Wider international support for the
New Global Human OrderBy Odeen Ishmael
Guyana’s multilateralism achieved a signal honour in December 2007 when its resolution on the role of the United Nations in promoting the New Global Human Order (NGHO) was adopted by the UN General Assembly. This resolution follows two others on the same subject approved in 2000 and 2002.
It is clear from the adoption of this latest resolution that many ideas proposed by the New Global Human Order have taken deeper roots in the international community, especially among developing countries of the Americas, Africa, Asia and the Pacific. This is evidenced by the widespread support the resolution attracted, with more than 75 countries adding their names as co-sponsors. These included 33 Latin American and Caribbean nations making up the combined membership of Caricom and the Rio Group, and at least 30 from Africa. Significantly, the two most populous nations, China and India, as well as a number of other Asian and Pacific island states were among those that co-sponsored the resolution.
No doubt, the overwhelming co-sponsorship by the developing states of the South is significant since they feel that the NGHO initiatives promote in practical terms their fight against poverty and inequality and can help reduce the burdens of debt and dependency which suffocate their economic and social development.
The NGHO proposal was first enunciated in 1993 by the late Guyanese President Cheddi Jagan (1917-1997) in a letter to world leaders. Initially, some political and academic “experts” felt that the ideas promulgated in the proposal were utopian; that they would not gain support and would never engender serious discussions. Some even doubted that any government or multilateral institution would ever seriously try to implement the ideas for a long, long time.
But as President Jagan rightly pointed out, many ideas, which initially seemed utopian, eventually became accepted as realistic and practicable. As such, the Government of Guyana, since 1993, consistently propagated the proposal at all international forums, especially at the UN, OAS and other multilateral organisations. At first, it took some time for world leaders and governments to appreciate this fresh proposal coming from a Third World leader, but gradually – most likely because of Guyana’s persistence – many governments became interested, and over the years regional and international bodies such as Caricom, the Non-Aligned Movement and the Rio Group expressed their total support.
As the NGHO initiatives were refined and expanded over the past decade, some leaders from richer nations introduced their own parallel proposals with many of the same objectives. These include “Global Partnerships”, “Action Against Hunger and Poverty Initiative”, “Dialogue of Civilisations”, “World Solidarity Fund”, “Human Security”, and the “International Humanitarian Fund”. Even though these have not acquired international prominence as the NGHO, these initiatives have assisted in identifying and providing new resources to foster development cooperation, and in all respect, they can be seen as complementing the NGHO.
Basically, the NGHO calls for the mobilisation of concerted long-term global actions, within a holistic framework, to address development challenges and improve the well-being of people. These actions, aimed overall at the alleviation of poverty, include a commitment to sound policies; good governance at all levels and the rule of law; mobilising domestic resources and attracting international flows; assuring long-term investment in human capital and infrastructure; promoting international trade as an engine for economic growth and development; increasing international financial and technical cooperation for development; sustainable debt financing and external debt relief; and enhancing the coherence and consistency of the international monetary, financial and equitable trading systems.
They also demand a review of the role of the Bretton Woods Institutions and the WTO to focus more on human development; the reduction of military expenditures in favour of greater development spending and aid; the application of sound, sustainable environmental policies; creation of a Global Development Trust Fund; and the introduction of the “Tobin tax” of 0.05 percent on speculative transfer of currency.
All of these actions intend, in the final analysis, to promote partnership and cooperation among all nations for greater and more balanced economic and social progress, aimed at alleviating persistent poverty and under-development. Emphasising this, the UN resolution insists that primacy must be given to people in the development process to create an environment which encourages them to develop their potential and contribute meaningfully to their societies. It also recognises the disparities between rich and poor, both within and among countries, amidst current unprecedented global prosperity and notes that these have implications for the realisation of the Millennium Development Goals.
As a result, the resolution calls on the UN Secretary General to submit to the 65th session of the General Assembly (i.e., in 2010) a report on the implementation of the resolution including an assessment of the implications of inequality for development. It is expected that by that time, many plans will be operational, and the report should eventually establish a framework for a fair and equitable system of international social and economic relations.
For the Latin American and Caribbean countries, it is important that they work together to implement the NGHO initiatives to combat inequality and boost their human capital. In this respect, Guyana’s proposal for the establishment of a “corps of development volunteers”, first mooted by President Jagan in 1994 at the Summit of the Americas, should be revisited. This proposal was aimed at supplementing the work of the volunteer group known as the White Helmets (which is now managed by the UN) to assist in emergency situations in various countries. Jagan envisaged that the corps of specialist volunteers – teachers, health workers, engineers, scientists, etc. – would assist in special social and economic programmes throughout the Americas. While this proposal won unanimous support at the summit, it was never implemented. But, today, as new integration initiatives and cooperation expand across Latin America and the Caribbean, this proposal for the of development corps of volunteers may prove to be very useful for battling poverty, ignorance and disease in many of the countries of the region.
Already, some initiatives pertaining to debt relief and the provision of improved social infrastructure, improved trade regimes, as well as growing representative democracy, are being implemented in many countries, but much more still has to be done to improve the human situation in various parts of the planet. While the poorer nations must pool ideas and resources to assist each other, the UN must also assert its influence on the larger economies and multilateral financial institutions to provide tangible resources and other forms of assistance to ensure the implementation of at least some of the NGHO initiatives. The increased participation of the larger economies in this project will, no doubt, go a long way to reduce inequality and poverty for vast sections of the world’s population.
But since building the NGHO is an incremental process, the poorer countries of the Americas, Africa, Asia and the Pacific, which all stand to earn greater benefits, must place their own houses in order by taking actions which, in a large part, do not require substantial forms of external assistance. For a start, many of them must improve on democratic governance, make greater efforts to curb corruption, improve their justice system and enforce the rule of law. Surely, such actions will definitely set these nations on the road to realising at least some of the accrued benefits defined by the NGHO.
Caracas, 22 January 2008
(The writer is Guyana’s Ambassador to Venezuela. The views expressed are solely those of the writer.)
The Internationalisation of the New Global Human Order
by Eddi Rodney
Intensified and more extra-regionalised efforts to establish an adequate framework alternative that would sustain a global restructuring of economic and technological power, are more pronounced than these were in the immediately post Cold War situation.
In fact the crises of colonialist laissez-faire and statist capitalism in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, as well as in parts of political Europe reveal a world-wide trend. This in turn reflects firstly, that unilateralism of the George Bush II Administration is fuelling these crises by undermining international co-operation. And secondly social, political and ethnic based conflicts rooted in wide income disparities and resultant impoverishment, are becoming increasingly, direct threats to democracy and the implementation of anti-poverty programmes in Third World countries, in particular. Prominent economist such as Professor Paul Stiglita and others, some associated with the World Trade & Economic Forum at Davos have also concentrated more on the anti-poverty agenda and debate.
The recognition of Dr Cheddi Jagan’s ‘new partnership’ strategy - A New Global Human Order or NGHO - by the United Nations during the course of its program of activities, on December 17, 2007, is therefore a confirmation in the most concrete way, that the NGHO is a most advanced set of proposals.
Dr Jagan, it should be noted, identified globalisation as a historical paradigm; he viewed the development of the super - power concept in the post Cold War world, as one that signified amongst other things, a less influential role for the poor masses. I doubt that he was over-optimistic, or expectant that his reform package and ideas could be considered as “moderate” by the imperialist forces.
The dominant factors of a shift in balance of forces were evident. The results of rapid trans-national expansion into sectors of the Russian economy under Mr Boris Yeltsin, coupled with U.S. monopoly capital into Mexico, Canada and Latin America through the Enterprise of the Americas, meant that historically defined instruments of intervention available to the countries of the South were themselves becoming subject to more diffuse global practices and abuses. These could not work as during the period of Non-Aligned collaboration often with Soviet Union solidarity, to bring more or less variable terms of capital aid. That example was often stressed by Dr Jagan.
He gave examples such as Peru under the “Economic Miracle” associated Alberto Fujimori and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in the late 1980s and early 1990s. He also analysed how the Clinton Administration’s support for the big US corporations in terms of tax breaks had negative consequences inside the decision making centres and American government action and health care management for high density poor neighbourhoods in America. The decline of anti-poverty reforms coincided Dr Jagan argued, with the enrichment of elites in Latin America who had adopted the initial market strategies of the Free Trade Association of the Americas (FTAA). The reality was that the FTAA opened new job and capital markets that created adverse conditions for indigenous manufacturing sectors and tended to de-stabilise national currency movements against the US dollar. The result was dramatic outflows of capital (profit repatriation) and super salaries for swarms of foreign managers and other top level staff on risk investments – so called because of the uncertainty of both the market for relatively high -wage labour and the non existence of reform legislation that could act as a brake on US (and Canadian) trans-national take-overs.U.N Consensus and the proliferation of NGHO co-sponsors
As a specific set of principles and broad guidelines the NGHO as Janet Jagan correctly observed recently, posed the necessity for:
“a totally new approach which would address the debt problems and find new way of mobilising fresh resources to overcome underdevelopment, so as to enable the developing countries, in artnership with the developed countries, to play a more important and meaningful role in the global market place, currently characterised by rapid globalisation and trade liberalisation.” (Mirror 566/January, 2008).
The United Nations consensus text, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘recognises that inequality within and among countries is a concern for all countries regardless of their level of development - with multiple implications for the realisation of the internationally agreed development goals including the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
The ministry also stated that the number of co-sponsors of the UN General Assembly resolution has increased to seventy-five. The resolution was adopted following intense negotiations among member states of the UN.
Dr Jagan’s NGHO, I have said previously, requires deep reflection and analysis. Proceeding from the initiatives taken at the time and previous to the Georgetown Conference in 1996, as well as the series of symposia discussions held during 2006 to mark the 10th Anniversary of the Georgetown NGHO international event. Perhaps the Foreign Affairs Ministry may want to co-sponsor in collaboration with the University of Guyana and even the University of the West Indies, a number of continuing consultations on the UN consensus. It is this most recent development that requires some focus by Guyanese diplomats and trainee diplomats. Business leaders including those in the Chambers of Commerce across the country should become au fait with relevant sections of the NGHO UN consensus. Trade Union and Human Rights groups, farmers’ organisations and collegiate students all can learn and gain immensely from both the NGHO itself and the UN resolution adopted last December in New York.
Building a Continuous Feedback Loop
Written by Ron Cheong & Danny Doobay
June 11, 2009
Navin Chanderpal, Special Envoy for the President on Environment and Sustainable Development of Guyana was in Toronto to engage international discourse on the New Global Human Order (NGHO) initiative, and to expand the civic continuous feedback loop helping to flush out issues and move the concept forward.
The aim of this neural network of individual, organizations, students and academics is to eventually make NGHO a household term around the world. Tasked with devising creative methods to engendering global cooperation and assistance, the idea is not to allow the ideology of others to be a stumbling block, but to work in harmony with the essential premises on which those ideologies are based.
NGHO, the brain child of Dr. Jagan, is a practical blueprint for sustainable human development. At its core is the principle first articulated by Dr. Jagan’s friend and colleague the late Mahbub Ul Haq of Pakistan, that: there can be no sustainable development without Sustainable Human Development at its foundation. The blueprint further spells out the rationale for a NGHO, suggests methods of funding it and establishes social benchmarks that recipient nations should commit to.
In visionary statements in the mode of his stature as an internationalist whose thinking transcended national borders, Dr. Jagan sounded the alarm as far back as 1994 that contrary to the New World Order then being touted at the time, world systems were in disorder – not order. Needless to say, subsequent events and the current unprecedented Global Financial Crisis have validated his arguments.
Before his death, Dr. Jagan presented his NGHO concept at international conferences in Guyana and in Rome in 1996. From there it has gone on to UN, where support has grown from a handful of initial co-sponsors to more than 70 co-sponsors in 2007 including the two most populous countries China and India. And particular elements of Dr. Jagan’s blueprint have subsequently appeared in a three or four proposals put forward by other world leaders.
In his address to the NGHO conference in Guyana in 1996, Dr. Jagan made the case that there is enough to fulfill humanity’s basic needs, greatly reduce suffering and improve security for all:
The scientific and technological revolution and the information revolution have transformed our world to the point where mankind is in a position to expect universal prosperity. However, this great promise, especially with the ending of the sharp ideological/political confrontation of the cold war period, to meet man’s basic needs and provide individual and international security is far from being fulfilled.
Yet half of the world-population still lives on less than $2 a day. And 9 million children under five die annually from easily preventable diseases and malnutrition. When, just a 3% redirection in defense spending is all it would take to address this.
In Rome, a few months later Dr. Jagan further elabourated on the need for a framework of global governance especially in the wake of capital and technology intensive globalization, the benefits of which are largely skewed towards accruing to invested capital not people in general, which is further widening the gap within and between countries in both north and south:
As we approach a new century, the South is faced with aid cuts and the North with "jobless recovery" and "jobless growth." Consequently, we need a new global partnership for sustainable human development, good governance and a development strategy, which will provide the world with sufficient food to have such food resources equitably distributed. Poverty is the root cause of food insecurity and only its rapid and permanent elimination will produce improved economic and social relations for a more equitable world order.
In an increasingly globalised environment of disorder and confusion, there is little room for concepts of development which place prime emphasis on the promotion of narrow national interests above the common good of humanity. A stop must be put to an unjust global economic order; an order which robs the South of about US$500 billion annually in unjust, non-equivalent international trade; an order where the poor South finances the North with South to North capital outflows of US$418 billion in the 1982-90 period as debt payments - a sum equal to six Marshall Plans which provided aid for the rehabilitation of Europe after World War II. Those payments did not even include outflows from royalties, dividends, repatriated profits and underpaid raw material.
Globalization has also engendered a new form of colonialism where poorer and indebted countries of the south continue to pay the North with its most precious commodity, its human resources. Research indicates that 72% of graduates from the University of the West Indies and more than 80% the University of Guyana migrate north bound. This movement of qualified, skilled human resources follows a similar pattern for most countries of the south. Suffice to say that the free import of high quality labour, on the promise of a better quality of life, has replaced the 19 century’s sugar, bananas and coffee as new forms of tradable commodities, but with a difference. The supplying countries of the south get no direct compensation for this precious commodity.
Through his work and advocacy on these issues, Dr. Jagan succeeded in setting the stage for significant debt forgiveness for Guyana and other highly indebted nations. But the growing disparity between and within nations has continued, even as the world’s and north/south interdependence intensifies with globalization.
There therefore is an urgent need for consensus on global socioeconomic development that addresses in a coherent manner a number of international issues to provide economic security and Sustainable Human Development in the developing world.
For example, there has to be more empowerment of the U.N. And global governance needs to be strengthened – no one wants to see another breakdown in multilateralism like the invasion of Iraq, or another global credit crisis in which the international community is held hostage.
The mandates of institutions like the IMF and World Bank should be reviewed with respect to how much weight is given to the impact policies have on people. And on the environmental front, the burden of safeguarding and restoration should be borne more equitably. Countries whose own economic development was achieved at the cost of environmental degradation are now indignant over similar environmental mismanagement in the developing world.
Also, developing countries need more of a say in global policy making and autonomy in their own decisions locally. At the same time they have to demonstrate greater cohesion of their actions at international and local levels with a people centered and multi dimensional approach to poverty eradication with emphasis on vulnerable groups. Micro credits are needed to help lift people out of the poverty cycle. Systems of justice and the rule of law have to be strengthened.
These are hugely challenging issues, both at national levels and at an international level. But in Mr. Chanderpal’s words, this is Cheddi Jagan’s legacy and we are tasked with keeping Dr. Jagan’s vision of a New Global Human Order moving forward.
