Global Leaders Rely on Right to Development to Balance World Economy
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
During the past decade, the so-called "right to development" has been promoted as an ideal to which developed nations should aspire for the benefit of individuals residing in developing countries. More recently, foreign policy analysts viewed the realization of the right to development as a tool to eliminate the extreme poverty that, in their view, leads individuals to embrace violent extremist ideologies and actions. Now, to remedy the financial impact of Europe's economic crisis, politicians and economists are viewing the international funding of the right to development as a means of growing the economies of developing countries so that they can purchase capital goods produced by developed countries. Most likely, this third formulation of the right to development will lead to the global governance of national economies and the imposition of international taxes to fund capital projects in developing countries.
This week, just as European Union officials were beginning to take seriously the need for austerity measures to solve Europe's financial crisis, World Bank President Robert Zoellick dangled before them the prospect that EU national economies can grow themselves out of the crisis. Mr. Zoellick commented that an acceleration of the existing shift towards a multi-polar global economy, one in which developing countries grow at a rate of more than twice that of high-income countries, can help developed countries work out their economic problems. In other words, through internationally-financed capital projects in developing countries that generate demand for capital goods produced in high-income countries, EU member states can reduce the painful and politically unmanageable fiscal adjustments associated with higher taxes and less government spending, including cuts in public sector employment and pension benefits. Thus, the European Social Model, a utopian vision of society that combines sustainable economic growth with ever-improving living and working conditions, can retain its special place in the hearts and minds of politicians, academics, journalists, and union leaders on both sides of the Atlantic.
For many years, the right to development agenda has been a staple of economic and human rights conferences and bureaucracies in major cities throughout the world:
* In New York, in 1986, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Right to Development, Article 4 of which provides that States have the duty to take steps, individually and collectively, to formulate international development policies with a view to facilitating the full realization of the right to development and that sustained action is required to promote more rapid development of developing countries.
* In Vienna, in 1993, the World Conference on Human Rights adopted the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action in which it reaffirmed the right to development as established in the Declaration on the Right to Development; encouraged the international community to promote effective international cooperation for the realization of the right to development and the elimination of obstacles to development; and noted that lasting progress towards the implementation of the right to development requires effective development practices at the national level, as well as equitable economic relations and a favorable economic environment at the international level.
* In Geneva, there is housed within the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights the Intergovernmental Working Group on the Right to Development created in 1998 by the UN Commission on Human Rights to monitor and review progress made in the promotion and implementation of the right to development as elaborated in the Declaration on the Right to Development.
* In Washington, the World Bank serves as one of the leading forces behind the realization of the right to development and a leading proponent of a balanced global economy, the case for which World Bank President Zoellick presented in his April 14, 2010 speech to the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars titled "The End of the Third World? Modernizing Multilateralism for a Multipolar World."
* In Paris, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ("OECD"), created in 1961, brings its 31 member countries from around the world together to support sustainable economic growth; boost employment; raise living standards; maintain financial stability; assist other countries' economic development; and contribute to growth in world trade.
During the past decade, the "right to development" agenda has shifted from a long-term concern about the material well-being of individuals, to a medium-term concern about eliminating extreme poverty to ward off violent extremist influences, to an immediate concern about generating demand for the purchase of capital goods so that affluent countries can survive economically. Perhaps this is why, since late 2009, U.S. leaders have been preaching the importance of promoting economic rights in developing countries.
* In a December 14, 2009 speech at Georgetown University, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that the U.S. "human rights agenda for the 21st century is to make human rights a human reality," including not only freedom from fear but also freedom "from the oppression of want-want of food, want of health, want of education, and the want of equality in law and in fact."
* President Barack Obama delivered a speech at West Point on May 22, 2010 in which he stated that "we have to shape an international order that can meet the challenges of our generation" and "build new partnerships, and shape stronger international standards and institutions." He explained that it is an international order "that can resolve the challenges of our times," including "combating a changing climate and sustaining global growth; helping countries feed themselves and care for their sick; preventing conflict and healing wounds."
* In a May 23, 2010 Yale University Class Day speech, former U.S. President Bill Clinton stated that the world "is too unstable; it is too unequal; and is completely unsustainable."
At the end of the day, the global governors have decided it makes sense to "re-balance" the global economy by promoting those economic rights in developing countries that will generate a demand for capital goods produced in the West. Thus, the right to food will dictate that investments be made in agricultural machinery and conservation and land management consulting services; the right to water will dictate that investments be made in state-of-the-art irrigation equipment and engineering services; the right to health care will dictate that investments be made in hospitals, medical equipment, and health care consulting services; and the right to education will require the building of schools, the purchase of buses and books, and education consulting services. Most likely, these investments will be financed through global taxes on financial transactions, carbon emissions, and Internet activity, among other things.
Coincidentally, it will be up to the global governors who are advocating for this shift to actually plan, promote, regulate, and enforce the program for a balanced world economy. National governments will have to submit their proposed economic plans to a central international authority for review, comment, and revision to conform to the global economic order. Along these lines, on May 13, 2010, the European Commission proposed that EU governments submit their budgets to Brussels for review by their fellow governments before they are passed by national governments. A few days later, European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet joined the call for collectively managed public finances: "There needs to be major improvements [in fiscal coordination] to prevent bad behavior, to ensure effective implementation of the recommendations made by peers, and real and effective sanctions in case of breaches." Of course, all EU countries, not just the failing economies of Greece, Spain, and Portugal, will have to submit their plans so that balance, equality, and sustainability are achieved on a global scale.
The EU national budget review process will be the model for the international agency ultimately responsible for implementing such a practice on a global scale. Most likely, it will be the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") to whom all countries will have to submit their proposed budgets for review and amendment before passage by their national legislative bodies.
Thus survives the European dream of a new world order, where the EU is a global superpower that ranks alongside the U.S. and China. However, instead of being an economic engine driving the global economy, the Brussels-based EU and its officials will be contributing their "talents" in government administration, economic regulation, taxation, and human rights advocacy at the global level. Thus, perhaps U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden was unduly and prematurely criticized for remarking at the EU Parliament in Brussels on May 6, 2010 that Brussels, "which serves as the capital of Belgium, the home of the European Union, and the headquarters of NATO . . . has its own legitimate claim" to the title of "capital of the free world."
Apparently, we are all now citizens of the world, and our capital is Brussels. Indeed, elections have consequences.
Jim Kelly is the President of Solidarity Center for Law and Justice, P.C., a public interest civil and human rights law firm based in Atlanta, Georgia. The opinions expressed herein are his own.
A JOINT PROGRAM OF
