, Australia
is also increasingly a favoured target for illegal migration, assisted
by individuals and criminal syndicates engaged in the pernicious crime
of people smuggling. People smugglers are primarily organized crime
syndicates. They exploit their victims and they find their clients
among people who have experienced conflict or persecution, economic
downturn or extreme environmental breakdown. We need coordinated,
comprehensive approaches, and concerted international action to
address all its aspects. Root causes need to be addressed, and the
humanitarian and other needs of displaced persons in countries of
first asylum need to be addressed. Transit and destination countries
need to cooperate more effectively.
ALI SAID ABDELLA, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Eritrea:
Mankind entered the new millennium optimistically, but it has not yet
mustered the collective will to translate vision into reality or words
into deeds. Immense poverty in the midst of massive wealth continues,
as does deprivation, despite enormous scientific advances. Human
rights are wilfully violated, while mutual hatred and hostility
manifest. Yet, a collective address of the forces being unleashed can
turn globalization into an effective tool to establish an equitable
relationship between rich and poor and to promote sustainable
development for their mutual benefit. A new cooperative mechanism
must be established immediately, however, to increase the capacity of
poor nations to participate meaningfully in the global economy.
Globalization has had a severely negative impact on African
countries. It has deepened marginalization and deprived Africans of
the benefits of the global economy. Africa suffers most from extreme
poverty, recurrent famine, rampant disease and conflict. The year
2000 was an auspicious year with encouraging signs in the Sudan,
Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and many others,
including Ethiopia.
Primary responsibility for resolving conflict lies with the people
and leaders of the countries. Regional assistance is appreciated if
it is based solely on the interests of the people concerned. In the
Horn of Africa, a zone of conflict for four decades, the
revitalization of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development
(IGAD) is closely linked to regional security and prosperity through
its engagement in peacemaking, conflict resolution and coordination of
cooperative efforts. Peace in Somalia is vital for security, commerce
and economic relations in the region. And while the peace process
between Ethiopia and Eritrea has made progress, key provisions of the
peace agreement remain unimplemented because Ethiopia has failed to
comply with its obligations.
Ethiopia has obstructed the functional establishment of the
Temporary Security Zone (TSZ) and has continued deportations. Its
surprising claim that Eritrea is mobilizing troops is meant to hide a
plan to subvert the peace process by provoking hostilities. Eritrea
is now a victim of terrorist elements organized, financed, trained and
armed by the Ethiopian Government, often joined by Ethiopian troops in
crimes against civilians. The international community should condemn
these acts and demand that the activity cease. The United Nations
presence should continue because it plays a crucial role in
maintaining peace and security, promoting and protecting human rights
and promoting development and social progress.
ANTONIETA ROSA GOMES, Minister for Foreign Affairs and
International Cooperation of Guinea-Bissau: This first General
Assembly of the twenty-first century represents a historical challenge
for building new international relations, described in the Millennium
Declaration. The year has seen the realization of some important
international conferences, including the recent Third World Conference
against Racism in Durban. The Final Declaration has qualified slavery
as a crime against humanity. It has also launched an appeal to
reverse the consequences of slavery, recognizing that historical
injustices contribute to poverty, underdevelopment, marginalization,
social exclusion, economic disparity and insecurity.
Despite that historic perspective, the present session of the
General Assembly takes place in a moment of deep disquiet due to the
11 September terrorist attacks on the United States. It was for the
purpose of repressing terrorism that Guinea-Bissau became party to the
1999 Convention on terrorism of the Organization of African Unity
(OAU). The subregional organizations are finding political solutions
to conflicts across the world, including in Sierra Leone, Angola, East
Timor and the Middle East, with support from the United Nations. The
embargoes imposed on certain countries, including Cuba, should be
subject to dialogue by virtue of their highly negative repercussions
affecting unprotected populations.
The overall global economic situation is also of concern after the
events of 11 September since its negative impact is most strongly felt
in the least developed countries. As the universal conscience with
the mission to generate north-south dialogue, the United Nations
should make its first priority the fulfilment of developing country
needs. The action programmes from the conferences and meetings of the
past decade should be implemented to produce sustainable development
and protect the environment. Additionally, the United Nations system
should address the marked decline in foreign aid and the slump in
commodity export prices such as the cashew nut, the major export of
Guinea-Bissau.
Guinea-Bissau is rebuilding with the assistance of development
partners. The programme for reconstruction and rehabilitation of
infrastructure and for national reconciliation is progressing. The
international community is requested to reinforce its support of
Guinea-Bissau. It is asked to actively participate in next year?s
round table on assistance to Guinea Bissau.
TOOMAS HENDRIK ILVES, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Estonia:
After the terrorist attacks of 11 September, we were all confronted
with a common threat, and many existing disputes became insignificant.
It is of utmost importance that we maintain that unity and reinforce
it with concrete actions. Terrorism is the ultimate challenge to our
common values, and our struggle against it has only begun. The
destruction and elimination of terrorist networks is a time-consuming
task, for which there are no instant solutions. The United Nations
does, however, have effective measures at its disposal to fight
terrorism ?- international conventions and sanctions that can be
applied to hamper terrorist activities.
The reform processes launched over the past few years in the
United Nations are also appropriate for dealing with current problems.
But is there some way we can speed up these reforms to better deal
with the prevailing situation? It is also important for Members to
realistically assess how high a level of development they have
achieved, and refrain from accepting aid in favour of those who need
it most. This is the flip side of development ?- as one rises out of
poverty and underdevelopment, one should also become more responsible,
acknowledging that obligations rise along with living standards.
We must ensure that our efforts to solve urgent problems
confronting us do not become entangled in the deficiencies of the
Security Council. We all know very well what these are, and our
common goal is quite clear ?- to increase the transparency and
efficiency of the Council. In the confrontational context of the cold
war, the veto was a means for the great Powers to protect their
interests. Even then, a light-handed use of the veto resulted in
condemnation by the international community. By now, the sense of
trust among Council members has grown immensely, and a limitation on
the use of the veto would be an appropriate reflection of this
improved atmosphere.
The composition of the Council, which still reflects the power
relationships current in 1945, is another issue that cries out for
resolution. From the inception of the United Nations until just a
decade ago, the people of my country were afforded only rare glimpses
of the goings-on at the Organization through tears in the fabric of
the Iron Curtain. When we finally re-established our independence in
1991, we emerged onto the international arena only to discover that
the Council, judging by its composition, was still stuck back in 1945.
The contributors to stability in the world have, in the course of
half a century, changed fundamentally. We need not fear opening a
discussion on whether the moral and legal reasoning underlying Council
membership in the wake of the Second World War is still appropriate
for the post-cold-war era.
PETER P. CHKHEIDZE (Georgia): Ominous threats we have been
talking about for so long have become real. Georgia, a country that,
over the past decade, has suffered tremendously from different
manifestations of terrorism, is an active participant in the campaign
against terror. Time is ripe for increased cooperation of all the
States and peoples of good will in this fight against terror. In our
region, we have increased opportunities for cooperation. There is,
however, a threat of confrontation and a danger of renewed fighting.
In the past two years, rapid development in Georgia has been countered
by the absence of progress in the peace process in Abkhazia, Georgia.
It is time to put an end to the spiritual and physical suffering of
Georgian, Abkhaz and other nationalities, who have been forced from
their homes and lands by the tragedy of war.
The time has come to duly react to the ethnic cleansing carried
out in Abkhazia, Georgia. The separatists, with the help of outside
forces, expelled about 300,000 people from their places of residence.
The inalienable right of people to live in their homeland is still
flagrantly abused. On numerous occasions, Georgia has expressed its
deep concern regarding the presence of uncontrolled regions within the
territories of a sovereign State, ruled by de facto separatist
regimes. The consequence of such regimes is totally unacceptable.
The tragedy of the loss of a United Nations helicopter over Abkhazia
is one such heartbreaking example.
I would like to bring your attention to the danger of the
large-scale provocation Georgia is facing today. I am referring to
the violation of Georgia?s airspace and the bombing of its territory.
Such attacks have taken place before, as well. Despite our protests,
no adequate reaction was forthcoming. These acts are an infringement
on our sovereignty and an attempt to subvert the peace process. It is
unacceptable that some States use the noble cause of fighting
terrorism as a disguise to reassert influence in the post-Soviet
space. We reiterate our commitment to the peaceful settlement of the
conflict in Abkhazia. My Government is ready to grant Abkhazia the
widest type of autonomy practised in the world today.
Rights of Reply
ATOKI ILEKA (Democratic Republic of the Congo): At a time when
the Security Council is supporting the peace process in the Democratic
Republic, Rwanda is the only country that has not withdrawn its
forces. In defiance of the international community, it has
strengthened its occupation forces and has even opened fire on
innocent by-standers. Rwanda continues to masquerade as a nation
interested in peace, but it is well known that extra judicial
disappearances and human rights violations continue, and that it is
trying to destabilize the region.
In truth, Rwanda?s presence in the Democratic Republic has a
mercantile purpose centred on competition with neighbours. Its aim
was to dismember countries in the region for the purpose of economic
and ethnic superiority in numerous areas rich in a range of precious
commodities such as diamonds and gold. The Lusaka Agreement is a road
map allowing a way out from the strife that has plagued the region.
It was notable that all belligerents, except Rwanda, have left the
Democratic Republic.
ABDUL MEJID HUSSEIN (Ethiopia): Ethiopia has only one strategic
enemy and Eritrea is not it. The enemy is poverty and backwardness,
and we want to use all our resources to fight poverty. But we can?t
do this if we have a neighbour whose leadership is unable to build a
State with all its responsibilities. Eritrea wants to cover up its
problems by externalizing them, but we are determined not to give it
that chance.
Let us cite one of two points which brought about the ceasefire.
Ethiopia signed an agreement last March; Eritrea has not done so.
Ethiopia has allowed the United Nations mission free movement in both
countries, but Eritrea has not.
Although the TSZ is established, it is not functional because,
under the agreement, Eritrea was allowed to have police and militia --
armed groups of farmers to protect their villages. Ethiopia has said
that regular forces in the thousands are in the TSZ. The Zone was
established to separate the forces, but they are not separate. The
other side continued to put people in dangerous situations by arming
and taking conscripts, but our side has demobilized 64,000 troops.
The other side has added forces, so that 10 per cent of the population
is under arms; this is not "a group of armed men going for a picnic".
On the issue of Ethiopia submitting information on minefields, we
have submitted all we have. We cannot give what we don?t have. The
United Nations has accepted what the other party has said about this.
Finally, Ethiopia wants peace to concentrate on alleviating poverty.
We were doing this before the invasion, during the conflict and since
the end of conflict. This year alone, we registered 8.5 per cent
growth of gross domestic product (GDP). We hope the other party will
heed our advice that we should concentrate on alleviating poverty and
work on the peace process, not just pay lip service to it.
SOTIRIOS ZACKHEOS (Cyprus): The Turkish Foreign Minister had not
hesitated once again to engage in the well-known rhetoric of threats
and misrepresentation. The Foreign Minister had referred to the
so-called realities on the ground and misrepresented President
Clerides.
The accession of Cyprus to the European Union involved the
European Union and Cyprus only. It has been clearly established by
the European Union that no third party could veto the accession of
Cyprus to the Union. Furthermore, there were no legal obstacles to
Cyprus becoming a member of the European Union. Turkey had violated
international law in the region, with its invasion and subsequent
occupation, practising the policy of ethnic cleaning along with an
array of other human rights violations, in the pursuit of its
secessionist goals.
With regard to the letter sent to President Clerides, the
President had responded immediately to the idea of a tête-à-tête
meeting between the two Presidents. It was President Denktash who had
refused the resumption of the process. Cyprus was ready to have
direct talks with Turkey in the presence of the Special Representative
of the Secretary-General, so that the Secretary-General would be aware
of the progress and inform the Security Council. So far, there had
been no response from President Denktash, but it was hoped that he
would display the political will to find a just and lasting solution
to this issue.
AMARE TEKLE (Eritrea): Respecting the General Assembly, I will
avoid the language used by the representative of Ethiopia. I am not
here on a propaganda campaign. Internal affairs also need no
repetition since they are documented in public newspapers. It is
known that the United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE)
is pleased with the information received from Eritrea regarding
landmines. Ethiopia, however, does not want to give information on
landmines because it does not want people to return to villages and
farms. The issues of militias and demobilization were also handled
yesterday. The alternative routes were not deviations, but paths
taken by airplanes to hit civilian targets.
Mr. HUSSEIN (Ethiopia): We have already made our points. What we
want is to fight poverty. We do not want to make polemics here. We
would like to leave judgement up to you and the Assembly here.
Concluding Remarks by Assembly President
HAN SEUNG-SOO (Republic of Korea), President of the General
Assembly: The general debate has been held in a most extraordinary
setting in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 11 September.
The issues we have addressed during the last week were of great
importance and urgency. Speakers, almost without exception,
highlighted the need for concerted common action to combat terrorism,
expressing their support of Assembly resolution 56/1 and Security
Council resolutions 1368 and 1373. A number of delegations also
underscored their support for the current military campaign in
Afghanistan, and many expressed the view that a broad-based
post-Taliban government should be established, representing all the
Afghan people.
The importance of directly linking the wider goals of the United
Nations with the fight against terrorism was also recognized. It has
been stressed that terrorism can only be eliminated if conditions
creating a fertile breeding ground for terrorism, such as poverty and
marginalization, are removed. It was pointed
out that a lack of democracy and persistent violations of human
rights could lead to the emergence of terrorist movements, and some
saw a link between acts of terrorism and the lack of progress in
resolving long-standing disputes, particularly with regard to the
Middle East dispute. Some delegations said that any definition of
terrorism must distinguish between acts of terrorism and acts in the
exercise of the legitimate right to self-determination and defence
against foreign occupation. I requested the Sixth Committee (Legal)
to expedite its work with a view to conclusion of the pending
conventions on international terrorism.
The broad consensus on addressing terrorism went hand in hand with
a recognition of the need to deal in parallel with the many concerns
that had been on the United Nations agenda before the 11 September
events, including the fight against poverty, underdevelopment,
inequality, disease, and other economic and social problems. It was
widely agreed that the international community should proceed
expeditiously with implementing the Millennium Declaration. Many
speakers drew attention to the role of the United Nations as a focal
point of multilateralism. Emphasis was placed on the central position
of the Assembly and the need for continuing reform of the
Organization.
Concern was expressed that, as the impact of the economic slowdown
is most acutely felt by developing countries, issues, such as the
continuing lack of full access to the markets of developed countries
for products from the developing countries, insufficient and declining
official development assistance volumes, unsatisfactory levels of
foreign direct investment, and unsustainable debt levels, must be
urgently addressed. The threat of HIV/AIDS was also a focus of
concern. Concerning the role of information and communication
technologies in an era of globalization, it was widely acknowledged
that greater efforts are needed to deal with the digital divide.
Several speakers welcomed the adoption, by the thirty-seventh summit
of the OAU, of the New Partnership for African Development.
I regret that it is not possible for me to reflect in these short
remarks the rich ideas, profound insights and far-reaching visions
that have been presented by some of the best minds of our world. I
would just like to emphasize that we share a responsibility to
maintain and nurture the spirit of commitment and cooperation at the
high political level that has been demonstrated in the general debate.
* *** *
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/ga9971.doc.htm
http://www.ciaonet.org/casestudy/god01/
you can have a documantery with details about the subject from this
address;http://www.ciaonet.org/casestudy/god01/
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_hr/020602ford.html
THE NATURE OF TERRORISM
I paid great attention to the debate on the root causes of terrorism,
and could not help noticing the extreme caution with which many
speakers approached this issue. The most outspoken speaker on the
economic and social dimensions of international terrorism was Defense
Minister Scharping, who defined economic and social development as the
very basis for future security, a useful way to think when coupled
with the democratic process. Dr. Rogov defined the new terrorism as
the losers' response to globalization, a rejection of participation in
improved living conditions and open societies. While it may be useful
to describe economic underdevelopment, poverty, and illiteracy as
fertile soil for terrorist movements, a number of speakers during the
conference pointed out that terrorism is basically a very successful
tool in the hands of people who seek political power and do not share
our ideals of social equality and democratic values. There is poverty
and social inequality where there is no terrorism and there is
opulence and education where there is terrorism. Terrorism is part of
a political power game and we need to concentrate on how it operates
and where it strikes to understand the nature of the new international
terrorist network and how we should react to it.
The new international terrorist network operates by preying on our
societies' weaknesses and vulnerabilities. To some extent, we are
vulnerable because of the values we believe in. Our open, free
societies lend themselves to abuses. But do we want to limit our
openness and our freedom? Of course not. We may accept limited
restrictions for a period of time, but such measures go against our
convictions.
International terrorism also concentrates on our economic weaknesses.
For example, why is the Middle East breeding global terrorism but
Indonesia and Central Africa are not? It is because the main players
of the democratic and developed world have huge invested interests in
the Middle East. Every year, the European Union and the U.S. are
becoming more dependent on imported fossil fuels, much of which is
found in the Middle East, the most unstable political region in the
world. Indeed the energy problem has manifested itself four times
since 1970 but we have not taken it seriously. We have not seen the
signs and we are not quite literate in this respect. We have woken up
to the terrorist problem but we have yet to fully comprehend the
energy problem. The two are closely linked, however, as at least two
speakers, Professor Stefano Silvestri and Dr. Sergei Karaganov,
pointed out. http://www.users.interport.net/r/o/roger.dnai/berlin02/olrich.htm
Fighting The Real
War On Terrorism
By Terrell E. Arnold
12-2-2
After the attacks of 9-11 the United States launched a War to rid our
country and the world of Terrorism. That War got off to a brisk start,
ousting the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan and attacking the hideouts
of Al Qaida and Osama Bin Laden. The War bogged down in Afghanistan,
however, because there are many places to hide, and Al Qaida has
allies in several potential safe-haven countries. But Afghanistan is
only the beginning, because terrorist groups exist in 75 or more
countries. Ultimately, that War cannot succeed, because terrorism
grows out of deeply embedded, complex global issues, and the War on
Terrorism does not address any of them. If we hope to win, we must get
at the causes.
Where Real Effort Should Be
USAID statements present the problem clearly. As AID Administrator
Andrew Natsios observed in May 2001, USAID has missions in 75
countries, and in 50 of those countries major conflicts occurred
during the past five years. Most of these countries have terrorist
groups that existed before we ever heard of Al Qaida. These countries
are among the least developed economically and the least modern
politically.
The enemies in the real war on terrorism are poverty, ignorance,
differences of culture or religion, social, political and economic
injustice, destruction of the environment, and exclusion of out-groups
from the mainstreams of many societies. Official US, UN and other
government statements cite the critical roles of these global issues
in world terrorism. But the attack by all governments and the UN is
weak and misdirected.
Where Do We Go Wrong?
The global effort falls way short of need. US economic and
humanitarian assistance is larger than the programs of all other
aid-giving countries combined, but it will be only about $8.5 billion
in 2003. If it were evenly spread among aid recipients, it would
amount to less than $4 per person.
The money does not go where it is most needed. Upward of half of US
AID funds go to Israel and Egypt; the lionâs share goes to Israel. In
effect, Congress decided to pay for the Palestine peace process with
the existing aid budget, forcing sharp cuts in assistance to all other
countries. Congress cut assistance more when the Cold War ended. Thus,
aid to the 70 or so needy countries amounts to less than $2 per person
per year. Annual aid to Israel, in grants and loans that are routinely
forgiven, amounts to $600-800 or more per person.
Little to none of the money is spent on economic growth. The largest
human needs for assistance exist in Asia, Africa and Latin America
where the money is spent on programs to grow more food, improve
health, cope with the aids/hiv pandemic, and to democratize countries
and reduce conflicts.
What Became Of Dedication To Growth?
In the 1950s and 60s, development economists argued that rapid
economic growth was the key to escape from underdevelopment, because
growth advanced the critical indicators: income, employment,
education, health, as well as political and economic modernization.
However, beginning in the 1970s, Congress put the brakes on funding
for growth, while in the work of a new school of development
economists, growth strategies fell completely out of favor.
The World Bank now suggests that early development economists had it
right by putting first priority on economic growth. The key ingredient
in underdevelopment is scarcity. Growth in income and the alleviation
of scarcity produce improvements in the quality of life across a broad
set of indicators. In sum, we may have wasted several decades by
placing growth at the bottom of our priorities.
The Terrorism Generators
Even with a quick turnaround, scarcity can drive the terrorism
generators for years to come. The numbers of people left out, angered,
frustrated and rendered militant by problems of overcrowding and
poverty are likely to grow at frightening speed, because most of the 2
billion people to be born between now and 2025 will be born in the
poorer countries.
This is the wind in Al Qaidaâs sails. If advanced countries do nothing
to reduce the economic and social distances between ãNorthä (wealthy)
and ãSouthä (impoverished) countries, Osama bin Laden and the leaders
of other terrorist groups will exploit the growing gap to generate new
outbreaks of terrorism.
What Needs To Be Done
Congress must first insist that assistance goes to people who need it
most, and Congress must sharply increase the aid budget. US diplomatic
efforts must focus on sharp increases in assistance from other
governments. The wealthy of the planet must put in the resources
needed to do serious developmental work, and they must keep working
the problem until the results are assured.
How To Get To The Future
Assuming that we do not destroy ourselves on route, we can get to the
future in two ways. One is to continue present trends that assure we
will face endless conflict and constant threats of terrorism. The
other is to lift the bottom of the human condition by dedication and
sacrifice to improve the quality of life for everybody. We must start
down this road, and we must make our destination clear to everyone. If
we make an honest and dedicated effort to help the weak, they will
help us contain terrorism. If we do nothing about the causes of
terrorism, we must learn to live in fear.
Above all we must act now. The matter is urgent.
The writer is a retired senior foreign service officer of the United
States Department of State
http://www.rense.com/general32/real.htm |
