>X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



>      Third World Debt after Okinawa: the G7 is unmasked!
>
>
>      Third World debt is really a mechanism for
>      transferring wealth from the South to the North.
>
>
>      Each year sub-Saharan Africa reimburses almost $15
>      billion, i.e. four times more than it spends on
>      health and education.
>
>
>      France and Japan are lying outrageously!
>
>
>
>From: "Eric Toussaint" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Third World Debt after Okinawa: the G7 is unmasked!
>Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 19:56:40 +0200
>
>
>For info,
>this article can be reproduced.
>
>Best,
>Comit� pour l'Annulation de la Dette du Tiers Monde
>Committee for the Cancellation of the Third World Debt
>29 rue Plantin
>1070 Bruxelles
>tel (322) 527 59 90
>fax (322) 522 61 27
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://users.skynet.be/cadtm
>
>The Third World Debt after Okinawa: the G7 is unmasked!
>
>Eric Toussaint (*)   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>After the G7+1 summit which took place in Okinawa in July 2000, it's time to
>check on the status of promises concerning the cancellation of Third World
>debt. More than a year ago, in June 1999 in Cologne, the Jubilee 2000
>coalition handed the G7 leaders a petition with 17 million signatures
>calling for them to cancel the debt of 50 Third World countries. The G7
>seemed to respond positively and committed to rapid cancellation of up to
>90% of the debt of 41 heavily-indebted poor countries (HIPC), making the
>fight against poverty a priority. $100 billion were to be devoted to this
>"generous" initiative, which was widely covered by the media.
>
>Public announcements echoed round the world. Standing in front of the IMF
>and World Bank Assembly Michel Camdessus read out the letter written by the
>two young men from Guinea who died in the landing gear of a Sabena Airlines
>plane and he declared that their appeal had been heard thanks to the Cologne
>Initiative. In September 1999, President Bill Clinton announced that his
>country would unilaterally cancel 100% of the poor countries' debt. He was
>followed by Gordon Brown, Great Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer, by
>Jacques Chirac etc.
>
>At the time, the Committee for the Cancellation of Third World Debt (COCAD)
>cried out that this initiative was a sham and called for real solutions to
>be implemented.
>
>So, what is the situation a year after Cologne?
>
>Of the $100 billion announced, barely $2.5 billion have materialized. That
>represents about 1.2% of the debt of the HIPC. (The figure is $2.07 billion
>if ex Eastern-bloc countries are excluded). This is a far cry from the 90 or
>100% cancellation announced! Whatever discussion there might be on just how
>much effort has been made, everyone now agrees that very little has been
>achieved.
>
>The world's richest countries are really stingy. The US Congress has
>allocated $63 million to debt reduction in 2000, $69 million in 2000, i.e.
>1/4 of one-thousandth the $280 billion annual US defense budget. This is in
>the context of a budget surplus expected to amount to around $100 billion
>over the next decade. One can guess that both the Capitol and the Pentagon
>intend to spend part of this on the anti-missile shield project (so loved by
>Ronald Reagan in the 1980's) rather than on canceling Third World debt.
>
>Our calculations show that none of the creditor nations of the North will be
>contributing more than 1% of their defense budget to debt relief. Thus, the
>Belgian government plans to allocate BF800m. (about Euro 20m.) to Third
>World debt reduction. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that most of
>this sum has not yet been handed over. At the rate of BF800m. per annum it
>would take a century to cancel the BF90bn that the HIPC owe Belgium. It is
>also worth stating that the sums that industrialized countries allocate to
>debt relief are used to compensate private German, French and Belgian
>companies that participated in white elephant projects in countries that are
>now crushed by the burden of the debt (especially installations unsuited to
>local needs such as the Inga Dam in the Lower Congo or the Kl�ckner Iron and
>Steel Works in Cameroon). These white elephants were bought by regimes that
>were paid commissions by these companies for accepting "turnkey" packaged
>solutions that included both the projects and the loans. The contracts
>involved were gigantic and the companies involved were aided and abetted by
>western governments that wanted to keep close ties with their ex colonies
>(France, Great Britain, Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal) or that wanted
>to open up new markets by forming strategic alliances (United States). Most
>of the HIPC debt originated in the 1970's and 1980's.
>
>An equally serious matter is the fact some of the funds allocated to
>compensating private sector creditors are drawn from development aid
>budgets. In short, the funds announced by the governments of the North
>aren't reaching the people of the South; they are public funds that are
>being used in part to the advantage of private firms despite the fact that
>they are largely to blame for the disastrous situation in the Third World.
>One can rightly ask why it's necessary to compensate private sector
>creditors who have already made substantial profits from juicy contracts
>with debt-laden countries as well as having received subsidies from
>governments of the developed countries.
>
>Moreover, France and Japan are lying outrageously when they pretend that
>they are canceling the debts owed to them by the HIPC. The truth is that
>they are demanding that the debt be repaid. On receipt of the
>reimbursements, France and Japan will donate the funds, which is not the
>same thing as debt cancellation at all. Japan specifically demands that when
>the funds are handed back to the developing countries they be used to buy
>goods and services supplied by Japanese companies. In short, the debt does
>indeed have to be repaid and the funds that are "given" end up in the
>coffers of the "donor" country's corporations.
>
>The announcement made in Okinawa, on the 23rd July 2000, that Japan was
>making a $15bn "effort" in favor of Internet development in the Third World
>should be viewed in the light of this. This is yet another example of tied
>development assistance that induces the beneficiary countries to buy
>Japanese computer equipment and technlogy. France is a little more discreet
>on this because, for several years now, significant progressive movements
>have been strongly critical of tied development assistance. However, it
>should be remembered that President Jacques Chirac has been offering debt
>relief to the HIPC for several years on the condition that they privatize
>their public sector to the advantage of French multinationals. Bouygues,
>Vivendi and other large French multinationals have bought whole sectors of
>the economies of the old French African colonies at discount prices thanks
>to this policy.
>
>Finally, we must not forget that all these debt relief initiatives are
>linked to structural adjustment programmes imposed by the creditor nations
>which, even if they now refer to them as "Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper",
>force the countries concerned to continue opening their markets to goods
>from developed countries and extend fiscal policies that place the burden of
>taxation on the poor (VAT rates in Western Africa are in the range of 18 to
>21% whilst, pretexting the need to encourage private investment, capital is
>not taxed directly). These policies also lead to widespread privatization of
>the water and energy sectors (Vivendi applauds this), the continuation of a
>policy of exporting at any cost which has detrimental effects on food safety
>(food crops are abandoned in favor of crops that can be exported) and is
>preventing the conservation of natural resources (deforestation and extreme
>exploitation of raw material and fuel resources), the privatization of
>communal land, the further lowering of public sector starvation wages, in
>short the application of hard-line neo-liberalism with a sprinkling of
>targeted subsidies for those in "abject" poverty.
>
>In conclusion, the current initiatives are either totally inadequate or
>quite simply unacceptable.
>
>If real solutions are to be implemented it will be necessary to lift the
>veil of secrecy that's hiding the truth concerning Third World debt: the
>debt is really a mechanism for transferring wealth from the South to the
>North. The latest figures from the World Bank show that in 1998 the 41 HIPC
>transferred $1,680 million more to the North than they received (cf World
>Bank: "Global Development Finance, Net flows and transfers on debt" table,
>April 2000). That's massive. The reality is that the HIPC are making the
>richest countries even richer.
>
>If we widen the debate to cover all the developing countries then the
>scandal takes on outrageous proportions. In 1999 these countries transferred
>a net sum of $114.6 million to the creditor nations in the North (op. cit.
>p. 188)! That's at least equivalent to the Marshall Plan but transferred in
>a single year.
>
>Another indicator: in total the developing countries reimbursed (in capital
>and interest) $350 billion in 1999 (op. cit. "Tables" p.24), i.e. seven
>times more than the total for Public Development Aid which amounted to $50
>billion that year!
>
>What are the real solutions?
>
>The starting point must be to meet the basic human needs guaranteed by the
>Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Rather than speaking grandiloquently
>about the advantages to be gained by developing countries from access to
>financial markets and the supposed benefits of globalisation, it should be
>bourn in mind that each year sub-Saharan Africa reimburses almost $15
>billion, i.e. four times more than it spends on health and education.
>Meanwhile, according to the United Nations Development Program, a budget of
>$40 billion dollars per annum over ten years would allow universal primary
>education (there are currently 1 billion people suffering from illiteracy in
>the world), guarantee access to potable water for the 1.3 billion people who
>are deprived of it, provide medical care to 2 billion people who don't have
>access to it and ensure basic food needs for the 2 billion people suffering
>from anemia.
>
>If we really want to see durable human development social justice then
>several urgent steps must be taken.
>
>1. Cancel the Third World's public external debt (it has already reimbursed
>more than four times what it owed when the debt crisis exploded in 1982).
>This external public debt amounts to around $1.6 trillion, i.e. less than 5%
>of global debt that currently stands at about $40 trillion. The US public
>debt (for a population of 275 million) amounts to $5 trillion, i.e. more
>than three times the total exterior public debt of all the Third World's
>countries. The French public debt amounts 750 $ billion, i. e.  more than
>three times the total exterior public debt of all sub-Saharan Africa
>(population 600 million). Canceling the Third World debt would require
>demanding that all the various creditors wipe out 5% of their accounting
>assets. That's not too much to ask.
>
>2. Start and successfully conclude judicial proceedings to end the impunity
>of those who got rich illegally on the backs of their citizens as well as
>their accomplices in developed countries. The late Mobutu's fortune is
>believed to amount to at least $8 billion whilst the Democratic Republic of
>Congo is in debt to the tune of $13 billion. These illegally-gained assets
>must be expropriated and handed back to the plundered population via a
>democratically-controlled local development fund.
>
>3. Abandon the structural adjustment policies that are so disastrous for
>Third World populations.
>
>4. Apply a tax like the Tobin Tax and devote the majority of its resources
>to socially just and ecologically sustainable development projects.
>
>5. Deliver on the promises made by countries in the United Nations by
>raising Official Development Assistance (ODA) to 0.7% of the Gross National
>Product of developed countries (at the moment it's only 0.24% for the OECD
>GNP as a whole). The entire ODA should be bestowed as a donation (currently
>part of it is granted in the form of loans).
>
>6. Stop deregulating trade because this impacts Third World populations
>directly.
>
>These proposals certainly aren't enough to solve all the injustices of
>North-South relations but they are necessary if human development and
>justice are to be given a chance.
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>(*) Eric Toussaint is president of the Brussels-based Committee for
>Cancellation of the Third World Debt (COCAD, CADTM in French) and author of
>"Your Money or Your Life: The Tyranny of Global Finance"
>
>Three different editions in English:
>1) by Pluto Press, 1999, London - UK (ISBN 0 74531414 0 pbk) and Mkuki na
>Nyota Publishers, Dar es Salaam - Tanzania (ISBN 9976 973 54 3 pbk) 322pp
>2) by VAK Vikas Adhyayan Kendra, 1999, Bombay - India, 302pp
>3) by Labour Party Pakistan Publications, 2000; Lahore � Pakistan, 346pp
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   .............................................
>   Bob Olsen, Toronto      [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   .............................................
>
>
>


__________________________________

KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi

___________________________________

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subscribe/unsubscribe messages
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________


Reply via email to