We are living through a period of great flux and uncertainty. The events of 11 September, and the international response to them, are still unfolding. It is not easy to predict how and when the immediate crisis will be resolved. However, it is still necessary – indeed essential – to draw some wider lessons from these events and to learn from them so we can try to ensure that good comes out of bad.
Nothing can excuse the deliberate destruction of innocent life on 11 September. But to prevent further tragedies, we need to understand better the conditions and the forces that generate terrorism. The roots of terrorism are complex and multi-faceted. The struggle against terrorism will therefore need to be fought on many different fronts. Focused and proportionate military action – while sometimes necessary – will not be enough on its own. We also need much greater international cooperation on issues of intelligence, crime, money laundering, and the arms and drugs trades. We need stronger, not weaker, international institutions. And we need a much greater international effort to address those underlying conditions – poverty, squalor, inequality and dysfunctional governance – that provide such a fertile recruiting ground for terrorist organisations.
A big part of the necessary response to terrorism is a massively enhanced international development effort, including faster progress in the reduction of poverty, and a more determined and concerted effort to promote effective governance, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. This is not special pleading, but rather a serious analysis of what needs to be done if the world is to be made safer and more secure.
I am proud of what the UK government has already achieved on international development. Refocusing our development effort on the reduction of extreme poverty and the International Development Targets, after years in which overseas aid had been misused for short-term political and commercial objectives; a big increase in the aid budget (up by 45 percent in real terms between 1997 and 2003/04); the untying of all UK aid, so that poor countries now have the flexibility to purchase goods and services from the most cost-effective source; a leading role internationally on debt relief, health and education; and action to promote fairer terms of trade for the least developed countries. All this we have achieved – and more.
But there is so much still to do. One fifth of the world’s population are living in extreme poverty, on less than a dollar a day. Half the world’s population live on less than two dollars. A billion people have no access to clean water, 2.3 billion people are without access to safe sanitation and half a million women die during childbirth for lack of simple medical interventions. Eight hundred million adults cannot read or write. And 113 million children are without access to primary school.
The existence of poverty on this scale is a moral outrage. But recent events have reminded us – all too clearly – that poverty and underdevelopment is also a threat to the stability and security of the world. There can be no secure future for any of us without greater global social justice.
So what does an enhanced international development effort mean – for the UK and other developed countries?
It means increasing levels of development aid and using those resources more efficiently and effectively: aid as an investment in pro-poor development and the reform of political institutions; aid to help poorer countries grow their economies and provide quality public services to their people, particularly education and healthcare; and aid to help promote better systems of government, human rights and the rule of law. This includes action on police reform and the reform of security structures, so that military forces are reshaped and made fully accountable to civilian authority and control.
Since 1997, the UK government has increased our aid budget – up from £2.2 billion in 1997 to £3.6 billion by 2003/04. But, overall, levels of global aid are falling. We need international agreement to increase aid volumes and to make faster progress to the agreed UN 0.7 percent oda/GNP target (only five of the world’s development donors currently meet or exceed this target).
But we also need to improve the quality of that aid. Too much of the world’s aid remains tied to the purchase of the donor government’s goods and services – a practice which reduces the value of that aid (by up to 25 percent), and which distorts a country’s development priorities. The UK government has untied all of its aid, but many other development donors have not done so.
Making progress on poverty reduction also means looking beyond aid – at the wider set of issues necessary to manage our globalised world with greater justice. This has profound implications for policy on trade, investment, the environment, and conflict prevention and resolution.
Take trade. There are serious inequities in the existing international trading system. Developed countries have long preached the virtues of openness, but practice lags behind the rhetoric. Despite progress over the last 50 years, developed countries maintain significant tariff and non-tariff barriers against the exports of developing countries. These barriers are most damaging in areas of key importance to developing countries, such as agriculture, textiles and clothing, while the use and threat of ‘trade defence’ instruments (e.g. anti-dumping) creates further obstacles. Total developing country gains from a 50 percent cut in tariffs, by both developed and developing countries, would be in the order of $150 billion – around three times global aid flows.
Progress on poverty reduction and development requires decisive action to improve the trading opportunities of developing countries. It also needs action to help poorer countries to take greater advantage of new trading opportunities as these become available. And it means strengthening and reforming the World Trade Organisation, so poorer countries have a more effective voice within it.
Another related priority is helping the poorest countries to attract increased flows of private investment. This is essential if they are to get the levels of investment they need in sectors like energy, water and sanitation, transport infrastructure and telecommunications. This means working with developing countries to put in place conditions that will attract private financial flows and minimise the risk of capital flight. Harnessing private finance for poverty reduction also requires action to strengthen the global financial system, and corporate social responsibility by national and international companies.
We need strengthened international agreements to ensure the world’s resources are used sustainably. Environmental protection and sustainable development go hand in hand. We cannot protect the environment without addressing the development needs of the poor. This is the agenda we need to see taken forward at the Rio plus 10 Summit in September 2002.
We also need much more energy behind conflict prevention and resolution. If we didn’t know this before, we know it now. Instability anywhere is a threat to safety everywhere. We need a more effective United Nations that can take action more rapidly to prevent and resolve conflict. We need to redouble our efforts to tackle existing armed conflicts – particularly the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, but also in Africa and many other parts of the world.
The UK has strengthened its efforts to support conflict resolution particularly in Africa. We are making progress in the Balkans and Sierra Leone. And we have recently committed £19.5 million over three years to fund programmes to reduce the circulation of small arms and light weapons that feed conflict in some of the poorest countries.
We need to do all this, and more, if we are to reduce the risks of violence and marginalise the forces of extremism, which multiply in conditions of poverty and injustice.
The terrible events in Washington and New York bring home to all of us the extent of our global interdependence. Six billion of us live together on this planet. No country is immune to the impact of instability and violence in other countries. And none of us, therefore, can afford to be indifferent to the struggles and conflicts that are played out in countries far away from our own shores.
We are living through an extremely dangerous moment in human history. No-one should underestimate the risks and the dangers before us. But we should remember, too, that moments of acute risk are also moments of great opportunity. We cannot afford to let that moment pass. Now is the time to forge new levels of international co-operation to achieve the inter-related goals of sustainable development, human rights and democracy, and peace.