September 2000
|
|
Issue 73 September 2000 |
|
|
Many to Many Issue 73 September 2000
2. After Seattle – UNCTAD X It was only some two months after the tumultuous Seattle World Trade Organisation (WTO) Conference and yet in a wholly new millennium that the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD X) met in Bangkok, February 2000. Particular effort had been made to ensure meaningful participation of civil society. A series of civil society and parliamentary meetings had been arranged, among these an NGO Plenary Caucus attended by some 160 representatives and social movements from over 40 countries, and a meeting of the Inter-Parliamentary Union. The discussions throughout this period resulted in various statements such as for instance the NGO "Bangkok Appeal", which called for convergence on common civil society platforms and coordination of national and international actions. And in their Final Declaration, adopted unanimously, the Parliamentary Meeting stated that: "Multilateral and international systems – be they in the area of trade, finance, social or environmental regulation – should invariably be transparent in their design, application and practice. While significant advances have been made in recent years in improving transparency in some international organisations such as the World Ban, there is still a lack of transparency in the decision-making and functions of various multilateral bodies. Although membership of these organisations is almost universal, some important decisions are taken by just a few. Moreover, secrecy surrounds the operation of such bodies and access to relevant information is largely confined to Government, excluding legislators and civil society." Local Thai NGOs and grassroots organisations had also organised a series of peaceful demonstrations; this "Assembly of the Poor", consisting of about 2000 people, including landless farmers, fisherfolk, indigenous people, slum dwellers and unemployed industrial workers, protested peacefully against the current forms of globalisation. The theme of UNCTAD X was: "Development strategies in an increasingly interdependent world: applying the lessons of the past to make globalisation an effective instrument for the development of all countries and peoples." The formal inter-governmental negotiations at UNCTAD X, presided over by the Deputy Prime Minister and Trade Minister of Thailand, Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi (also to be WTO Director-General from 2002) resulted in two documents, namely a Plan of Action, setting out a work programme for the next four years, and a political statement, the "Bangkok Declaration: Global Dialogue and Dynamic Engagement". Many NGOs expressed their disappointment with the "Plan of Action" feeling that, after the collapse of Seattle, the developing country constituency of UNCTAD as well as the secretariat had failed to "seize the moment to challenge the WTO" and forge alternative trade rules from within the UN system which could be seen to have legitimacy and to be more democratic. Even so the text recognises that the various "imbalances and asymmetries" facing developing countries in the international trading system which go against their interests must be urgently addressed with the support of the UNCTAD secretariat. The Plan of Action also gives UNCTAD a stronger mandate in contributing to reform of the international financial system. UNCTAD X was seen by many as the "rebirth" of an organisation which, after the creation of WTO ion 1994, was considered by some developed countries, including the U.S. to have outlived its purpose. The Bangkok Declaration reaffirms UNCTAD as the focal point within the United Nations for "the integrated treatment of development and the interrelated issues in the areas of trade, finance, investment, technology, and sustainable development.." In his closing statement, the UNCTAD Secretary-General, Mr. Ricupero, referred to the socalled Washington consensus with its 12 rules of economic policy which proved to be too restrictive and have a tendency to neglect the problems of poverty. Instead of a new set of 12 points of consensus Mr. Ricupero would prefer to refer to a Bangkok "convergence", starting from opposite ends of the political and ideological spectrum and gradually converging toward some common ground. Rather than formalising a new consensus, it is more important to urge that extremism in economic policy be abandoned by all sides. Mr. Ricupero reminded the conference of the words of the Indian minister of commerce and industry when he told the plenary that "the end of socialism does not silence the cry of the poor, and out of the pain of poverty must be born new dreams of justice – a new world economic order." "Today I want to insist that the building of an international community that will respect the aspirations of all its members for sustainable development must rest on the same moral foundation as does sustainable development itself: the fundamental idea is once again that of generalised reciprocity." But real reciprocity still has to be constructed and the concept of mutuality respected by all. The international financial crisis which erupted in East Asia in the mid-1997 with devastating social and economic consequences throughout the developing countries was a major topic for discussion at the UNCTAD X meetings, as were proposals for reform of the international financial system. While it was acknowledged that economies in the region showed clear signs of recovery, Mr. Yilmaz Akyuz, Chief Macroeconomist at UNCTAD, pointed to the "catastrophic social fall-out lagging behind", saying that although economies are recovering, people are not. The Director-General of the IMF, Michel Camdesus, in his farewell speech before retiring from office, called for "a progressive humanisation of basic economic concepts". Insisting that economic growth alone is not enough: that it could "even be destructive of the natural environment or precious social goods and cultural values", Mr Camdessus went on to call the widening gap between right and poor peoples and nations "morally outrageous, economically wasteful and potentially socially explosive". Poverty, said the IMF Director-General, is "the ultimate systemic threat facing humanity". Mr. Camdessus also reminded governments of the need to implement the commitments made during the UN conferences of the 1990’s, in particular the commitment to reducing by half the number of people in absolute poverty by 2015. Financing for Development Mr. Camdessus’ remarks were preceded by a series of resolutions approved by the 54th UN General Assembly (September-December 1999) regarding the financing for development and the creation of a "stable international financial system, responsive to the challenges of development". The General Assembly decided, in resolution 54/196, to convene a high-level intergovernmental event in 2001 which will address "national, international and systemic issue relating to financing for development in a holistic manner in the context of globalisation and interdependence." This meeting would also address the mobilisation of financial resources for "full implementation" of the commitments made at the summits and conferences organised by the United Nations in the 1990s. The Assembly decided that steps should be taken as soon as possible to establish a preparatory committee which, no later than March 2000, should consider the form, timing, duration, format and agenda of the final event, together with the modalities for the participation of "instititutional stakeholders", such as World Bank, IMF, WTO, UNCTAD, and others, including NGOs and the private sector. The first substantive session of the Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) took place 31 May – 2 June in which, despite "difficult negotiations", a preliminary agenda was agreed upon. Decisions were also reached on a schedule on regional consultations as well as hearing to be held with NGOs and the private sector. A second and third substantive session by the PrepCom is scheduled for 12-23 February 2001 and 2-12 April 2001 in New York. The IMF Director-General surprised the UNCTAD X conference audience by – at the end of his farewell speech – making an astounding suggestion regarding the reform of the governance of international financial institutions, namely that the G7 – G8 summit should be replaced every two years by a meeting of the heads of state and governments of the countries (approximately 30 at any one time) who have Executive Directors on the Boards of either the IMF or the World Bank. Elaboratin on his suggestion, Mr. Camdessus said that: "provided such a meeting was prepared with the active participation of all countries of the respective consitutencies, this would be thoroughly representative of the entire membership of 182 countries. As it would be attended by the Secretary-General of the United Nations and by the heads of the relevant multilateral organisations, it would offer a way of establishing a clear and stronger link between the multilateral institutions and a representative grouping of world leaders with unquestionable legitimacy." 3. Women 2000 The 23rd special session of the UN General Assembly was entitled "Women 2000: Gender, Equality, Development and Peace for the 21st Century" and took place at the UN headquarters between 5-10 June 2000. It was attended by 2,003 government delegates and 2,043 representatives of 1,036 non-governmental organisations (NGOs). The session was convened in order to review and appraise what progress had been made in implementing the Nairobi Forward-Looking Strategies and the Platform for Action from the Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing 1995. This Platform for Action (PFA) sets time-specific targets for eliminating discrimination in health, education, the workplace, decision making and the law, and identifies 12 critical areas of concern: poverty; education; health care; violence against women; women and armed conflict; women and the economy; women in power and decision making; institutional mechanisms; human rights of women; women and the media; women and the environment; and the girl child. The special session met in plenary and heard statements from 178 member-states, 3 non-member states, 16 observers, 4 heads of UN and specialised agencies, the chair of the committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and 5 NGOs. 77 percent of the plenary statements were made by women. While the special session was "very contentious" with negotiations running late into the night, the General assembly president, Theo Ben-Gurirabl (Namibia) was nevertheless satisfied that there had been "no backward movement in any of the Beijing language" and that the PFA remained fully valid for national and international actions. The outcome document of the session contains a Political Declaration and "Further actions and initiatives to implement the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action". The Political Declaration reaffirms governments’ commitments and recognises their primary responsibility in implementing the PFA, the 12 critical areas of concern and the Nairobi Forward-Looking Strategies. It calls for continued international cooperation, including attainment of the internationally agreed target of 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) of industrialised countries for official development assistance (ODA). It also reaffirms the goal of universal ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All discrimination Against Women and commits to strengthening and safeguarding a national and international enabling environment, including through the protection of human rights. Governments furthermore agreed to regularly assess PFA implementation, with a view to meeting in 2005 to consider new initiatives. After the session, Angela King, Assistant Secretary-General and Special Advisor on Gender Issues and the Advancement of Women, expressed her delight that "the dire predictions that there would be a roll-back have proved false. We were determined to get a strong document that did not in any way diminish the gains women had achieved in Beijing. We were also determined to go beyond Beijing, and we did, despite the efforts of countries that made the process an arduous one." In his closing remarks, Mr. Ben-Gurirab called on the United Nations organisations, Bretton Woods Institutions, the World Trade Organisation, other international and regional inter-governmental bodies, parliaments and civil society to support government efforts and develop complementary programmes to achieve the goals of the PFA. He said the outcome document acknolwdges the role NGOs must continue to play in the promotion of gender equality, development and peace. Source: NGLS Roundup, Jly 2000, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, NGLS publications available online: www.ngls.tad.ch. 4. We the Peoples Millennium Forum Declaration and Agenda for Action Strengthening the United Nations for the 21st Century United Nations, New York 22-26 May 2000 After numerous national and international conferences, meetings and other more local activities and consultations, civil society from all parts of the world has made its contribution to a We the Peoples Millennium Forum Declaration and Agenda for Action. This document, formulated by the 1,350 civil society organisations’ representatives attending the New York Forum, will be presented to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. At the opening of this Forum, Secretary-General Kofi Annan welcomed the participants, stressing that it was in bringing the power of the world’s peoples to the United Nations that the principles of the UN Charter would come alive and be made to work for all in the twenty-first century. He acknowledged that "during the cycle of world conferences of the last decade, it was you who set the pace on many issues." Kofi Annan pointed out that while non-governmental organisations have understood the need for global action on any particular issue, there was now a widespread recognition that all the many issues are, as are indeed the world’s peoples and nations, interconnected and interdependent. Indicating the need for a wider definition and deeper understanding of "globalisation", he suggested that the challenge was "to make globalisation mean more than bigger markets": "I believe the poor are poor not because of too much globalisation, but because of too little – because they are not part of it, because they are excluded." Globalisation challenges all international institutions and all governments to "learn to govern with the voice of the peoples, with a view to meeting the needs of peoples." The Secretary-General went on to mention his Millennium Report with its four headings "freedom from want’, "freedom from fear", "sustaining our future", and "renewing the United Nations", and told the audience that his Report, entitled "We the Peoples – the Role of the United Nations in the 21st Century", although written for governments, was also a report for the world’s peoples. Offering some examples of how civil society could inspire and work with governments to achieve common goals, Kofi Annan also mentioned ways it could help "to bridge the digital divide", which today is leaving billions of people without any technological means of communication; that "half the human race has yet to make or receive a phone call, let alone use a computer". Through joining one of the digital bridges announced in his Report, such as the United Nations Information Technology Service (UNITeS), members of civil society could greatly assist the work of bringing the information technology with all its benefits to the entire human family. Another example given to the civil society representatives at the Forum was to continue to keep the pressure on our governments, encouraging them to sign and ratify the some 500 international treaties and conventions which have been formulated since the birth of the UN, creating a comprehensive legal framework for a better world. The outcome of the Forum deliberations, which would have taken into account the many submissions from people and non-governmental organisations throughout the world, resulted in a 20-page Declaration and Agenda for Action. This document starts with a vision statement entitled "Our Vision", the full text of which is the following: "Our vision is of a world that is human-centred and genuinely democratic, where all human beings are full participants and determine their own destinies. In our vision we are one human family, in all our diversity, living on one common homeland and sharing a just, sustainable and peaceful world, guided by universal principles of democracy, equality, inclusion, voluntarism, non-discrimination and participation by all person, men and women, young and old, regardless of race, faith, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity or nationality. It is a world where peace and human security, as envisioned in the principles of the United Nations Charter, replace armaments, violent conflict and wars. It is a world where everyone lives in a clean environment with a fair distribution of the earth’s resources. Our vision includes a special role for the dynamism of young people and the experience of the elderly and reaffirms the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights – civil, political, economic, social and cultural." In the following pages are outlined recommendations on issues categorised: A. Eradication of Poverty: Including Social Development and Debt Cancellation B. Peace, Security, and Disarmament C. Facing the Challenge of Globalisation: Equity, Justice and Diversity D. Human Rights E. Sustainable Development and the Environment F. Strengthening and Democratising the United Nations and International Organisations. No doubt this We the Peoples Millennium Forum with its comprehensive Declaration and Agenda for Action, should be seen by all who for years have worked towards a more democratic and open United Nations, as an encouraging step forward towards true democracy. The full text of this document is available at: http://www.millennium forum.org/html/papers/mfd26May.htm 5. The House That Peace Built According to Jeff Halper, professor at Ben Gurion University in Israel and coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, the Palestinian population of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem is entangled in a politically motivated web of restrictions that, among other things, denies their ability to obtain building permits. The end result is that palestinian homes are routinely demolished for being illegal. The American Friends Service Committee organised a speaking tour which it hoped would open the way for a wide range of organisations to work together, from Arab, Jewish, and Christian groups. The tour itself was in fact co-sponsored by US Arab and Jewish peace organisations in partnership with AFSC. The tour’s co-speaker was Salim Shawamreh, a Palestinian engineer and grassroots peace worker whose home had twice been demolished. In the Spring issue 2000 of the Quaker Bulletin, published by the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), the following wonderful testimony to the spirit of peace was given: "Salim Shawarmeh and his family have experienced both the politically motivated Israeli policy and practice of home demolitions and the desire for peace shared by many Israelis and Palestinians. After being denied a building permit four times, the Shawarmehs built a much-needed home, with the Israeli army tore down. Salim and his family rebuilt with help from the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, as well as Palestinian and international non-governmental organisation. The house was again destroyed. Undaunted, the Shawaamrehs, along with Israeli, Palestinian, and international peace activists, rebuilt the home. Today, Salim’s house is known in the area as "the house that peace built" because of the spirit of cooperation that prevailed during it’s construction. It stands as a symbol of the desire of all Palestinians and Israelis to live in peace and equity." Contact: Quaker Service Bulletin, 1501 Cherry Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102, USA 6. Missile Defence and the Future of the Anti-Ballistic Missile System A notable but little publicised 3-day seminar on the above topic was held in Beijing in March of this year, hosted by the Chinese People’s association for Peace and Disarmament (CPAPD). The participants consisted of a high level group from chinese military, academic circles and government institutions and a delegation of ten guests from Europe. The latter were all members of the Oxford Research group (ORG), United Kingdom. At the conclusion of the seminar a summary was given by Ambassador Sha Zukang, Director-General of the Department of Arms Control and Disarmament, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, China. The Ambassador stated that missile defence systems might be able to give the US a temporary sense of "absolute security" but that such a sense of security would be nothing more than an illusion. Missile defence was not an answer to Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and missile threats. It could only lead to the upset of global strategic balance, the erosion of mutual trust and cooperation between major powers and the disruption of international as well as regional peace and stability. That would be detrimental to all countries, including the United States. Ambassador Sha concluded with the assertion that future progress in this area would depend on whether certain countries could "jettison their hegenomic mentality and practice; would respect the legitimate security interests of other countries, and make genuine efforts to maintain international and regional peace and security." Peace and security attained through international cooperation, the Ambassador maintained, was the only kind of peace and security that could benefit all countries. Participants included: Dr. Frank Barnaby, Scientific Consultant to oxford Research Group, former Director, Swedish International peace Research Institute; Dr Scilla Elworthy, Director, Oxford Research Group; air Marshall Sir Timothy Garden, former assistant Chief of Defence Staff and Director of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, UK; Professor Gu Guolian, Director of the Centre for Arms Control & Non-proliferation Studies, Chinese Academy of social Sciences; Ambassador Sha Zukang, Director-General of the Department of Arms Control and Disarmament, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, China; Professor Van Xuetong, Director, Chinese Foreign Policy Research Centre, Institute for Contemporary International Relations, China. A full report on this seminar is to be found in the publication "PEACE", June 2000, serial no. 55, Special Issue for the CPAPD/ORG Seminar PO Box 188, Beijing, 100036 China. Russia-China Summit The Beijing summit meeting between Russian President Vladiimir Putin and President Jian Zemin of China in late July underscored the strong opposition to United States’ plans for a missile defence shield at the March seminar. The joint statement issued by the two leaders warned of grave security consequences if the plans were to go ahead, not only to the national security of Russia and China and other countries but also to the international strategic stability of the United States itself. With its plans for the missile defence shield the US was, the statement maintained, seeking unilateral military and security advantages and would make a new arms race with China and russia inevitable. This view was also expressed by former Soviet President Mikhail Gobachev who, interviewed recently in New York, urged the US to engage more deeply in a partnership with Europe. In the interview Mr. Gorbachev criticised US Secretary of State Madelaine Albright’s reported remark that, in exceptional circumstances, the US would have the right to use military force unilaterally. "I don’t think" he said, "the world will accept this approach." The US gives as its reason for planning to build a missile shield its claim that North Korean missiles will be able to strike US cities by 2005 and it also fears the possibility of attacks from other "states of concern" such as Iran and Iraq. A Treatre Missile Defence (TMD) system would shield its troops and allies in Asia. Among the territories protected by such a system would be Taiwan, which China regards as a rebel province and has threatened to invade it if the island declares independence or stalls beyond China’s endurance over unification talks. Two recent failed attempts by the United States to hit and destroy "enemy warhead" in space can scarcely give the US Government reason for confidence in the building of such a missile defence system. But with the mind-set now prevalent in the United States, including the known support for such a system on the part of both presidential candidates, it would seem to be not so much a matter of if such a system will be deployed but when. High-level Russian officials have voiced a concern that the collapse of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty coinciding with the building of a US theatre missile defence system would entirely undermine disarmament agreements concluded over the past 30 years. This is denied by the United States, but many countries remain unconvinced about the feasibility, even the desirability of such a defence system and there is the need for the US to come up with more cogent arguments than hitherto in favour of the project, perceived to be serving the interest of the world as a whole, if strongly help contrary opinions are to be set at rest. 7. "Beat Swords Into Plowshares" Given the tragic history of Okinawa, when the eight wise men of the world meet there it would be particularly appropriate if they turned their minds, in this International Year of the Culture of Peace, to the subject of ridding the world of war and genocide. Confronted with a world that cannot be changed, reasonable people adapt and accommodate. But the turning points of history and progress in human civilisation have come from those who set out to change the world. This is a story about a group of unreasonable people who met recently to set up the Steering Committee of a group called Global Action to Prevent War. An International Coalition to Stop Armed Conflict and Genocide. War is as pervasive as the wish for peace is universal. Some of the most charismatic and influential personalities in human history – Gautama Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mahatma Gandhi – have preached the renunciation of force and the need to eliminate it from human relationships. The causes of war are many and complex. Our call to end it is single-minded and simple. Cynics insist that war is an inherent part of human society. To end war would be to end history. Maybe. But crime and poverty, too, have always been part of human history. Any political leader who admitted to giving up on the fight to end crime or poverty would quickly be returned to private life by voters. Paradoxically, in the case of war, those who seek to abolish it are the ones to be considered soft in the head. The 20th century illustrates the paradox only too well. On the one hand, we placed increasing normative, legislative and operational fetters on the right of the countries to go to war. For example on August 28, 1928, the Kellogg-Briand Pact was signed in Paris outlawing war. This was preceded by the League of Nations and followed by the United Nations. Yet the 20th century turned out to be the most murderous in human history with over 250 wars, including two world wars and the Cold War, and with more dead than in all previous wars of the past 2,000 years. This deadly situation must not continue into the new century. We already have the resources and the knowledge to cut the level of armed violence drastically and make war increasingly rare. What has been missing is a programme for the worldwide, systematic and continuing application of these resources and this knowledge. Global Action offers such a programme and is building a worldwide coalition of interested individuals, civil society organisations and governments to carry it out. For internal conflicts, we propose a broad array of conflict prevention measures t be applied by the UN, regional security organisations and international courts. For conflicts between neighbouring countries, Global Action proposed force reductions, defensively oriented changes in force structure and a set of confidence-building measures and constraints on force activities tailored to each situation. Major powers could cooperate in preventing smaller wars among others and undertake step-by-step cuts in their own conventional and nuclear forces. Global Action’s conflict-prevention and conventional-disarmament measures will promote nuclear disarmament. Countries like China, Russia and India are unlikely to relinquish nuclear weapons if the main effect of doing so is to reinforce the already large conventional superiority of the United States. Nuclear cuts will in turn facilitate conflict prevention and conventional disarmament. Other governments are not likely to slash their conventional armed forces unless convinced that nuclear weapons are on the one-way road to extinction. Global Action’s deliberate focus is on violent armed conflict. The world also faces fundamental crises of poverty, environmental degradation, and human-rights violations. All these challenges must be met before human security and a just peace can be achieved. To meet these challenges, many efforts must be pursued; no single campaign can deal with all of them. But efforts to address these global problems can and should complement and support one another. Progress toward the abolition of war will make it possible to focus remaining energy and efforts on resolving the fundamental structural problems. The costs of war for human development are truly horrific. The analogy we like is with domestic violence. Faced with incidents of violence within the family, the first and most urgent order of business is to stop the violence. Only then can we look at probably causes and possible solutions including, if necessary, separation and divorce. Global Action’s programme is as comprehensive and coherent as we can make it now. But it is evolving work in progress, incorporating many suggestions from participants; readers’ ideas are very welcome at www.globalactionpw.org. Though its component measures are practical and effective, the goal of Global Action is ambitious and cannot be achieved quickly. But sustained, coordinated efforts can turn killing fields into playing fields and rice fields. This article was specially written for The Japan Times by Ramesh Thaku, vice rector of the United Nations University in Tokyo, and founding member of the executive committee of Global Action, July 2000. 8. Creating a Culture of Peace – The UN and I "Blessed are the peacemakers – for they shall inherit the earth." This was the ironic caption on a cartoon commentary of the efforts of Barak and Arafat to reach a peace agreement. It caused me to wonder whether world peace was an impossible dream. Today war continues to wreak havoc in the lives of young and old, yet our current world leaders acknowledge the need for peace. Many believe the United Nations’ goal of developing a culture of world peace is achievable. We all recognise that war doesn’t just destroy, it also denies opportunity for personal growth, achievement and successful contribution to society. In their pursuit of peace our world leaders also acknowledge this. Fifty five years ago the desire for peaceful co-existence was the catalyst for the formation of the United Nations. The preamble of the UN Charter says it aspires to "reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights" as well as "faith in the dignity of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small". Yet today there are at least 20 war zones in our world. Russia, Israel, East Timor Zimbabwe and Iraq for example. The media brings into our own secure New Zealand world the graphic horrors of those wars – their bloodshed, destruction, consequent famine and social upheaval. Through its organisations UNICEF and WHO the UN is committed to picking up the pieces after war – providing war’s human casualties with access to food, health, welfare, education and hope. We can take pride in knowing that our New Zealand doctors, teachers and armed forces are actively supporting the UN in its role as peacekeepers in these troubled war zones. The UNHCR is responsible for the resettlement of refugees. We as New Zealanders are committed to accepting and integrating into our community structure many refugees who have been displaced by war. I believe, however, that the UN ideally, should not have to alleviate the desolation and adversity of war. Rather its efforts should focus on fostering a peaceful future. At my school there are currently students of 38 nationalities – many of these students my age come from war-torn countries. Within our school we have developed our own multicultural community. Through recognising that acceptance of individual difference is a prerequisite for harmony we have learned respect for each other’s beliefs and nurtured a culture of peaceful, supportive co-existence. This experience is enriching for us all, but perhaps more valuable is that we larn the rich rewards of acceptance, tolerance, and understanding. I believe that by becoming more aware of other cultures, our won existence is more fulfiled. This is surely the UN dream that in affirming faith in human rights we create a culture of peace and build the foundations for prosperity for all of us. If my school, a microcosm of the world community, is able to function in peace by recognising and valuing each culture, then the UN’s goals are surely achievable. They are not just dreams. We should all actively pursue them. If each of us can recognise, accept and value the differences in each other’s cultures, races and creeds then together we can forge greater, richer, more vibrant nations – nations which foster a culture of peace. As individuals we must make a personal commitment to promoting tolerance and understanding within our communities. We must learn to negotiate and to compromise as a means to resolving conflict. In the words of Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has". World peace is not an impossible dream. It is a realistic goal for the 21st century and one we should all work to achieve. Rebecca Rose, Fairfield College, Hamilton, NZ, winner of the United Nations Association of New Zealand Peace Award 2000. 9. International Year of Volunteers, 2001 (IYV 2001) The idea for an international year of volunteers emerged from discussion between various non-governmental organisations, among these the International Association for Volunteer Effort (IAVE) and the UN Volunteers Programme (UNV). it seems to them most appropriate that the role of volunteers and their services within the local and global community should be highlighted, discussed and enhanced as the world enters the 21st century. This eventually found its way to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and was placed on the agenda in July 1997. In its resolution (1977/44 of 22 July 1997) ECOSOC recommended to the United Nations Generally Assembly that their resolution be adopted and 2001 proclaimed the International Year of Volunteers. And so it came to be that the General Assembly formally passed a resolution in which it decided to take the action called for in the ECOSOC proposal. The idea has since gained increasing support from governments, national and international NGOs, and different UN bodies like UNICEP, UNESCO, UNAIDS, World Food Programme, UN High Commissioner for Refugees and many others, all agreeing that volunteer service is more than ever needed within the social, economic, cultural, humanitarian, peacebuilding and many other fields of human concern. IYV Objectives: Four main objectives have been identified: 1) Increased recognition. It is hoped that both national and local authorities will put in place effective mechanisms enabling them to consult with voluntary services thus benefiting from their rich resources of hands-on experience. Awards for "best practices" of individual, group, local community and national NGO could also be set up. 2) Increased facilitation. It is hoped that each society will look into how to encourage people to volunteer their services, whether short or long term; that the State will contribute by allowing its different training facilities to be used for volunteer efforts to "encourage technical competence, sound management and accountability in the volunteer sector." 3) Networking, through greater emphasis and use of the media, radio, TV and electronic media. 4) Promotion. More effort could be aimed at highlighting the importance of the work of the volunteer and creating a "climate of public and official opinion in even more supportive of voluntary action." The competence of professionalism of volunteers should be further stressed and the benefits accruing to society from their activities be emphasised. The UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, will inaugurate the International Year of Volunteers in New York on 5 December 2000, the International Volunteers Day. This will be followed by the XVIth International Association for Volunteers Effort (IAVE) World Conference which is being held in Amsterdam between 14-18 January 2001 on the theme "renewal and rejuvenation of voluntary work worldwide." For more information on the many conferences, meetings, and other agencies: Team IYV 2001. c/o UNV, Postfach 260 111, D-53153 Bonn, Germany, www.ivy2001.org. e-mail: Team@iyv2001.org 10. Voices of the Poor In March 2000 the World Bank published a study on the causes and effects of global poverty. This study, called "Voices of the Poor: can anyone hear us?" is based on the personal accounts of over 60,000 men and women in 60 countries. The book tells the reader of the daily struggles and aspirations of the poor; about the realities of living in poverty and what the poor need to improve their lives. The study is the result of ten years of intensive consultations with the poor, which it is hoped will aid and drive new World Bank policies effectively to reduce poverty. "Voices of the Poor" raises major challenges to both our institutions and to all who are concerned about poverty, says Clare Short, British International Development Secretary, in her foreword to the book. While the bottom line of poverty is constantly living with hunger, the study highlights the multidimensional structure of poverty "with its persistence linked to a web of recurring factors." Poverty has important psychological dimensions, says the study, such as a sense of dependency, humiliation, voicelessness and shame. Too many interactions with government representatives are "marred by rudeness and humiliation as the poor seek services such as health care, education for their children, social and relief assistance, police protection or justice from local authorities." This, together with their daily experiences with often corrupt civil servants, makes poor people mistrusting of governments and their officials, feeling that they could do much more to fill the needs of the poor. The study describes how households are crumbling under the stresses of poverty: "they can disintegrate as men, unable to adapt to their ‘failure’ to earn adequate incomes under harsh economic circumstances, often turn to alchoholism or domestic violence, leading to a breakdown of the family structure. In contrast, women tend to swallow their pride and do demeaning jobs or anything that puts food on the table for their children and husbands." Furthermore, according to the study, poverty can also erode social solidarity and social bonds which leads to increased lawlessness, violence and crime, to which the poor are most vulnerable. The author of "Voices of the Poor" is Deepa Narayan, Senior Social Development Specialist of the World Bank. "Around the world, poor people’s experiences highlight the role of power and social structures in determining who has opportunity and who is excluded", said Deepa Narayan. One of the priorities of the 21st century must be to create governance systems which include both local and global levels and which can respond adequately to the needs and concerns of the poor. But for this to happen, investment in their organisations is required so that they are able to negotiate directly with governments, NGOs, traders and international agencies. Source: Go Between 80. Contact: Ben Jones, Poverty Group, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network, World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433, US. email bjones@worldbank.org. 11. Towards a Culture of Peace It would seem an appropriate moment in time to remember and revive an initiative which emerged in the beginning of the 20th century, started by a Russian artist and archeologist, Nicholas Roerich. As a young man be became aware of the lack of respect and of the negligence with which humanity often let some of the most beautiful creations of its own making simply erode or be destroyed by weather or human warfare. Nicholas Roerich felt that the cultural heritage of each country was the treasures of the whole of humanity and that the concept of what constitutes cultural heritage needed to be broadened to include not just artistic but also educational and scientific expressions of creativity. After the first World War with all its human suffering and senseless destruction, Nicholas Roerich resolved to write a treaty in which his proposal for the protection of all cultural products and activities – with the help and advice of the legal profession- was clearly set out. This treaty was called the Roerich Pact. Nicholas Roerich also designed a banner of peace, which he envisaged would fly at all sites of cultural and historical value, clearly showing the neutrality of these places. Because of the similarity of intent of this Pact with its banner of Peace and that of the Red Cross and their symbol, the Roerich Pact was often called the Red Cross of Culture. The Roerich Pact movement spread through the nineteen-twenties and thirties and on the 15 April 1935, The Pact was signed by all the member states of the Pan-American Union, in Washington, in the presence of the then US President, Franklin Roosevelt. Later other countries also signed. Symbol of Banner for Peace Nicholas Roerich chose the symbol of the three dots enfolded in a circle because it has been used throughout the ages by humankind and appeared in cultures all over the world. Whether the interpretation is that of past, present and future within the womb of eternity; religion, science, and art making up the circle of culture; or any other interactive trinity of life, this symbol can be found throughout the Himalyan countries on the coat of arms of the Popes, on the breast of Christ in Hans Memling’s painting, on the shield of the Crusaders, in the Temple of Heaven in Beijin, on Samarkand’s cost of arms as well as on the pottery of the neolithic age. This symbol, whose origin seems beyond while also accompanying humankind on its long cultural pilgrimage, could therefore be seen as rightfully representing the protection of our cultural heritage and of our continuous journey towards a culture of peace. http://www.roerich.org/banner_of_peace.html "The Institute of the Heart will enter into the Society of Culture, because the heart is inseparable from culture." HEART, 1932 12. Earth Charter An Earth Charter has been in the making for the past eight years. More than 100,000 people from broad spectrum of the global community, including the environment business, politics, religion, and education, have participated in the deliberations, leading up toe the announcement, 14 March 2000 in Paris, of a comprehensive document of new global ethical guidelines. The Earth Charter bridges between the human rights and the rights of all other life forms, links material progress with moral progress and seeks to shape global responsibility for the deeply-rooted, economic and environmental problems that plague humanity, "the Earth Charter is a call for an awakening of universal responsibility" says Steven Rockefeller, chair of the Earth Charter drafting committee. The intention is for the Earth Charter to be presented to the United Nations in 2002, ten years after the UN Conference on Environment and Development, the socalled Rio Earth Summit. The first four guiding principles of the Charter are to: • respect Earth and life in all its diversity; • care for the community of life with understanding, compassion and love; • build democratic societies that are just, sustainable, participatory and peaceful; and • secure Earth’s bounty and beauty for present and future generations. Among the sponsoring organisations of the Earth Charter are the Earth Council and Green Cross International, founded by Mr. Gorbachev in 1993. Contact: Anne Glauber, Senior Vice-President, Ruder Finn, 301 East 57th Street, New York, NY 11002, US. email: glaubera@ruderfinn.com, www.earthcharter.org.
|
|
Many to Many a quarterly publication issued by Operation Peace through Unity Anthony Brooke and Gita Brooke, co-founders Te Rangi, 4 Allison Street, Wanganui 5001, New Zealand phone/fax: +64-6-345-5714 ~ e-mail: larrym@clear.net.nz OPTU is an accredited NGO in association with the UN Dept of Public Information |
Many to Many under the aegis of Operation Peace Through Unity is a communicating link between 'we, the peoples' of all nations, races, creeds and ideologies offering in the spirit of the preamble of the United Nations Charter an instrument for the furthering of better relationships based on deepening mutual understanding and the aspiration to promote unity and cooperation beyond all differences. |
