Levels of international aid have been criticised as seriously insufficient for over 50 years, debt cancellation programs have failed to reach most developing countries, and the Millennium Development Goal for halving poverty will not be met by 2015. Without a fundamental restructuring of global economic priorities, the needs of the majority world will continue to be overshadowed by commercial interests.
High crude oil prices will more than offset the benefits of debt relief the Group of Eight rich nations gave to poor countries last year, and this year the G8 will make the situation worse by promoting more investment in fossil fuels, a new report warned on Wednesday.
Aid provided by rich governments needs to target poverty. Instead, one quarter of their aid – $20bn a year – funds expensive and often ineffective western consultants, research and training.
The huge pledges of aid, debt relief and trade reforms that were promised at last year's G8 conference at Gleneagles have not been delivered, according to a report by Action Aid.
The purpose of this essay is to show that: one, an historical debt exists, which is owed by the rich and developed countries of the North (Western Europe and North America) to the poor and underdeveloped countries of the South (Africa, Latin America and Asia); and two, unless that historical debt is paid back in part (given its magnitude, it would be impossible to reimburse it in full), humanity will not be able to build a ‘better world’, that is, a viable and sustainable world, in which sufficient levels of justice, liberty and peace exist.
An investigation into the inability of the current system of international aid to significantly reduce poverty over the past 35 years, with practical proposals for an alternative mechanism, based on economic sharing, which can rapidly foster self-sufficiency in the developing world.
Nothing in the world is as powerful as an idea whose time has come’ ~ Victor Hugo
Humanity must per force prey on itself, like monsters of the deep,’ said Albany in King Lear. For Emmanuel Levinas, ‘The inheritance of Abraham is not biological, but, above all, ethical.’ These two statements represent the two extremes, the good and the bad, of human experience. Some individuals, groups, and even nation-states, are close to the good end of the ‘stick’; others, far more numerous, are nearer to the bad end of it. That we need a better world is generally acknowledged.
In a recent conference on globalisation (in favour of it), one of the papers presented was entitled ‘Business for a Better World’. I thought that that was an indisputable sign that our present world needs mending. The awareness, or consciousness, of that reality is widespread: millions of people – in nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), in UN agencies, in church and charity groups, in international cooperation departments, and so on -- are presently involved in activities whose alleged purpose is to build a better world.
Almost daily, the United States and Europe brandish threats to impose economic sanctions or cut off development assistance unless some vulnerable government accepts their political strictures. The most recent threats are towards the new Hamas-led government in Palestine. Other recent example include threats vis-à-vis Chad, Ethiopia, Haiti, Kenya, Bolivia, Uganda, and long-standing sanctions against Myanmar.
