[Article] World Bank critical of war on terror

Victor

Holy bank-loans Batman, the World Bank going against American policy? Now that is a surprise. this reads more like something from a bunch of (sober) hippies than the world bank.

World Bank critical of war on terror
From:Reuters
Wednesday, 29th October, 2003
By Jeremy Lovell

LONDON (Reuters) - The short-term focus on military action to bring stability in the U.S.-led war on terror is undermining the long-term task of tackling the causes rather than the consequences of poverty, a World Bank expert says.

"The war on terror is shifting attention away from making globalisation work for all. It is undermining our ability to drive forward a responsible globalisation," World Bank Environment Director Kristalina Georgieva told Reuters on Wednesday.

"We need prevention rather than reaction, yet we focus not on the causes but on the cures.

"Money has an opportunity cost. Money that goes to one place doesn't go to another. The focus on Iraq in terms of those in equally serious or even more serious development need is an issue to be faced," she said on the margins of the Environment 2003 conference in London.

Georgieva, a Bulgarian national who has spent a lifetime working on environment and development issues, pointed out that world governments annually spent some $600 billion on arms but just $50 billion on development aid.

"For us to make a real dent in the problem of long term environmental sustainability, a conservative estimate would be that we need probably somewhere between $65-$85 billion a year plus another $50-$70 billion for the Kyoto climate change challenge," she said.

While this might seem a large amount of money, it had to be seen in the context of a world economy worth some $40 trillion a year.

"If this is the price we need to pay for the future of our kids, is this really such a lot," she asked rhetorically.

She said the long-established divide between rich northern nations and poor southern states was becoming more entrenched and more complicated as divisions opened up between the southern hemisphere countries themselves.

Those countries that had embraced globalisation had seen all their people get richer while at the same time seeing the gap between rich and poor get wider.

On the other hand, those such as much of sub-Saharan Africa, which had failed to get aboard the globalisation gravy train were sinking without trace, to the extent that they were not even able to tackle their own problems.

Technology transfer could offer a solution, but historically almost every advance brought with it a downside so it should be adopted with caution.

What was needed was strong leadership through multilateral organisations, but just when it was needed most it was at its weakest for generations.

"What you see now is the growth of bilateralism unilateralism, clubism -- the G8s, G20s and so on. If you are not a member of a club you have no voice.

"That disenfranchises people who have no hope and nothing to care for. As Karl Marx said, if you have nothing, you have nothing to lose," Georgieva said. "That is dangerous."

Éomer of Rohan

ie US incompetence is highlighting the flaws in the system.

shotamoose

Just because a World Bank environment director criticises the war on terror doesn't mean it's official World Bank policy. The WB has made a habit of making comforting comments of this sort recently, but even though it has also improved somewhat in terms of its anti-poverty policies and practises, it is still for example refusing to cancel 100% of the debts owed to it by 'Highly Indebted Poor Countries', which it can easily afford to do. It would make a massive difference to reducing poverty in those countries, but they just won't even countenance it, and I don't understand why.

Those countries that had embraced globalisation had seen all their people get richer while at the same time seeing the gap between rich and poor get wider.

Not true. Many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America that have 'embraced globalisation', in the sense of lowering trade and investment barriers, have actually seen their incomes decline.