In the wake of 7/7
SHELLEY WALIA
|
In the backdrop of the tragedy in London, the leaders of the G-8 nations deliberated over the issues that preoccupied the world community in recent years. A comment.
|
PHOTO: AP
Moving forward: Despite being overshadowed by the spectre of terrorism, there were still some positive fallouts from the G-8 summit.
NO war and no bloodshed can ever be justified. The terrorist attacks on New York, on Madrid, on London, on Ayodhya or the bomb blasts in Mumbai are as unpardonable as the war on Afghanistan or Iraq. It is clear that there is no way that a highly sophisticated weaponry can successfully wage a war against the guerrilla tactics of a terrorist onslaught. And there are no national borders for the operation of terrorism and no set time, though the attack on London is certainly intended to coincide with the G-8 summit. This is what the leaders who had assembled at Gleneagles must strive to realise.
The spectre of terrorism, of death and destruction has overshadowed the G-8 summit and still haunts the peaceful environs of Gleneagles. The nightmare scenario has finally taken place and reveals that counter-terrorism measures have completely failed. On my way to the Isle of Skye in North West of Scotland a few days ago, I stopped in Gleneagles in the ample Perthshire countryside north of Edinburgh. I decided to visit the 80-year-old French chateau where a glass of white wine cost me over £8 (Rs. 560). Amusingly, this luxurious site was in stark contrast to the meagre contribution that the world's elite group of rich nations spend on international development.
In the backdrop of the terrible tragedy in London the leaders deliberated over the pressing issues that preoccupied the world community in the recent years. The public stands ahead of the politicians, compelling them to take cognisance of the seriousness of the exceedingly disturbing problems confronting the human race. Nothing seems to be conclusively signed and sealed; pessimism overwhelms most of the NGOs as well as various justice and peace organisations. Terrorism, which was not on the agenda, can now in the wake of 7/7, be put on the top demanding a new alertness from the leaders. But I wonder if the solidarity expressed in Gleneagles is a way out or one more step towards the further intensification of the conflict between the "civilised" forces and the jehadi ideology.
Focus on Africa ... .
July 6, the day the leaders converged on Gleneagles was a day of marches and protests. Hundreds of scholars walked out of their classrooms; an estimated 2,00,000 people converged on the hotel for a rally organised by "Make Poverty History", a coalition of about 450 non-governmental organisations. This is understandable. Considering that on the top of the agenda is the worldwide concern with death and hunger in sub-Saharan Africa, the mammoth rallies were intended to draw attention to. As pointed out by Jeffrey Sachs, adviser to Secretary General Kofi Annan on the U.N. millennium development goals, "Africa's investment priorities lie in four main areas: health, education, agriculture and infrastructure." If no concrete steps are taken, the countries of Africa will miss the deadline of 2015, which is the year fixed by the U.N. to halve the poverty in the world, in these areas by a wide margin. There seem to be no programmes that could aid any increase in education such as a need for classrooms, teachers and supplies. African agriculture lacks the supply of fertilisers, or seeds and other modern inputs for small-scale irrigation projects. Rural electrification, safe drinking water, sanitation, paved roads and telecommunication are the basic infrastructural needs of Africa. Though the G-8 have expressed concern in all these areas, it will have to be seen how serious they are in the implementation of their decisions on climate change, energy and sustainable development.
Three million child deaths can be prevented if the rich countries meeting here use this opportunity to evolve policies that would show that their recent promises do not sound as hollow as they have always been. The U.N. Development Programme says that: "the human cost to Africa in child deaths would be the equivalent of twice the combined under-five population of New York, London and Tokyo." World leaders have to decide to act now, and fight deprivation and disease to get Africa back on track. More than 12,000 children die every day from poverty-related diseases; if the millennium targets are not met by 2015, sub-Saharan Africa will be burial ground for "two in every three child deaths in the world."
... and its enormous debt
AIDS and malaria, which kills one child every minute, are all related to the overwhelming shroud of poverty and malnutrition. The lack of clean drinking water and the absence of any national health services or supply of medicines together multiply the burdens of a society that now looks towards the West for some tangible aid programmes to avert one of the biggest tragedies of the human race. Concrete budget plans need to be earmarked for helping the various national poverty reduction schemes that nations in Africa will undertake in the coming years. It is logical that all aid must be in proportion to the national income; but Japan, Italy and the United States contribute the least in proportion to their wealth. Africa needs the finance and it is up to the G-8 to provide it.
The question of doing away with most of the unsustainable debt that Africa is burdened with is a vital issue. The recent decision by the Bush Government taken in agreement with six other rich nations is a step in the right direction to eliminate $40 billion of debt owed by 18 of the poorest countries. Fourteen countries have qualified for this exemption. Moreover, the Japanese Prime Minister has announced an aid of $10 billion to Africa. There is a $50 billion uplift for developing countries. The summit has, however decided only on doubling the aid to $25 billion. Nevertheless, Tony Blair, as a host of the summit and as a leader with some vision and hope, has tried his utmost to get the communiqué signed by the leaders of G-8 so that there is some commitment to what they have promised.
Universal access to AIDS treatment, sending 75,000 peacekeepers to Africa, access to medicine with no strings attached are some of the other important steps taken at the summit. But more than just an increase in the financial aid are vital questions of debt and trade that need immediate attention. Creating mass vaccination programmes against polio, measles and TB, lifting barriers which make it difficult for African nations to compete in the open world market: this is what Blair wants.
As Jeffery Sachs points out, "All in all, Africa's needs are urgent — indeed are matters of life and death — but are very modest relative to the incomes of the donor countries." Britain, France and Germany have already agreed to increase aid to 0.7 per cent of their national income. Bush has yet to be coaxed into following suit and not abandoning everything to his rhetoric which is not enough to save Africa. Apart from the threat of poverty, the G-8 put climate change on the top of their agenda. They all are aware of the scientific evidence according to which "Carbon Dioxide levels have risen from 280 parts per million to over 375 parts per million — higher than any level measured in the past 4,20,000 years; the Earth's surface has warmed by approximately 0.6 oC in the 20th Century. Bush has finally come around and tried to surmount his incorrigible "rhetoric of irrationality" and has finally stopped denying that there is a positive link between global warming and human activity.
Optimism
Undoubtedly, there are some positive fallouts from the summit: the decision to reverse greenhouse emissions by pushing for energy sources other than fossil fuels, such as the alternative nuclear energy programme, and sharing it with developing countries; the resolution to work together technologically with developing nations and the possibility of India joining the International Thermonuclear Energy Project; Tony Blair's idea of a new round of post-Kyoto talks between the U.S., Russia, India and China to find a way forward to taking prompt action on an issue that is endangering the human species. This is in opposition to the U.S. policy on global warming which has been utterly misguided. Further, it is vital that "all nations identify cost-effective steps that they can take now, to contribute to substantial and long-term reduction in net global greenhouse gas emission." Bush has all along ignored this scientific evidence. The economic rise of China or India cannot be used as a retaliatory defence measure for refusing to take action against both the excessive use of coal on which the U.S. relies so heavily for its economic prosperity and curtailing the use of cars within the U.S.
Time is running out. America is the only one out of the eight members who had refused to sign the Kyoto protocol. Let us see if other world leaders can persuade Bush to change his stand. The only move forward is the consensus on global warming being a threat; otherwise Bush has not bugged at all. The summit did not go far enough. The question is not simply to increase aid and cancel debts. The nations gathered here have to develop specific commitments and steps to counter poverty and global warming. A peacekeeping force in Africa, directives to improve education, and aid to fight disease are among some of the achievements of the summit, although there is a conspicuous lack of a comprehensive package in trade or aid or climate change. The G-8 members have committed themselves to finding an end date to the important issue of farm subsidies but sadly, without a final resolution. Celebrities like Bono and Bob Geldof might have given the public "an inflated sense of aid's effectiveness in easing poverty." Noticeably, aid alone will be of no use if the G-8 do not realise that lifting trade barriers and allowing free flow of needy migrants across borders are of crucial importance in making poverty history. Indeed "the people have roared, but the G-8 has whispered", as Kumi Naidoo, Chair of the "Global Call to Action against Poverty", so tersely put it.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
