And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 15:46:56 -0600 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk From: "Kathleen Hiltsley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Sign on letter to the UN concerning the UNDP initiative called the Global Sustainable Development... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN March 12, 1999 James Gustave Speth Administrator, United Nations Development Programme The United Nations New York, USA Via Fax: 212-906-5700 (4 Pages) Dear Mr. Speth, We write as individuals who care deeply about the United Nations system and who have worked for years to strengthen and support it. We want to express our deep concern about the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) initiative called the Global Sustainable Development Facility-2B2M: 2 Billion to the Market By the Year 2020. We believe this project could cause serious harm to the organization's independence and credibility. We are also concerned that the UNDP not fall victim to inappropriate corporate influence. We are writing to you before the UNDP launches this unprecedented collaboration with a number of global corporations with the hope that you will reconsider and halt the project. Our concerns are various. First, many of the transnational companies you are partnering with are well known for their negative impacts on development, human rights and the environment. For instance: *Rio Tinto Plc is a British mining corporation which has created so many environment, human rights, and development problems that a global network of trade unions, indigenous peoples, church groups, communities and activists has emerged to fight its abuses. For instance, the company stands accused of complicity in or direct violations of environmental, labor and human rights in Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Namibia, Madagascar, the United States and Australia, among others. *Asea, Brown, Boveri is a Swiss-Swedish company that has faced sustained campaigns by environmentalists and human rights advocates against its involvement in various hydro projects, including the Three Gorges Project in China and the now indefinitely postponed Bakun dam in Malaysia. *Dow Chemical (GSDF steering committee member) is one of the biggest polluters in the United States, the world's largest producer of chlorine-the root source of dioxin-and one of the largest pesticide companies on the planet. *Citibank is the U.S. financial services corporation which played an important role in the Asian financial crisis that threw millions of workers out of work in 1997. Citicorp was also a major lender to developing countries in the 1960s and 1970s, leading up to the Third World debt crisis. *Stat Oil, "Statoil, Norway's state-owned oil company, has been and is involved in environment, development and human rights conflicts at home, as well as in Venezuela, Russia, Malaysia, Nigeria, East Timor and the Caspian Sea. Given the collective record of these and other corporations involved, it is not clear how much they see this proposed joint venture with the United Nations as having to do with the stated goal of "sustainable development." Rather, it may be more of an opportunity for these corporations to practice "greenwash"--a public relations exercise aimed at improving their troubled images. Second, the UNDP claims that the lives of the world's poorest 2 billion people can or will be improved by drawing them into the world economy as it exists today-the stated objective of its collaboration with this group of global corporations through the GSDF. Yet the most pressing needs of the poor-- the provision of basic health, education, and food resources--are in arenas of little or no interest to most transnational corporations. Indeed, corporate activities-including those of your partners in this endeavor--frequently undermine the needs of the poor. So far we have seen no substantial indication that these corporations or most others are changing their priorities. Furthermore, the GSDF "joint venture" raises the specter of UNDP programs and priorities increasingly being diverted to serve corporate shareholder interests rather than those of the poor. This is a sharp diversion from the original intentions of the United Nations and of the UNDP in particular. Yet those organizing the GSDF seem to see no conflict here, citing the "strong relationship�between sustainable human development and the growth of shareholder value." The fact that the UNDP appears to be embracing such a stance through the GSDF project is profoundly disturbing to us and, we feel, antithetical to the organization's mission. Indeed, we believe that in today's global economy the relationship between the enrichment of shareholders and the goals of poverty alleviation is more often antagonistic than constructive. Third, we are of the opinion that the GSDF initiative represents a worst case example of the potential outcome of the "Global Compact" proposed recently by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in Davos, Switzerland. The Secretary General's challenge to business leaders represents an important step in pressing transnational corporations to adhere to universal values defined by the United Nations in the areas of human rights, labor rights and the environment. We agree with the Secretary General that the UN should be given the resources and authority to monitor the realization of these internationally agreed upon values as the search for effective mechanisms of enforcement continues. However, what the Secretary General's hopeful vision fails to address, is a fundamental divide: that between the interests of global corporations and the multilateral trading system they have been instrumental in devising on the one hand, and the interests of the world's poor, the environment and democratic institutions on the other. The growing concentration of wealth and power in the hands of fundamentally undemocratic global corporations and other institutions of globalization clashes with the overriding purpose of the United Nations to enhance human dignity and the capacity for self-governance. Transnational corporations and the globalization process they are leading frequently extract wealth from communities and countries, engendering severe social, economic, human rights and environmental costs. Meanwhile, the basic needs and desires of the world's poor-two thirds of whom are marginalized from the global economy-are often diametrically opposed to the corporate imperatives to maximize profits and accumulate wealth and power. What's more, transnational corporations-including some of those involved in the GSDF initiative--often work at cross purposes to UN objectives such as international environmental and labor rights agreements. Thus, while the Secretary General calls for giving "a human face to the global market," we are concerned that efforts such as the UNDP's GSDF project may only serve to mask the unfortunate nature of the core activities of many of these transnational companies. We understand that given the difficult financial and political situation in which the United Nations finds itself--in large part because of the United States government's refusal to pay the $1.6 billion it owes--the UN may feel compelled to seek political and economic support from the corporate world. This would be similar to what many public institutions have faced as their government budgets have been reduced and they have turned to the corporations for support. Many of these institutions have lost some of their independence as a result. The UN now faces a similar dilemma. It was the US government which successfully pressured for drastically downsizing the UN Centre on Transnational Corporations (UNCTC) in 1992. The UNCTC had been set up to monitor the social, economic and environmental impacts of corporate investment in developing countries. We recognize that the UN needs to find a way to inject itself more forcefully into the debate about globalization. But to base that intervention on misguided initiatives such as the GSDF is a step in the wrong direction. We respectfully submit that the UN should be working to subordinate the ravages of the so-called "free market" to the imperatives of human rights, environmentally sustainable and socially equitable development, the rights of women, indigenous people and of the poor. We believe that the UN should be monitoring the human rights and environmental impacts of corporations in developing and industrialized countries, while helping to build truly effective and enforceable mechanisms of international accountability. We firmly believe that the United Nations can and should serve as a counterbalance to unrestrained globalization rather than building collaborative projects with corporations who are the architects of a system that is usurping the UN's authority, and who are the perpetrators of human rights and environmental problems which so hinder sustainable human development. At a moment when the gap between rich and poor countries and people is growing, it would be a grave disservice to the goal of sustainable development for a key United Nations agency to have its independently determined priorities threatened by an exercise that is likely to bring benefits primarily to the public relations of several global corporations. Therefore we call on UNDP to call off its GSDF project, and in doing so, to preserve the credibility of its mission to serve the world's poor. Similarly, we hope that the Secretary General will continue to openly explore ways in which the UN can position itself at the center of efforts help build a future where human rights, labor rights and the environment come first. In this way, the United Nations could move into the 21st Century with its integrity intact. Sincerely, Upendra Baxi, Professor of Law, University of Warrick, UK, former Vice Chancellor University of Delhi, India Walden Bello, Director, Focus on the Global South, Thailand Phyllis Bennis, Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies, USA John Cavanagh, Director, Institute for Policy Studies, USA Susan George, Fellow, Transnational Institute, The Netherlands; President Observatoire de la Mondialisation, France S M Mohamed Idris, President, Third World Network, Malaysia Joshua Karliner, Director, Transnational Resource & Action Center, USA Ward Morehouse, President, Council on International and Public Affairs, USA Atila Roque, Programme Coordinator, IBASE--Brazilian Institute of Economic and Social Analysis, Brazil Yash Tandon, Director, International South Group Network (ISGN), Zimbabwe Cc: Secretary General, Kofi Annan Endorsed by (partial list), Adewale Adeoye, Chairman, Journalists for Democratic Rights, Lagos, Nigeria Dr.Gabriele Deitrich, National Convenor, National Alliance of People's Movements, India Nicholas Hildyard, The Corner House, UK Olivier Hoedeman, Coordinator, Corporate Europe Observatory, The Netherlands Masakazu Honda, Member of the Commission of The Tada Human Rights Fund, Japan Andrew Jackson, Senior Economist, Canadian Labour Congress, Canada Danny Kennedy, Director, Project Underground, USA David C. Korten, President, The People-Centered Development Forum, USA Ashish Kothari, Kalpavriksh, India Jerry Mander, Director, International Forum on Globalization, USA Patrick McCully, Campaigns Coordinator, International Rivers Network, USA Kinhide Mushakoji, Secretary General, International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR); Former Vice-Rector, United Nations University, Japan Patterson Ogon, Director, Ijaw Council for Human Rights, Port Harcourt, Nigeria Doifie Ola, Editor, Survival, Pan-Niger Delta Resistance Movement, Chikoko, Yenagoa, Niger Delta, Nigeria Medha Patkar, National Alliance of People's Movements, Narmada Bacahao Andolan, India Aravinda Pillalamarri, Association for India's Development, USA Morten Ronning, The Future in our Hands/NorWatch, Norway Kavaljit Singh, Director, Public Interest Research Group, India Himanshu Thakkar, Centre For Water Policy, India Felix Tuodolo, Council Member, Ijaw Youths Council, Port Harcourt, Nigeria Lori Wallach, Director, Global Trade Watch, Public Citizen, USA Robert Weissman, Essential Action, USA Please reply to Joshua Karliner at: Joshua Karliner TRAC--Transnational Resource & Action Center/Corporate Watch PO Box 29344 San Francisco CA 94129 tel: 415-561-6567 fax: 415-561-6493 web: http://www.corpwatch.org ------------------------------------------ Kristin Dawkins Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy 2105 First Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 USA Central tel: (612) 870-0453 Direct tel: (612) 870-3410 Fax: (612) 870-4846 [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.iatp.org Kathy Hiltsley Program Assistant Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy 2105 1st Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 Direct Phone: 612-870-3455 IATP Ph. 612-870-0453 IATP fax. 612-870-4846 http://www.iatp.org email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
