|
United Nations Non-Governmental Liaison Service |
||
|---|---|---|
|
||
|
|
NO 94 OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2002
| UN UPDATE | NGO NEWS | FOCUS |
|
Addressing the Security Council on 4 October 2002 to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the Committee
on Counter-Terrorism, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described terrorism as a global threat with
global impacts, whose consequences affect every aspect of the UN agenda. Excerpts from his speech
follow on page two. “Last autumn, to identify the long-term implications and broad policy dimensions of terrorism for
the United Nations, I set up a Policy Working Group on the United Nations and Terrorism. It combined
the expertise of key agencies, programmes and departments within the Organization with that of
independent specialists. On 28 June this year, the Group submitted a report, with recommendations on
steps that the United Nations can take. “The report, which I made public on 10 September, contains proposals for a strategic definition of
priorities to orient the Organization’s work in this complex field. I endorse the three-pronged
strategy suggested by the report. “When approaching issues related to terrorism, the United Nations will set itself three goals:
dissuasion, denial, and cooperation. “First, we must dissuade the would-be perpetrators of terror by setting effective norms and
implementing relevant legal instruments; by an active public information campaign; and by rallying
international consensus behind the fight against terrorism. To achieve effective dissuasion, it is
essential to remember that the fight against terrorism is above all a fight to preserve fundamental
rights and sustain the rule of law. “By their very nature, terrorist acts are grave violations of
human rights. Therefore, to pursue security at the expense of human rights is short-sighted,
self-contradictory, and, in the long run, self-defeating. In places where human rights and
democratic values are lacking, disaffected groups are more likely to opt for a path of violence, or
to sympathize with those who do. “Second, we must deny would-be terrorists the opportunity to
commit their dreadful acts. We can do this by supporting the efforts of the Counter-Terrorism
Committee to monitor compliance with Security Council resolution 1373; by greater efforts to
achieve disarmament—especially through strengthening global norms against the use or proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction; and by giving technical support to States seeking to curb the flow
of arms, funds, and technology to terrorist cells. “To be effective and sustainable, a strategy of denial must be
grounded in both international and domestic law. It is not good enough to sign the key international
instruments. We must implement them as well. “Given the levels of inhumanity to which modern-day terrorists have
descended, efforts to curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction have assumed new urgency.
“Other legal instruments, such as those that deal with transnational
crime, narcotics, and money laundering, are essential to denying sources of finance for terrorist
networks. States must ensure that these instruments are adopted and effectively applied. Moreover,
the struggle against terrorism demands closer analysis of its links with crime, narcotics, and the
illicit trade in weapons…. “Third, we must sustain cooperation in the struggle against terrorism
on as broad a basis as possible, while encouraging subregional, regional, and global organizations to
join forces in a common campaign. In overcoming as elusive a transnational threat as terrorism,
cooperation is essential. Fortunately, there has been some progress. The United Nations is committed
to working with international partners in the fight against terrorism, and to achieving unity of
purpose and action. “Just as terrorism must never be excused, so must genuine grievances never be ignored simply because
terrorism is committed in their name. It does not take away from the justice of a cause that a few
wicked men or women commit murder in its name. It only makes it more urgent that the cause is
addressed, the grievances heard, and the wrong put right. “As the United Nations unites to defeat terrorism in the months and
years ahead, we must act with equal determination to solve the political disputes and long-standing
conflicts which generate support for terrorism. To do so is not to reward terrorism or its
perpetrators; it is to deny them the opportunity to find refuge, in any cause, any country. Only then
can we truly say that the war on terrorism has been won.”
|
|||
|
The International Day for the Eradication of Poverty was commemorated
on 17 October. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in his message, calls upon “many actors” to work
together to defeat an “old enemy with many faces”—poverty. Below are excerpts from his message. “Two years ago, at the United Nations Millennium Summit, world
leaders recognized the global progress that had been achieved in the struggle for human development, but also
identified some of the serious impediments and threats—such as HIV/AIDS, conflict, and terrorism—that still
stand between humanity and the realization of its hopes for freedom from want and freedom from fear. They
responded by adopting the Millennium Declaration: a clear statement of values and priorities for action in the
new century. “Among those priorities, none was more important than the pledge they made
‘to spare no effort to free our fellow men, women and children from the abject and dehumanizing conditions of
extreme poverty.’ More specifically, they resolved that by 2015 they would: halve the proportions of the world’s
people living in extreme poverty and hunger and without safe drinking water; achieve universal access to
primary schooling and gender equality at all levels of education; reduce child mortality by two-thirds and
maternal mortality by three-quarters; halt the spread of HIV/AIDS and reduce the incidence of other major
diseases; integrate the principles of sustainable development into their policies; and forge a global
partnership for development. “This International Day for the Eradication of Poverty is an occasion for us all
to recommit ourselves to these Millennium Development Goals, and reflect on the progress—or lack of it—so far
achieved. “Overall, the world is not on track to meet the Millennium Development Goals by
2015. By the year 2000—the latest for which data are available—we should have been 40% of the way there. But
for most of the Millennium Development Goals, the global record shows that barely half that amount of progress
had been achieved. “Each country must find the right mix of policies—the one that suits its local
conditions. And the people of each country must insist that those policies be applied. “Let no one think that this applies only to developing countries. The developed
countries, too, must ensure that no part of their own population falls short. And they also have a special
global responsibility. They must deliver what they have promised: to open their markets fully to the products of
developing countries; to let them compete in the global market on fair terms; and to provide much more generous
development assistance. Without these things, many developing countries will be unable to reach the Millennium
Goals, however hard they try. “On this International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, let us recognize that
extreme poverty anywhere is a threat to human security everywhere. Let us recall that poverty is a denial of
human rights. For the first time in history, in this age of unprecedented wealth and technical prowess, we have
the power to save humanity from this shameful scourge. Let us summon the will to do it.”
|
|||
|
Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi has warned that Ethiopia faces a massive
food shortage caused by a worsening drought, calling the number of people affected by the crisis potentially
three times greater than the number of those affected in 1984, when nearly one million died. Officials say
six million Ethiopians are in need of food aid and millions more have barely recovered from the last famine
of a couple of years ago. Up to 15 million could face starvation in early 2003. According to estimates from the Disaster Preparedness and Prevention Committee
in Ethiopia, between 211,000 and 500,000 metric tonnes of food aid will be needed in the first quarter of 2003.
So far donors have pledged 120,000 metric tonnes. “Donor contributions have covered the most acute needs over recent months, but
by early next year the number of drought affected Ethiopians will rise dramatically—the food aid pledges
received so far are nowhere near enough,” said Georgia Shaver, World Food Programme
(WFP) Representative in
Ethiopia.
|
|||
| UNAIDS/WHO Release AIDS Epidemic Update 2002 | |||
|
According to a report issued by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
(UNAIDS) and the World Health Organization
(WHO), the HIV/AIDS epidemic is fuelling a widening and increasingly
deadly famine in Southern Africa. AIDS Epidemic Update 2002 says the African famine is a clear example of how
the impact of HIV/AIDS reaches beyond the loss of life and health care costs traditionally associated with the
disease. The report finds that AIDS-related deaths in a farm household cause crop output
to plummet—often by up to 60%. A 2002 study in central Malawi shows that about 70% of surveyed households have
suffered labour losses due to sickness, and household incomes also shrink, leaving people with less money to
buy food. The report indicates that seven million agricultural workers in 25 African countries have died of
AIDS since 1985. In 2001 alone, AIDS killed nearly 500,000 people—most of who were in their productive prime—in
the six predominantly agricultural countries threatened with famine (Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland,
Zambia, and Zimbabwe). “The famine is a tragic example of how this epidemic combines with other crises
to create even greater catastrophes,” said UNAIDS Executive Director Peter Piot. “What is happening today in
Southern Africa illustrates that AIDS cannot be addressed in isolation. Reponses to AIDS must take into account
that the epidemic has an impact in every economic and social sector.” The report finds that the world's fastest growing HIV/AIDS epidemic is currently
found in Eastern Europe and the Central Asian Republics. In 2002, there were an estimated 250,000 new infections,
bringing the total for the region to 1.2 million people living with HIV/AIDS. The report describes the epidemic’s
growth in some countries as “startling,” pointing to Uzbekistan where there were almost as many new infections
reported in the first six months of 2002 as in the entire previous decade. Several countries in Asia and the Pacific, including China, Indonesia and Papua New
Guinea, may also face huge growth in their epidemics. UNAIDS warns that 11 million more people will acquire HIV
in Asia by 2007 unless concerted and effective action is taken to increase access to HIV prevention and care in
the region, where the epidemic is still in its early phases. “We know there is a point in every country’s AIDS crisis where the epidemic breaks
out from especially vulnerable groups into the wider population,” said Gro Harlem Brundtland, WHO
Director-General. “This is a critical moment of opportunity and danger. Unless we see national prevention
initiatives championed by the highest level of government, the growth in infections can be unstoppable. We are at
this critical moment today in a number of countries in Eastern Europe, central, south and eastern Asia.” Globally, the report finds that 42 million people are now living with HIV, 5 million
were newly-infected in 2002, and 3.1 million people were killed by AIDS this year. In sub-Saharan Africa, the
epidemic continues to expand. An estimated 3.5 million new infections occurred in 2002, and 2.4 million Africans
died of the disease. In Asia, 7.2 million people are now living with HIV. The report identifies injecting drug
use as the main mode of HIV transmission in Eastern Europe, and in several countries in Asia, the Middle East and
North Africa. The report identifies several successes in the fight against AIDS, noting that
evidence from South Africa and Ethiopia indicates that the awareness campaigns and prevention programmes that have
been launched in recent years are starting to have an impact, particularly among young people. These trends follow
the reporting of similar findings in Zambia and Uganda. UNAIDS calculates that effective prevention and care programmes in low- and middle-in
come countries will require US$10.5 billion by 2005. Funding needs will then rise significantly so that by 2007
some US$15 billion a year will be needed to successfully combat AIDS—and that level would have to be maintained
for at least a decade thereafter, according to UNAIDS. Contact: Dominique de Santis, Press Officer, UNAIDS, 20 avenue Appia, CH-1211
Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/791 4509, fax +41-22/791 4898, e-mail <desantisd@unaids.org>, website
(www.unaids.org). Chris Powell, Information Officer, Family and Community Health, WHO, 20 avenue Appia,
CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/791 2888, e-mail <powellc@who.int>, website
(www.who.int/en).
|
| ||
| WFP Launches Africa Hunger Crisis Campaign | |||
|
In response to mounting concern among the general public about the vast hunger
crisis gripping the African continent, the UN World Food Programme (WFP), on 21 November 2002, announced a
global campaign to assist the more than 38 million people facing starvation. The Africa Hunger Alert campaign was created in reaction to spontaneous grassroots
initiatives originating among student communities in the United States and Canada, and which now stretch from
Europe to Hong Kong. WFP says the students and community groups have committed themselves to help generate an
international response to the catastrophic conditions in Africa, caused primarily by shifting weather patterns
and the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and, in some countries, political instability and failed economic policies. “By announcing the Africa Hunger Alert campaign, WFP is signalling its commitment
to link up with ordinary citizens to alert the international community to the enormity of the crisis faced by
millions of innocent men, women and children who run the very real risk of death by starvation,” said James
T. Morris, WFP Executive Director. “We appeal to governments, private charities, non-governmental organizations,
citizens’ groups and everyone who cares about fundamental human decency to join this campaign. The scope and
depth of this crisis is unprecedented and it will require an unprecedented and urgent response.” The hunger crisis in Africa has grown particularly acute in the wake of two major
emergencies this year—in the Southern Africa region and in the Horn of Africa. In the six countries of Southern
Africa - Malawi, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Lesotho, Swaziland and Mozambique - almost 15 million people are threatened
by starvation. In Ethiopia and Eritrea an additional 11-15 million are at risk—and the number could go higher.
WFP is just one participant in the Africa Hunger Alert campaign, formally launched
on 16 December, and which will run for at least three months. The WFP website
(www.wfp.org/AfricaHungerAlert)
will provide information on the crisis that can be instrumental in lobbying governments into action.
Participating organizations will be able to promote their activities and ideas on a bulletin board on the
website. The website will also give updates on how much money has been raised from governments and individuals,
and how it is being used. “Right now in Africa we are confronted with a fundamental choice,” Mr. Morris said.
“We no longer have the luxury of making things better. The issue is whether we can prevent the situation from
getting worse. The stark fact is that 38 million human beings are threatened by starvation.” Contact: Caroline Hurford, Public Affairs Officer, WFP, Via Cesare Giulio
Viola 68, I-00148 Rome, Italy, telephone +39-06/6513 2330, fax + 39-09/6513 2840,
e-mail <caroline.hurford@wfp.org>, website
(www.wfp.org). |
| ||
| GA President Observes World AIDS Day | |||
|
President of the fifty-seventh session of
the United Nations General Assembly, Jan Kavan (Czech Republic), in his
message observing World AIDS Day on 1 December, said that the stigma and
discrimination that accompany HIV/AIDS contributes to the devastating
epidemic. Below is his message. “The HIV/AIDS epidemic is the most devastating and challenging of
epidemics faced by mankind. Its rapid spread across the globe and the
stigma and discrimination accompanying the disease, has already taken a
major toll in human lives. It is the fourth largest global killer. Its
impact on entire households, on the economy, on health workers, on
education, on enterprises and development, is potentially catastrophic. It
is not an epidemic that seems to have a natural course of coming to an end.
The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) has categorized
this status of the epidemic as an “early stage.” We, therefore, need to
work together globally at all levels and across all sectors to control this
epidemic and bring it to an end. “The deep personal commitment of the Secretary-General, and the UN
General Assembly in engaging the world leaders and society at the Special
Session on HIV/AIDS last year, has focused the world’s attention to
HIV/AIDS and generated a global resolve to effectively fight this epidemic.
Many countries that were previously in denial that this epidemic existed in
their territories, have now openly acknowledged the problem and are joining
the world community to arrest its spread. “There are over 42 million adults and children living with AIDS, of which
some 14 million are orphaned children. The current projections estimate
that an additional 45 million persons could become infected with HIV in the
next eight years if the pandemic is unchecked. These horrific statistics
speak for themselves. The stigma attached to HIV/AIDS and the
discrimination against those suffering from the disease, are still keeping
many nations and communities in denial of acknowledging this epidemic in
their midst, contributing to its spread and further loss of life. The
disavowal of HIV/AIDS victims by society in these communities, ranges from
refusal of health care services to eviction from their homes. The World
Aids Day campaign aims to focus on all elements that play a part in
effective prevention and care to arrest the spread of the disease. “The Declaration of Commitment that emanated from the UN General Assembly
Special Session on HIV/AIDS, provides specific guidelines for governments
to follow and act upon. There is a determined commitment amongst the UN
family, including through the work of UNAIDS, to enhance coordination and
transparency and mobilize the world community to this challenge.” |
|||
| FAO, WFP Commemorates World Food Day | |||
|
On 16 October 2002, some 150 countries around the world observed World Food Day,
which marks the anniversary of the founding of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) on that day in
1945. This year’s theme was “Water: Source of Food Security”. During a ceremony at FAO headquarters in Rome,
FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf and Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez both stressed the importance of water
in achieving sustainable food production. Dr. Diouf pointed out that “careful water management will be crucial to grow
the food we all need to lead productive and healthy lives,” while noting that world population is expected to
rise to eight billion in 30 years. “The combined vicious impact of poverty, rising demand for food and
insufficient availability of water poses a serious challenge for world food security and universal access to
clean water,” he stressed. In his address, President Chávez condemned what he called “wild capitalism and
immorality,” saying that “the root of poverty, hunger, water pollution is the economic model imposed on the
world.” He deplored “the absence of an ethical approach” and the fact that “rich countries are imposing
standards and norms on poor countries” while maintaining subsidies to farmers in industrialized countries.
Commenting on the outcomes of the Johannesburg Summit on sustainable
development and other major world gatherings, the Venezuelan President said: “We are miles away from the goals
we set to ourselves. If we simply make speeches and produce documents we are not acknowledging reality.” He
also made reference to his proposal to establish an international humanitarian fund to relieve the debt burden
of developing countries and devote significant funding to urgent food and water development programmes. Also on World Food Day, the UN World Food Programme expressed deep concern
about its inability to respond fully to ever-mounting hunger crises, despite the generosity of donor countries
and efforts by relief workers. “This disturbing new phenomenon is not simply a lack of cash, though funding
for humanitarian emergencies is never easy to secure,” said WFP Executive Director James Morris. “The main
challenge comes from a surge in new needs, driven primarily by weather-related disasters and by HIV/AIDS.” WFP says extreme weather has intensified its role in current crises: in
Southern Africa, drought is the prime cause of hunger, which is now threatening an estimated 14.4 million
people, according to a recent assessment. At the same time, another serious drought is looming over the Horn
of Africa where the figure of those at risk in Ethiopia alone has unexpectedly jumped to between
10-14 million. WFP says that civil unrest in the Ivory Coast could affect up to four million
people unless a peaceful solution is found, while in Mauritania, drought is already causing serious hardship
and is spreading to five neighbouring countries, affecting up to 1.5 million people. In Central America, over 1.5 million people have seen their food supplies
wither because of drought, while Asia is battling with floods. In Afghanistan, four years of drought and
conflict are still wreaking havoc on the lives of almost ten million people. WFP also warns that its operation in North Korea to reach 6.4 million people,
where agricultural production is limited not only by unfavourable weather but also by adverse policies, is
under funded, leading to reduced rations for three million hungry women, children and elderly people, with a
further 1.5 million people likely to be cut off in January 2003. “The combined needs of roughly 50 million people cannot be shrugged off. Nor
can the needs of 300 million hungry children, who either go to school and don’t get a meal or don't go to
school at all,” Mr. Morris said. Contact: John Riddle, Information Officer, FAO, Viale delle Terme di
Caracalla, I-00100 Rome, Italy, telephone +39-06/5705, fax +39-06/5705 3699, e-mail <john.riddle@fao.org>,
website (www.fao.org). Caroline Hurford, Public Affairs Officer, WFP, Via Cesare Giulio Viola 68,
I-00148 Rome, Italy, telephone +39-06/6513 2330, fax + 39-09/6513 2840, e-mail <caroline.hurford@wfp.org>,
website (www.wfp.org).
|
|||
| WHO Releases Study on GM Foods | |||
|
The World Health Organization (WHO) has released a document, entitled 20
Questions on Genetically Modified Foods, which addresses key concerns over genetically modified (GM) foods and
crops, in response to requests from Southern African Governments for further information on the safety of GM
food, in light of the region’s food crisis and the issue of GM food aid (see Go Between
93). “Persistent concerns have been raised over the safety of GM maize, and this
has seriously jeopardized the delivery of food aid to vulnerable people that require it urgently across
Southern Africa,” Ana Dias Lourenco, Angola’s Planning Minister, said. Meeting in early October in Angola for
the Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), ministers
from the six affected countries—Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Lesotho and Swaziland—failed to agree on
the issue of genetically modified foods. However, the Summit’s outcome notes “Member States are at liberty to take a
position to accept or reject GMO [genetically modified organism] grain coming as food aid. In the event that a
Member State accepts this grain, it should undertake awareness campaigns to ensure that GMO maize is not
planted and also ensure that all GMO maize is milled into flour before any distribution to beneficiaries.
As a long-term measure, Member States should develop capacity to deal with GMO issues particularly for testing
and monitoring.” 20 Questions points out that individual GM foods and their safety must be
assessed on a case-by-case basis, making general statements on the safety of all GM foods “impossible.”
According to WHO, GM foods on the international market have passed risk assessments and are not likely to
present risks for human health, and “no effects on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption
of such foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved.” The document lists three main concerns about modifications to crop genes:
the possibility that such food could cause allergic reactions in some people, the transfer of modified genes
to those eating the food, and the possibility that modified genes could be spread to unmodified crops “in the
wild.” WHO said that these concerns can vary widely from place to place: “Depending on the region of the world,
people often have different attitudes to food. In addition to nutritional value, food often has societal and
historical connotations, and in some instances may have religious importance.” The safety assessment of GM foods generally investigates: direct health
effects (toxicity); tendencies to provoke allergic reaction; specific components thought to have nutritional
or toxic properties; the stability of the inserted gene; nutritional effects associated with genetic
modification; and any unintended effects which could result from the gene insertion. Issues of concern for the environment include: the capability of the GMO to
escape and potentially introduce the engineered genes into wild populations; the persistence of the gene after
the GMO has been harvested; the susceptibility of non-target organisms (e.g. insects which are not pests) to
the gene product; the stability of the gene; the reduction in the spectrum of other plants, including loss of
biodiversity; and increased use of chemicals in agriculture. WHO says the environmental safety aspects of GM
crops vary considerably according to local conditions. On the positive side, WHO reports that GM foods could help improve food
security through better protection from pests and drought, produce vaccines, and increase nutrient levels of
foods, and has announced that it plans to conduct a broader evaluation of GM foods, including a joint report
with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), to be
released in January 2003. 20 Questions is available online (www.who.int/ fsf/Gmfood/q&a.pdf). Contact: Jørgen Schlundt, Coordinator, Food Safety, WHO, 20 Avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland,
telephone +41-22/791 3445,fax +41-22/791 4807, e-mail <schlundtj@who.int>, website
(www.who.int). |
| ||
| BWC Ends Fifth Review Conference | |||
|
The Fifth Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on the
Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons
and on Their Destruction met in Geneva from 11-15 November 2002. It concluded with the adoption of a Final
Report outlining a new approach to combat the deliberate use of disease as a weapon, marking the end of a
year-long series of informal negotiations led by Conference President Tibor Tóth (Hungary). Last year, the Conference was suspended in the final hours of its last day
(7 December 2001) after the US proposed the termination of the Ad Hoc Group (AHG) in charge of negotiating a
verification Protocol to the Convention. States Parties hurriedly agreed to adjourn the Conference until
November 2002. Over the last several months, Western European States had been pushing for continued, regular
talks on measures to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). The US, however, had said in
September 2002 that BWC States Parties should meet for less than a day for the sole purpose of agreeing
to reconvene in four years for another review. Under the new agreement, adopted on 14 November 2002, States Parties to the
BWC are to meet for three annual week-long meetings, beginning in 2003, to promote “common understanding and
effective action” in five areas: —the adoption of national measures to implement the prohibitions set forth in
the Convention, including the enactment of penal legislation; Opinions on the decisions carried in the work plan were split. A number of
countries expressed disappointment over what they called the proposed Protocol's “inability” to strengthen the
BWC. Some criticized it for its lack of compliance measures, while others felt the decision carefully balanced
the views of all States Parties. Non-governmental arms control organizations gave the decision a mixed review.
Oliver Meier of the Washington-based Arms Control Association said, “The process outlined by Ambassador Tóth
would limit further international discussions to national and voluntary measures on bioweapons and would not
allow for the development of new, legally binding measures to prevent the development and production of
biological weapons.” A new NGO initiative, entitled the BioWeapons Prevention Project (BWPP), was
launched during the Conference. Jayantha Dhanapala, Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, welcomed
the initiative. Aimed at strengthening the norm against using disease as a weapon, BWPP will work to establish
a global monitoring network. Project activities are to include monitoring implementation by governments of
their legal and political obligations related to biological weapons, as well as other developments, publishing
findings to increase openness and transparency, and building a global network of civil society organizations
concerned with the threat of biological weapons. Contact: Richard Lennane, Secretary of the Fifth Review Conference of the
BWC, Department for Disarmament Affairs, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland,
telephone +41-22/917 2298, fax +41-22/917 0034, e-mail <rlennane@unog.ch>, website
(http://disarmament.un.org/wmd/bwc/index.html). Ditta Ciganikova, BWPP Project Coordinator, telephone +41-22/917 2699,
e-mail <bwcmonitor@hotmail.com>, website (www.bwpp.org ). |
| ||
| Climate Change: COP-8 Meets in New Dehli | |||
|
The eighth Conference of the Parties (COP-8) to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was held in New Delhi (India) from 23 October-1 November 2002. It brought
together over 4,300 participants from 167 States Parties, three observer States, 213 intergovernmental,
non-governmental and other observer organizations, and adopted a number of decisions on the procedures of the
Kyoto Protocol, expected to enter into force in early 2003. The Protocol commits developed countries to reduce
their overall emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHG) during the period 2008-2012. Throughout the meeting, Parties convened in negotiating groups, informal
consultations, plenary sessions and three high-level roundtables. COP-8 adopted decisions and conclusions on
improved guidelines for non-Annex I countries (which refers to developing countries) national communications;
issues under the financial mechanism; “good practices” in policies and measures; research and systematic
observation; cooperation with relevant international organizations; and methodological issues. Negotiation of the Delhi Declaration proved difficult and intense given the
difference between the positions of developing and most developed countries on GHG reductions, and the initial
draft of the Declaration did not contain a single reference to the Kyoto Protocol. Much of the debate focused
on the need for “further action” on combating climate change, in particular after the first commitment period
ending in 2012, including the role that developing countries should play in addressing climate change and what
commitments they should accept. In the end, a debate on post-2012 action was postponed and the Declaration did
not call for follow-up action, instead emphasizing the need for adaptation measures, sustainable development
and technology transfer. Three ministerial high-level round table discussions were held from 30-31
October, bringing together some 65 ministers. Speaking at one of the high-level segments, Indian Prime Minister
Atal Bihari Vajpayee said that while developing countries produce only a fraction of the greenhouse gases that
cause global warming, they will disproportionately bear the burden of the adverse impacts of climate change.
He said India and other developing countries have been demanding adaptation measures to tackle the problem
rather than make commitments on climate change mitigation beyond that included in the Convention. Steen Gade,
Director General of the Danish Environment Protection Agency and head of the European Union delegation, said
that what was important was that developing countries begin discussing mitigating measures before 2005 as
agreed under the Kyoto Protocol. On 1 November, Parties adopted the Delhi Declaration on Climate Change and
Sustainable Development. The US was the only industrialized country that expressed satisfaction with the final
declaration, saying it was a “balanced document for future course of action to deal with climate change.” Many
delegations were puzzled by the US’s volte-face concerning the commitments of non-Annex 1 countries. Indeed,
one of the reasons the Bush administration had pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol in March 2001 was that developing
countries did not have set targets for reducing GHG emissions. In its policy reversal, the US said it stressed
economic growth as the key to environmental progress, and cautioned against burdensome targets for developing
countries. Nigeria noted that the Declaration recognized the needs of the developing world and pointed the way to
new avenues of cooperation between the North and South. The EU, however, submitted a statement of concern, calling on all countries to
engage in a common dialogue with a view to further action consistent with the UNFCCC’s ultimate objective. EU
negotiators had hoped for a stronger Delhi Declaration that would incorporate commitments to reduce global warming
beyond 2012 by all Parties, whether developing or developed countries. The Declaration reaffirms development and poverty eradication as overriding
priorities in developing countries and implementation of UNFCCC commitments according to Parties’ common but
differentiated responsibilities, development priorities and circumstances. It promotes less polluting energy and
other innovative technologies while urging governments to promote technological advances, substantially increase
renewable energy resources, and promote the transfer of technologies that can help reduce GHG emissions in major
economic sectors. It also calls for early ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. The Declaration makes the Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) fully
operational. The CDM will channel private-sector investment into emissions-reduction projects in developing
countries, promoting sustainable development in these countries while offering industrialized governments credits
against their Kyoto targets. The first projects may be approved during the first quarter of 2003. “The New Delhi conference has achieved its main goals of further strengthening
international collaboration on climate change while meeting the requirements of sustainable development,” said
UNFCCC Executive Secretary Joke Waller-Hunter. “Now the spotlight must focus on action to accelerate the transition
to climate-friendly economies. Industrialized countries have only ten years to meet their Kyoto emissions
targets—and the evidence today is that most of them still have a great deal of work to do to reduce their
greenhouse gases,” she said. Italy will host COP-9 from 1-12 December 2003. Contact: Climate Change Secretariat, UNFCCC, PO Box 260 124, D-53153 Bonn, Germany,
telephone +49-228/815 1005, fax +49-228/815 1999, e-mail <press@unfccc.int>, website
(http://unfccc.int/cop8/).
|
| ||
| GA Considers Cloning Convention | |||
|
In December 2001, the General Assembly (GA) established an Ad Hoc Committee on an
International Convention against the Reproductive Cloning of Human Beings (see Go Between 90). A working group
(WG) of the GA’s Sixth Committee (Legal) met from 23-27 September 2002, and issued a report (A/C.6/57/L.4)
summarizing deliberations on the elaboration of a mandate for negotiating the international convention. The WG
has now begun the process of identifying the legal issues involved. According to Peter Tomka (Slovakia), Chair of both the Ad Hoc Committee and
the Sixth Committee WG, there is firm opposition to the reproductive cloning of human beings and general
agreement that it should be banned. Views differ, however, on the scope of the ban. France and Germany, with the support of many delegations, issued a proposal
favouring a convention banning reproductive cloning, sending a clear message that such cloning is “unethical,
intolerable and illegal.” These countries favour a pragmatic and principled step-by-step approach, first to
address reproductive cloning, and then to address the issue of therapeutic cloning. Delegations supporting
this approach said that it recognized the concerns, complex issues and conflicting views about both
therapeutic and experimental cloning, while still reflecting the consensus that reproductive cloning was
morally unacceptable. Germany further emphasized that since work on human cloning was already taking place,
it was crucial to elaborate a convention against it immediately, before a cloned baby could be brought to life.
An “all-out approach,” Germany argued, would not likely be acceptable to all delegations, and would result in
delays that would benefit only “irresponsible researchers, fraudulent doctors and obscure religious sects.”
An initiative led by Spain and the United States, among others, favoured a
convention calling for a comprehensive ban on both reproductive human cloning and on cloning for therapeutic
and experimental purposes. Since the technology for both is the same, these delegations maintained that a
partial ban would be ineffective and would send the wrong signal by implicitly authorizing the creation and
destruction of human embryos for experimentation. A partial ban on cloning, they said, would create legal
uncertainty. Chile and the Holy See Observer further emphasized that the distinction between reproductive and
other cloning masked the reality that a human being was being created for the purpose of destroying it to
produce embryonic stem cell lines or to carry out other experiments—techniques that they said raised profound
ethical and moral questions. Regardless of the purpose, Mr. Tomka said, it had been pointed out during
negotiations that human embryonic cloning conflicted with international legal norms protecting human dignity.
It had equally been pointed out that no avenues of medical benefit should be hastily cut off before there was
a proper understanding of them. It was unclear, for example, whether other cloning techniques, such as adult
stem cell research (which would not be covered by a ban), yielded the same benefits for medical science as
embryonic cells. Alternative approaches included a moratorium pending entry into force of a
convention; a permanent ban on reproductive cloning and a temporary one on therapeutic cloning to buy time for
study; and a two-tiered approaching focusing on reproductive cloning and containing provisions on other cloning
activities that Contracting Parties to the convention could opt in and out of. On 7 November the Sixth Committee agreed through its draft decision
(A/C.6//57/L.24) to convene a working group from 29 September-3 October 2003 in order to continue the work of
the Ad Hoc Committee on an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings begun
this year. Contact: Office of Legal Affairs, Room S-3460, United Nations, New York NY
10017, USA, fax +1-212/963 1963, website (www.un.org/law/cloning).
|
| ||
|
The UN General Assembly, through its Second Committee (Economic and Financial),
took up the agenda item of high-level intergovernmental consideration of financing for development (FFD) on 8
November 2002 to explore ways forward in following up the International Conference on Financing for Development,
held in Monterrey in March 2002. Delegations put forward a number of recommendations dealing with the two
principal arenas for follow-up, namely the annual “High-Level Dialogue between the Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC) and the Bretton Woods Institutions (BWIs),” scheduled for April 2003, and the General Assembly (GA)
“High-Level Dialogue on strengthening international economic cooperation for development through partnership,”
scheduled for the second half of 2003. Delegations also discussed UN secretariat support for FFD. While delegates agreed on the importance of the two meetings and follow-up in
general, a range of views was offered regarding the purposes they might serve. For example, the European Union
(EU), and Norway suggested that FFD and the GA High-Level Dialogue should be approached in a holistic manner to
be considered by an ad hoc working group on integrated conference follow-up along with the Millennium Summit and
the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD, see NGLS Roundup 96). According to the representative of
Denmark, speaking on behalf of the EU, the GA High-Level dialogue should focus on implementation of the Monterrey
Consensus and related issues, whereas the ECOSOC and the ECOSOC-BWI meeting should address coherence, coordination
and cooperation. The EU also suggested that inputs from the major stakeholders should be part of the
preparation for these meetings. The Ambassador of Venezuela, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 developing
countries and China (G-77/China) emphasized that follow-up on Financing for Development, while coordinated
with the follow-up of other conferences’ outcomes, should not be “distracted” and should remain focused on FFD
itself. To this end, he said the G-77/China was presenting three draft resolutions to the GA: one dealing with
the follow-up in all its aspects, according to decisions in the Monterrey Consensus; the second focusing on
the High-Level Dialogue established to review fulfillment of commitments; and the third to address secretariat
support. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) offered a number of suggestions regarding
the role of the GA High-Level Dialogue, which included establishing a working group to oversee the
implementation of specific proposals in the Monterrey Consensus. The representative of Saint Lucia, on behalf
of CARICOM, suggested the following issues to be taken up by the working group: formulating internationally
agreed codes of conduct and rules to regulate international financial markets and the consideration of a world
Financial Authority; monitoring official development assistance (ODA) contributions; establishing an
independent debt arbitration mechanism involving creditors, debtors, and independent experts to adjudicate and
pass judgement on debt reduction options; formulating an institutional framework with timetable commitments
aimed at increasing the level of cooperation on tax matters; formulating proposals for the full and effective
participation of developing countries in global economic decision making; formulating an intergovernmental
framework for the conduct and monitoring of partnerships; and formulating proposals for addressing the
declining terms of trade and instability of commodity prices. Contact: Oscar de Rojas, Executive Coordinator, Financing for Development
Secretariat, UN DESA, 2 UN Plaza, Room DC 2386, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963 2587,
fax +1-212/963 0443, e-mail <ffd2003@un.org>, website
(www.un.org/ffd).
|
| ||
| UNCTAD Releases World Investment Report 2002 | |||
|
The World Investment Report 2002 (WIR02), published by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), looks at emerging trends in foreign direct investment (FDI) and focuses on the role of transnational corporations (TNCs) in the export competitiveness of developing countries. Taking into consideration aspects such as FDI stock and flows, sales, value added, employment, profits, and research and development, the report also benchmarks the FDI performance and potential of host countries and looks at the largest TNCs. WIR02 notes that developed countries have borne the brunt of declining FDI
(59%), but developing countries have also suffered with a decline of 14%. At the same time, developing
countries and Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) economies are garnering a rising share of FDI overall. While
saying that the fall in FDI is likely to continue for most countries in 2002, the report anticipates that
“over the longer term, international production—production under the common governance of transnational
corporations (TNCs)—seems set to raise its share of global economic activity.” WIR02 introduces two new indices which have been calculated for 1988-1990 and
1998-2000: the Inward FDI Performance Index (the ratio of a country’s share in global FDI flows to its share
in global gross domestic product to measure performance), and the Inward FDI Potential Index (which uses a set
of economic and policy factors of importance to foreign investors to calculate potential). UNCTAD says that
when taken together, the two indices show how countries are performing relative to their potential. TNCs are playing a pervasive role in the exports of developing countries,
UNCTAD finds, and, in a number of countries, they account for a substantial share of all exports, and this is
especially true of “winner countries”—those boasting the largest gains in market share over the past decades.
Their export growth is directly or indirectly linked to the expansion of TNCs’ international production systems.
But although more and more countries are targeting export-oriented FDI, high shares in exports are not enough,
with the report saying that “exports must also be upgraded and involve local value added if this investment is to yield longer-term development gains.” The report finds that several concurrent trends are responsible for the
transformation of international production systems and networks, including globalization, liberalization and
technological innovation. These trends have intensified competitive pressures, forcing corporations to become
more efficient and to internationalize their operations, posing both opportunities and challenges for
developing countries. Contact: Erica Meltzer, Press Officer, Division on Investment, Technology
and Enterprise Development, UNCTAD, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland, telephone
+41-22/907 5365, fax +41-22/907 0194, e-mail <WIRteam@unctad.org>, website
(www.unctad.org).
|
|||
| WIDER-UN Report Calls for Reform | |||
|
A two-year study led by the World Institute for Development Economics Research
(WIDER) of the United Nations University
(UNU), entitled Governing Globalization: Issues and Institutions,
finds that there is an “urgent need” to reform the United Nations system and the Bretton Woods institutions,
and also to create institutions that are “missing.” Suggesting that “crises are the catalysts for change,” and citing the creation
of both the UN and the Bretton Woods institutions in the aftermath of a world war and a worldwide economic
depression as an example, Governing Globalization says the governance needs in terms of institutions and rules
have changed as old problems persist while new problems, such as globalization, have surfaced. The policy
brief also finds that changes in the world, particularly during the past decade, “have eroded the legitimacy,
the effectiveness and the credibility of the United Nations.” Pointing to an increase in the number of humanitarian crises, the report finds
that the response of the international community and of the UN system—in peace keeping, helping refugees,
clearing land mines, or supporting reconstruction—has been “ad hoc, inadequate, or simply not forthcoming,”
adding that there is no system in place to take care of or prevent complex humanitarian emergencies. The report
also says it is essential to increase the membership of the Security Council and to circumscribe its veto powers,
and that it is necessary to explore possibilities of independent financing. It calls for the establishment of a
volunteer peace force to provide a prompt, collective security response whenever emergencies arise. The report finds that globalization has reduced the power of national governments
in economics and politics without a corresponding increase in effective international cooperation, and calls for
the creation of an Economic Security Council to govern globalization and to act as an international regulatory
authority as necessary. The report finds that without effective international coordination, “international public
bads (such as international crime, or international trade in drugs, arms, organs and people) are bound to increase
while international public goods (such as world peace and sustainable development) are most likely to decrease,” and
calls for an international mechanism for cooperation between States that would facilitate coordinated action and
cooperative behaviour. The study also finds that there are two fundamental flaws in the performance
of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank: Deepak Nayyar, editor and co-author of the study, says it is time to “reform
the reformers,” and that there is a strong need to re-think conditionality which is often counter-productive,
and to dispense of the standardized package of policies “simply because one size does not fit all.” The study also suggests that a Global Peoples Assembly, modelled after the
European Parliament, should run parallel to the UN General Assembly to allow civil society to have a wider
voice. Contact: Ara Kazandjian, Media and Public Relations, World Institute for
Development Economics Research (WIDER) of the United Nations University, Katajanokanlaituri 6 B, 00160
Helsinki, Finland, telephone +358-961/599210, fax +358-961/599333, e-mail <ara@wider.unu.edu>, website
(www.wider.unu.edu).
|
|||
|
The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) has
released an update to the World Economic and Social Survey 2002, its annual analysis of developments in the
world economy and emerging policy issues. It contains forecasts of short-term global and regional economic
trends, reviews major developments in international trade, and discusses the net transfer of financial
resources of developing countries. The Survey also provides statistical tables, giving standardized data on
macro-economic, international trade and finance. Part One of this year’s Survey revolves mainly around the origin, depth,
strength and sustainability of the economic recovery under way in some major developed market economies and in
some developing countries. It also examines the question of symmetry, namely whether any upturn in developed
market economies will have similar repercussions on developing countries in 2002-2003. Part One also assesses
the global economic situation shaping up and its possible impact on international trade and finance, including
commodity prices. Part Two looks at public-private cooperation and examines the role governments
now play as the public sector gradually retreats from the direct production of goods and social services in
competitive markets, while the private sector expands its activity into areas that were widely considered the
State’s responsibility. Chapter V deals with the privatization process as a tool to forge changes in
the relation between the State and the market, and describes changes in the focus and nature of research and
development (R&D) due to privatization. Chapter VI analyzes the shifts in the agricultural sector as the
share of private investment in R&D increases, and notes changes in the utilities sector, becoming more and
more often the target for privatization programmes throughout the world. Chapter VII describes how increased
competition coupled with an effective regulatory scheme as part of a wider liberalization process could lead
to increased efficiency, better quality and a significant fall in the real price of electricity. Chapters VIII and IX focus on the private sector's involvement in human
resources development in education and health. They conclude that in both sectors, private participation has
been essential in complementing the public provision of these services. The Survey suggests that the public
sector should take steps to enhance its dual role as both an important provider and also an efficient regulator
to assure equal access, allocation and quality. Contact: Development Policy Analysis Division, DESA, Room DC2-2170,
United Nations, New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963 4838, fax +1-212/963 1061, website
(www.un.org/esa/analysis/ddpa.htm).
|
|||
|
Meeting in their annual session from 28-29 September 2002 in Washington DC, the
Boards of Governors of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) discussed implementation of the
strategies and decisions agreed at the International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD) in Monterrey
and the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) recently concluded in Johannesburg, as well as the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and issues around a debt restructuring mechanism. A topic high on the agenda of the International Monetary and Financial
Committee (IMFC) meeting was approaches to restructuring unsustainable sovereign debts of developing countries.
Just prior to the Annual Meetings, Jack Boorman, Special Advisor to the Managing Director of the IMF, laid out
the current status of the debate on this issue. He said that over the last year, since IMF Deputy Managing
Director Anne Krueger proposed the establishment of a Sovereign Debt Restructuring Mechanism (SDRM), attention
to the issue has grown as has clarity around its potential application for emerging market borrowers rather
than poorer countries. He said that there is now far wider understanding of the relevant issues in areas
including legal, behavioural, institutional, and political, among others. Mr. Boorman outlined the four current proposals being discussed: statutory
approach to establish a universal legal framework to facilitate negotiations between creditors and debtors;
broadening of collective action clauses (agreements whereby the majority of creditors can agree to debt
cancellation on behalf of others), possibly to include bank loans; a two-step process involving exchanging
outstanding debt for claims which include collective action clauses, which would then be used to facilitate a
restructuring agreement; and leaving the current system as it is. The IMFC has asked the Fund to consider these issues further and develop, for
consideration at the Spring Meeting in 2003, a concrete proposal for a statutory SDRM. Other issues taken up
by the IMFC included: IMF reform; strengthening corporate governance, accounting and auditing; implementation
of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD); private sector involvement in crisis resolution; and
the IMF’s new guidelines on conditionality. In its communiqué, the Development Committee said it would use its future
meetings to review, on a regular basis, progress of implementation of strategies and partnerships related to
FFD and WSSD through clear and measurable indicators. In this connection, the Committee also said that it
intended to have further discussions on global public goods. The Development Committee requested work in other
areas as well including trade, as it urged “intensified efforts” to mainstream trade in the development
dialogue with the World Bank’s members. The Committee said that it was essential for developed countries to
do more to open their markets and to eliminate trade-distorting subsidies for products that represent major
potential exports for developing countries, such as agriculture, textiles and clothing. It also stressed the
importance of continued efforts toward trade liberalization in developing countries and the minimization of
adjustment burdens on the poor. The Committee expressed its commitment to working on the implementation of
the Millennium Development Goals and said a clear framework was needed to identify responsibilities and
accountability by which progress can be regularly measured. While acknowledging the role of the United Nations
in monitoring the MDGs, the Committee requested the Bank and the Fund to develop their own proposals on
policies, actions and outcomes needed to achieve the MDGs, which would be presented at the Spring Meetings of
2003. Recalling the FFD, in which governments stressed the importance of greater
coherence, coordination and cooperation among multilateral organizations and the need to broaden and
strengthen participation of developing countries and countries in transition in international decision making
and norm-setting, the Committee requested the Bank and the Fund to prepare a background document for
consideration at the Spring Meeting. Contact: World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433, USA, telephone
+1-202/473 1000, fax +1-202/477 6391, website (www.worldbank.org).
|
|||
|
According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO), the amount of
toxic waste stemming from obsolete pesticides in Africa is higher than previously estimated. “Every African country has stockpiles of obsolete pesticides and associated
waste such as heavily contaminated soils and millions of containers. FAO estimates that the toxic waste in
Africa alone amounts to around 120,000 tonnes, with more than 500,000 tonnes worldwide,” said Alemayehu
Wodageneh, FAO expert on obsolete pesticides, during an expert meeting held in Rome in September. FAO says it
previously estimated the amount of obsolete pesticides in Africa at around 50,000 tonnes. “These pesticides seriously threaten the health of both rural and urban
populations, especially the poorest of the poor, and contribute to land degradation and water pollution,”
Mr. Wodageneh said, and an estimated 30% of the waste is believed to be persistent organic pollutants
(POPs). In nearly a decade, less than 5% of the estimated stockpiles have been
disposed of, and FAO, in collaboration with bilateral partners, says it has disposed of close to 3,000 tonnes
in more than ten countries in Africa and the Near East. FAO’s biggest clean-up project, in Ethiopia, currently
aims at the removal of over 3,000 tonnes. Despite the committed efforts of FAO and others to address the problem,
obsolete pesticides continue to accumulate. “In some countries we have been very successful in linking the
removal of pesticide waste with the improvement of pesticide controls and the promotion of sustainable pest
management alternatives. Unfortunately, on a regional or global level, it is probable that stockpiles of
obsolete pesticides are growing more quickly than they are being alleviated,” Mr. Wodageneh warned. A lack of resources, weak import controls, poor storage and stock management,
and a lack of training in appropriate pesticide use has added to the problem. FAO says that since no adequate
hazardous waste destruction facilities exist in Africa, waste has so far been shipped to a developed country
for high-temperature incineration at an average cost of US$3,500 per tonne of waste. The Africa Stockpiles Programme (ASP), launched in August 2002, and which
hopes to be functional during 2003, aims to clear all obsolete pesticides and contaminated waste in Africa in
the next 10-15 years and to promote prevention measures and capacity building. Total funds needed to cover the
ASP costs are expected to be US$200-250 million. Partners of the initiative so far include: the African
Development Bank, the chemical industry, FAO, the Global Environment Facility, Pesticide Action Network, the
United Nations Environment Programme, United Nations Industrial Development Organization, the World Bank,
World Wildlife Fund. FAO is slotted to play a key role in the technical aspects of the clean-up operations. In related news, the FAO Council, during its 123rd Session held from 28
October-2 November 2002 in Rome, revised its International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of
Pesticides. The Code promotes practices that minimize potential health and environmental risks associated with
pesticides, and addresses the life-cycle of pesticides: from their development, regulation, production,
management, packaging and labelling, to their distribution, application, use and control and disposal. The revised Code calls upon industry “to supply only pesticides of adequate
quality, and to pay special attention to the choice of pesticide formulations and to the presentation,
packaging and labelling in order to reduce risks to users and minimize adverse effects on the
environment.” The voluntary Code also promotes Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies
that reduce the reliance on pesticides. IPM emphasizes the growth of healthy crops and encourages natural
pest control systems. It also urges countries to prevent the accumulation of obsolete pesticides and used
pesticide containers, calling on the pesticide industry to assist in the disposal of toxic pesticide waste in
an environmentally sound manner. Contact: Alemayehu Wodageneh, Plant Protection Service, Pesticide
Management Unit, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, I-00100 Rome, Italy,
e-mail <Alemayehu.Wodageneh@FAO.Org>, website
(www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPP/Pesticid/Disposal/index_en.htm). Africa Stockpiles Programme website (www.africastockpiles.org/index.html).
|
|||
|
Stalled global disarmament efforts and heightened fears of terrorist use of
weapons of mass destruction (WMD) provided the backdrop for a series of roundtable discussions convened by the
Department of Disarmament Affairs (DDA) from 1-16 October 2002 at UN headquarters in New York. Designed to complement the general debate and thematic discussions of the
General Assembly’s First Committee (Disarmament and International Security), the roundtables offered a
comprehensive and in-depth look at issues such as: disarmament in conflict prevention; the impact of the
11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States on disarmament efforts; disarmament and non-proliferation
education; the weaponization of outer space; efforts to address the problem of conventional arms; and the
experience of Hiroshima as it relates to our common future. A roundtable on Strategies for the Implementation of the Recommendations of
the UN Study on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Education, hosted by DDA, the Government of Mexico and the
Hague Appeal for Peace Global Campaign for Education, began with the launch of the study itself, which was
prepared by a group of governmental experts appointed by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The study was
introduced by the Chair of the Group, Miguel Marín Bosch, Under-Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
of Mexico, who said he hoped it would serve to heighten the UN’s coordinating role in promoting disarmament
education, and would prompt governments to designate focal points to galvanize input of all players. The study builds upon and seeks to revitalize efforts at disarmament
education, which it considers an integral part of peace education. It tackles new elements such as the growth
in the significance of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and small arms, as well as gender
perspectives on security issues. Its main contribution is the 34 recommendations for action to be undertaken
by governments, regional organizations, the UN and other international organizations, as well as municipal and
religious leaders, ranging from the creation of education modules, resource guides and online programmes, to
the establishment of peace museums and peace parks. The study also seeks to establish close collaboration
between the experts and civil society, and educators and academic institutions mainly at the secondary and
tertiary levels of education. During the discussion, Jayantha Dhanapala, UN Under-Secretary-General for
Disarmament Affairs, underscored the importance of education as a gradual and powerful “force of change,”
highlighting four areas for emphasis: new aspects of multilateral disarmament, WMD and small arms; small arms
and post-conflict situations; gender dimensions of disarmament, and the importance of women to education (as
they make up the majority of teachers); and energizing academic efforts for the study of peace and non-violence. James Tanis, Vice President of the Bougainville Peoples Congress, a former
combatant himself in a large-scale rebellion that began literally with a box of matches, emphasized that “the
psychology of someone with a box of matches, a box cutter or a nuclear weapon is the same.” He underscored the
need to look to elements for peace-making in every culture, not just war-making, and to make use of those in
order to get past hatred. “Successful disarmament does not come from imposing one on the other,” he said,
“but rather by cooperation.” William Potter of the Monterey Institute of International Studies noted that
“we are addicted to quick-fix responses to crisis situations” and emphasized the critical role of education in
changing this. He emphasized the need to develop critical thinking, as well as empathy through simulation
exercises, so that “we begin to see the world through the eyes of others.” He suggested this as an exercise
for world leaders and concluded by quoting the Secretary-General: “Education is the most effective form of defense
spending.” Contact: Department for Disarmament Affairs, United Nations,
New York NY 10017, USA, telephone +1-212/963 7714, fax +1-212/963 1121,
website (www.disarmament.un.org/dda).
|
|||
|
The First Committee (Disarmament and International Security) met from 30
September-1 November 2002 at UN headquarters in New York with much of its focus centred on how to pursue
multilateralism in disarmament and non-proliferation negotiations. The Committee also continued discussions on:
nuclear weapons; conventional weapons; disarmament machinery; related matters of disarmament and international
security; and international security. The Chair of the Committee, Matia Mulumba Semakul Kiwanuka (Uganda), in his
opening statement, said the international security challenges on the agenda were “both wide and deep-wide, in
encompassing issues of global scope, and deep, in touching upon matters that affect human security at is very
roots.” He called on the Committee to “rekindle the spirit of multilateralism” that he said was vital in order
to address global threats. In his opening remarks, Jayantha Dhanapala, Under-Secretary-General for
Disarmament Affairs, said it was “sobering to consider the amount of work that remains to be done, especially
with respect to a longstanding agenda item in this Committee—the relationship between disarmament and
development,” and cited the recent World Summit in Johannesburg on Sustainable Development as a missed
opportunity to address the issue. “Though the Summit’s Implementation Plan referred to peace and security as
‘essential’ for sustainable development, it took no account of this year’s global military expenditure, now
estimated at over US$850 billion. Yet according to the [United Nations Development Programme] UNDP’s latest
Human Development Report, all of the Millennium Development Goals could be met if official development
assistance were increased by about US$50 billion—just a fraction of current military spending—and sustained at
that level.” Mr. Dhanapala continued, “Speaking before the States Parties attending the
2000 NPT [Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty] Review Conference, the Secretary-General warned of the accumulation
of ‘rust’ in the multilateral disarmament machinery. In an ominous response to this warning, the United
Nations Disarmament Commission failed to meet this year, the year it was to have commemorated its 50th
anniversary—while the Conference on Disarmament has just concluded its fourth successive session without any
consensus on a programme of work….Will this year 2002 be best remembered for merely being the 50th anniversary
of the birth of the hydrogen bomb, or for achieving something more positive for international peace and
security? The answer is, to a significant extent, in your hands,” the Under-Secretary-General concluded. The Committee spent several days debating and voting on resolutions concerning
nuclear, chemical and biological weapons disarmament, small arms, the Register of Conventional Weapons,
missiles and the work of the Conference on Disarmament, with the subject of nuclear disarmament dominating
the debate. A draft resolution, sponsored by India, calling for global efforts to prevent
terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction and their delivery means was approved by the Committee
while a draft resolution submitted by Iraq on the effects of depleted uranium in armaments, which would have
requested the UN Secretary-General to seek the views of States and relevant organizations on all aspects of
its use and report to the Assembly at its next session, was defeated. The New Agenda Coalition (NAC)—comprising Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico,
New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden—introduced a resolution calling for a nuclear-weapon-free world. The text
calls “upon nuclear-weapon States to undertake the necessary steps towards the seamless integration of all
five nuclear-weapon States into a process leading to the total elimination of nuclear weapons,” and was
approved by the Committee. The only resolution on nuclear disarmament to be adopted by consensus was one
put forth by the US and the Russian Federation welcoming their bilateral nuclear agreement, the
Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty, although some of the countries that joined the consensus expressed
serious reservations about the resolution. “Reductions in deployment and operational status cannot substitute
for irreversible cuts in, and the total elimination of, nuclear weapons,” the New Agenda Coalition cautioned. A draft on preventing terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction,
put forth by India, also achieved consensus. It “urges all Member States to undertake and strengthen national
measures, as appropriate, to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction, their means of
delivery and materials and technologies related to their manufacture, and invites them to inform the
Secretary-General, on a voluntary basis, of the measures taken in this regard.” The Disarmament Commission adopted a provisional agenda for its spring 2003
meeting, when it will consider two main topics: ways and means to achieve nuclear disarmament; and practical
confidence-building measures in the field of conventional arms. More information can be found online (www.un.org/ga/57/first/index.html).
|
|||
|
On 23 October the United Nations announced that the United Nations Mission in
Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH) will formally withdraw its peacekeeping mission from Bosnia-Herzegovina by the end
of the year, and the European Union Police Mission
(EUPM) will then take its place. On 12 July 2002, the UN
Security Council had approved the extension of UNMIBH’s mandate until 31 December 2002. Jacques Paul Klein, Special Representative of the Secretary-General, told the
Security Council that the draw down of the UN International Police Task Force (IPTF) and the gradual build-up of
the EUPM had been carefully coordinated, and was the largest police reform and restructuring operation in UN
history. He also welcomed the fact that the EUPM had agreed to give priority to the State Border Service, the
State Information and Protection Agency, and the maintenance of effective counter-trafficking measures, and that
it intended to take a “robust approach” to organized crime. Referring to the 5 October 2002 general and presidential elections in
Bosnia-Herzegovina as an “unqualified success,” Mr. Klein stressed “this is not a time for either pessimism or
complacency,” adding that the “parties’ strong showing does not mean the peace process will stop, but will present
a more challenging political environment that will require strong intervention and continued commitment by the
international community.” Mr. Klein said UNMIBH’s mission had reaffirmed three fundamental points: the
introduction of the rule of law in a post-conflict situation was the foundation for democracy, economic progress,
and an exit strategy for peacekeepers; reconciliation and healing were impossible if notorious war criminals were
not brought to justice; and unstable, dysfunctional societies and the detritus of war could not be allowed to
fester unattended, or to be abandoned in midstream. Two-hundred and seventy-two UN personnel lost their lives
during the decade-long mission. More information can be found on the UNMIBH website
(www.unmibh.org/index.asp).
|
|||
|
States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling,
Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (also known as the Ottawa Landmine
Convention) held their fourth annual meeting in Geneva from 16-20 September with more than 700 representatives
from 131 States, international and non-governmental organizations participating. The meeting discussed promoting adherence to the aims of the Convention by
armed, non-State actors and on how de-mining can be used as confidence building in peace processes after internal
and interstate conflicts. It also focused on the humanitarian aims of the Convention, including clearing mined
land, assisting victims, destroying stockpiled mines and making the ban on anti-personnel mines universal. “Together we have achieved a great deal in implementing the Convention and
promoting its universal acceptance. However, between now and the Convention’s first Review Conference in 2004,
additional efforts will be required to ensure that the Convention lives up to its humanitarian promise,” said
Ambassador Jean Lint (Belgium), President of the fourth meeting. States Parties placed a strong emphasis on meeting the four-year deadline for
destroying stockpiled mines and the ten-year deadline for clearing mined land. The first deadlines for stockpile
destruction occur on 1 March 2003. “With important deadlines approaching for the destruction of stockpiled mines
and mine clearance, we must redouble our efforts to ensure full implementation of this important humanitarian
instrument,” said Mr. Lint. “In this regard, I am particularly pleased that relevant actors have agreed to be
steadfast in ensuring that by the Review Conference a significant renewal of our collective commitment is made to
finish the job of eliminating anti-personnel mines.” Delegates also highlighted the necessity of providing assistance to landmine
survivors, noting that 15,000-20,000 landmine victims are added each year to the hundreds of thousands who
already live with the disabilities caused by mines. By the close of the meeting, 128 States had acceded to the
Convention, which entered into force on 1 March 1999. States Parties reported having destroyed more than 27
million stockpiled anti-personnel mines. The Fifth Meeting of States Parties will be held in Bangkok (Thailand),
from 15-19 September 2003. During the meeting, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) launched
its fourth annual report, which finds that the export of antipersonnel landmines has nearly ceased, the number of
countries producing the weapon has decreased from 55 to 14, mine action programmes have expanded, there are fewer
new mine casualties than in the past, and the use of antipersonnel mines has fallen off. Landmine Monitor Report 2002: Towards a Mine-Free World notes that eight countries
have become States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty since the last annual report, including three that have recently
used antipersonnel mines but now disapprove the weapon--Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Eritrea.
More than a dozen governments have pledged to join in the near future, including Afghanistan, Greece, Indonesia,
Turkey, and Yugoslavia. ICBL has singled out non-treaty signatories India and Pakistan, saying that
since December 2001 both countries have engaged in massive new mine-laying operations along their common border,
resulting in numerous civilian casualties. New casualties due to landmines or unexploded ordnance (UXO) were reported in
69 countries in 2001, and the majority of these countries (46) were at peace, not war. At least 7,987 new
casualties were reported in 2001, roughly the same number as in 2000, but many casualties continue to go
unreported, ICBL says. The 922-page Landmine Monitor Report 2002 contains information on every country
of the world with respect to landmine ban policy, use, production, transfer, stockpiling, mine clearance, mine
risk education, landmine casualties, and survivor assistance. It not only reports on States Parties and their
treaty obligations, but looks at signatory States and non-signatories as well. The Landmine Monitor initiative is coordinated by a group of five ICBL
organizations including Human Rights Watch, as the lead organization, and Handicap International Belgium,
Kenya Coalition Against Landmines, Mines Action Canada, and Norwegian People’s Aid. Contact: Conventional Arms Branch, Department for Disarmament Affairs, United
Nations, New York NY 10017, USA, fax +1-212/963 1121, website (www.un.org/Depts/dda). ICBL, care of Human Rights Watch, 1630 Connecticut Ave, Suite 500, Washington
DC 20009, USA, telephone +1-202/612 4351, fax +1-202/612 4333, e-mail <lm@icbl.org>, website
(www.icbl.org/lm/2002/).
|
|||
|
The World Health Organization (WHO) has released its World Health Report 2002:
Preventing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life, which identifies major risks to human health and examines a range of
methods to reduce them. WHO Director-General Gro Harlem Brundtland, describing the report as a “global wake up
call,” says it provides a road map for how societies can tackle a wide range of preventable conditions that are
killing millions of people prematurely and robbing millions more of healthy life. The World Health Report finds that the top ten risks—tobacco; alcohol; unsafe
water, sanitation and hygiene; high cholesterol; indoor smoke from solid fuels; childhood and maternal
underweight; unsafe sex; high blood pressure; iron deficiency; and overweight/obesity—account for approximately
40% of the world’s 56 million deaths each year and one-third of global loss of healthy life years. The report
suggests that healthy life expectancy can be increased by 5-10 years if governments and individuals make combined
efforts against the major health risks in each region. The report finds the contrast between rich and poor people “shocking,” saying
the burden from many of the risks is borne almost exclusively by the developing world, while other risks have
already become global. Some 170 million children in poor countries are underweight, mainly from lack of food,
while more than one billion adults worldwide in middle-and-high-income countries alike are overweight or obese.
About half a million people in North America and Western Europe die from obesity-related diseases every year. WHO warns that the “cost of inaction is serious.” The report predicts that,
unless serious action is taken soon, by the year 2020 there will be nine million tobacco-related deaths,
compared to almost five million a year now; five million deaths attributable to overweight and obesity, compared
to three million now; and that the number of healthy life years lost by underweight children will be 110 million,
which, although lower than 130 million now, is still unacceptably high. “Globally, we need to achieve a much better balance between preventing disease
and merely treating its consequences,” says Christopher Murray, Executive Director of WHO’s Global Programme on
Evidence for Health Policy. “This can only come about with concerted action to identify and reduce major risks to
health.” The report lists a number of potential interventions that can be implemented on
an “à la carte basis, depending on each country’s individual circumstances.” WHO says governments must first be
able to assess and compare the magnitude of risks accurately in order to know which interventions and strategies
to use. The report makes a number of recommendations, including: Contact: Melinda Henry, Information Officer, World Health Organization, 20,
avenue Appia, CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone +41-22/791 2535, fax +41-22/791 4858,
e-mail <henrym@who.int>, website
(www.comminit.com/st2002/sld-6526.html).
|
|||
|
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2000 an estimated 1.6 million
people lost their lives to violence. Around half of these deaths were suicides (one death worldwide every 40
seconds), nearly one-third were homicides, and about one-fifth were casualties of armed conflict. The World
Report on Violence and Health says that violence is often “predictable and preventable” and urges countries to
take measures to avert violent deaths and injuries. The report addresses violence as a public health issue and examines its economic
consequences, finding that violence-related healthcare can account for up to 5% of some countries’ gross domestic
product (GDP), as is the case in Colombia. A 1992 study conducted in the US found that the yearly cost of
treating gunshot wounds to be US$126 billion, and cutting and stab wounds accounted for an additional US$51
billion. The 300-page report, complied by 170 experts worldwide, finds that women are
uniformly vulnerable to attacks. Researchers say violence against women in particular is “everywhere,” regardless
of income, religion or culture. Violence by partners accounts for up to 70% of female murder victims in Australia,
Canada, Israel, South Africa and the United States. In addition, 22% of women in the US, 58% in Turkey, 45% in
Ethiopia, and 29% in Canada say a partner has assaulted them at least once. The report says that in addition to death and disability, violence contributes
to a variety of other health consequences, including depression, alcohol and substance abuse, smoking, eating and
sleeping disorders, and HIV/AIDS infection and other sexually transmitted diseases. It also says that violence
results from an interplay of individual, relationship, community, and societal factors. The report examines the magnitude and impact of violence throughout the world;
identifies the key risk factors for violence; summarizes the types of intervention and policy responses that have
been tried and what is known about their effectiveness; and make recommendations for action at local, national,
and international levels. The report suggests that a science-based public health approach focused on
prevention may contribute to reducing violence. It calls for establishing national plans and policies for
violence prevention to help facilitate the collection of data to document and respond to the problem, to build
important partnerships with other sectors, and to ensure an adequate commitment of resources to prevention
efforts. It also calls for integrating violence prevention into social and educational policies, promoting and
monitoring adherence to international treaties, laws and other mechanisms to protect human rights, and seeking
practical, internationally agreed responses to the global drugs and arms trade. Contact: Department of Injuries and Violence Prevention, WHO, 20 Avenue Appia,
CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland, telephone + 41-22/791 3480, fax + 41-22/791 4332, website
(www5.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/main.cfm?s=0009).
|
|||
|
On 6 November, the International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the
Environment in War and Armed Conflict was celebrated. In his message commemorating the day, General Assembly President
Jan Kavan (Czech Republic) condemned the exploitation and destruction of nature during armed conflict. “This is the first year that we celebrate the International Day for Preventing the
Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict. The United Nations General Assembly established this day
in order to strengthen awareness and vigorously prevent or condemn warfare that deliberately exploits or destroys the
environment, which is our most precious and life sustaining global public good. It was, therefore, encouraging that
last year the international community established this Day to focus world attention on this issue. “We have to admit that the exploitation of nature as a tool in armed conflict is
nothing new in human history. In our past history, there are examples of setting fires, poisoning of water resources
or razing of crops or other forms of destroying the environment that were practised by warring parties to annihilate
livelihoods and inflict humiliation and defeat on the enemy. In the past, the destruction of the environment and
natural resources affected the civilian population disproportionately to the combatants or armies. In the current
and recent conflicts around various regions, with the advanc | |||