by Jules Evans | Jan 23, 2009 | Economics and development, Global Dashboard, Global system, London Summit
David Cameron yesterday warned that the UK could be forced to go cap in hand to the IMF, as it did in 1976 under chancellor Denis Healey. (This, by the way, at the launch of a new programme at Demos about ‘progressive conservatism’. Et tu, Demos?)
The question is, would the IMF have the cash. Click on more to read a story I recently wrote for my mag, www.emeafinance.com, which looks at the risk of the IMF running out of money in the next 18 months, and asks what the chances are of it receiving more funds from cash-rich G20 governments (answer: slim).
(more…)
by Mark Weston | Jan 23, 2009 | Africa, Economics and development
Photo courtesy flickr user mackz
Pat Buchanan’s American Conservative magazine has taken issue with my posts on using cash incentives to prevent HIV infection. The idea of giving people money in return for not contracting sexually transmitted diseases, Freddy Gray writes, “has a strong whiff of the Third Reich,” since it rewards the fit and punishes the unhealthy (given Buchanan’s long history of defending former Nazis, you’d have thought they’d approve!).
He then describes me as a racist, for suggesting that “the only way to stop black people from fornicating recklessly is to offer them a cash reward” (their words, not mine). Aside from the strong sense that Gray is interpreting what I wrote in the light of his own prejudices, it’s a bit rich for Buchanan’s mag to call others racist.
After all, isn’t this the guy who once said of South Africa that there was nothing wrong with white rule of a black majority? And who thinks America took the wrong side in the Second World War and that it would have been better if the “courageous genius” (um, and murderous racist?) Hitler had won?
Mind you, at least Buchanan’s magazine doesn’t describe me as homophobic for suggesting ways of tackling AIDS. That, after all, is his area. As he has famously said, “homosexuals have declared war on nature,” and “AIDS is nature’s retribution for violating the laws of nature.”
Given the American Conservative’s rich tradition of tolerance and goodwill to all men, I don’t know whether to feel outraged or proud at being the object of its ire!
by Richard Gowan | Jan 21, 2009 | Africa, Conflict and security
Last year, I wrote a couple of posts (here and here) warning of a rift between African countries and the West over how to administer peace and justice on the continent. That was coming out into the open over Darfur and Zimbabwe, forcing Western liberals to balance a commitment to “African ownership” with their desire to stay involved in African affairs. Now, a trenchant critique of “African solutions to African problems” rhetoric comes from Tsoeu Petlane, a South African scholar:
As we enter a New Year, we have to acknowledge that the “African solutions for African problems” approach has had some glaringly painful failures. The continuing crises in Somalia, in Zimbabwe, in Darfur and in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the surrounding Great Lakes region all demonstrate the weaknesses of the way “African solutions” have been implemented in 2008. These weaknesses must be addressed in 2009. The year ahead should be one of rethinking how Africa deals with problems in a manner that is effective and restores the continent’s image and initiative.
Petlane anatomizes the problem thus:
There are three key reasons for failure: an almost unquestioning adherence to protecting state sovereignty, dependency on forces outside the continent and lack of leadership. Together, these stifle innovation, limit the effectiveness of proposed solutions and alienate potential allies.
First, the continent’s endorsement of the leaders of collapsed or collapsing states such as Zimbabwe, Somalia and the DRC, far from promoting sovereignty, negates it.
Sovereignty resides in the people, who only delegate it to leaders. In a situation in which the expression of this sovereignty is denied the people, such as in Zimbabwe; where those entrusted with it are unable to exercise it practically, such as in the DRC; or where the institutions supporting it are in question, such as in Somalia, protecting a government makes no sense – it allows a regime to maintain a veneer of statehood only on the basis of recognition by others. Thinking beyond this paradigm is urgently needed.
Second, while African leaders appear united in calling for indigenous solutions, few have demonstrated a conceptual or practical commitment to the notion. Their initiatives and solutions have depended on Africa’s “partnership” with the nebulous “international community”. A major component of this “community” comprises the very same former colonists who, we claim, have (i) “created” Africa’s problems by colonising them, (ii) “interfered” in Africa’s internal affairs, (iii) shaped the international system to serve their own interests (in trade, economy and international relations), (iv) dictated values of good governance and economic performance that are “foreign” to Africans, and (v) “abandoned/marginalised” Africa by withdrawing aid and political support after the Cold War.
This kind of dependency – developing solutions on the basis of actions of others, and blaming them when things don’t work – points to our lack of good leadership.
(more…)
by Alex Evans | Jan 21, 2009 | Influence and networks, North America
[youtube:http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNhU4zwAh0]
Here’s Joe Biden swearing in the new White House senior staff as President Obama looks on (looking rather unamused at Biden’s wisecrack about the Chief Justice’s memory, one might add). But over at ForeignPolicy.com, there’s dark muttering from some of Obama’s foreign policy advisers during the campaign, who are feeling as though they’ve been left on the shelf.
As we reported here back in October 07, some of the people advising Obama on foreign policy were taking a career risk, given that
Team Clinton has put the word out that the usual process – whereby foreign policy advisers to other candidates are allowed to switch horses as and when their candidate gets eliminated during primary season – has been abolished, at least as far as Hillary as concerned. The ‘you’re with us or against us’ ethos is no longer limited to the GOP, it seems…
So: payback time for them now that Obama’s in office, right? Not exactly.
The irony, these people say, is that those who joined up with the Obama campaign early on — some at the risk of alienating their old bosses in the Clinton administration — now find that the Clintonistas have a patron who is taking better care of her people, as they see it, than Obama is of those who worked for him.
(more…)
by David Steven | Jan 21, 2009 | Climate and resource scarcity, Economics and development, Global Dashboard, Global system, London Summit
I’ve been in Japan today, speaking at ‘Reforming International Institutions – Meeting the Challenges of the 21st Century’, a seminar organized by the United Nations University and the British Embassy in Japan.
You can download my talk here (with pictures, references etc) – or the text only is available below the jump. There’s a webcast too.
Headlines:
- It’s going to be a tough year. The financial meltdown has a long way to go, and the downturn is risking turning into a global depression.
- Trade is a bell wether. Protectionist pressures are already on the rise. If they gain traction, take that as a warning of a wider loss of confidence in global institutions.
- The unravelling of global economic imbalances could prove corrosive to the international order. If countries start to devalue to protect exports, expect a tit-for-tat dynamic to kick in.
- Scarcity issues (energy, water, land, food, atmospheric space for emissions) remain the key medium term driver of global change. Commodity prices will spike again as soon as there’s recovery.
- The downturn has stemmed the uncontrolled growth of emissions, but also lessened the chance of a robust global deal on climate.
- Economic bad times could well drive increased conflict. A major new security threat might be the fabled black swan – hitting just when the global immune system is already overloaded.
- If we experience a long crisis (or a chain of interlinked crises), we are likely to see either a significant loss of trust in the system (globalization retreats), or a significant increase in trust (interdependence increases).
- You need to stretch time horizons to get the latter – shared awareness (joint analysis of risks and challenges), as a basis for shared platforms (loose coalitions of leaders), which can lobby for a shared operating system (a new international institutional architecture).
- 2009 sets a challenging agenda for the G20 (financial reform and economic recovery – but framed by a broader vision on climate, resources, security etc.)…
- …the G8 (caucus of rich countries able to tee up Copenhagen and kick start development assistance if developing countries begin to teeter)…
- …the UN (especially Ban Ki-Moon’s proposed high level ‘friend’s group’ on climate, but also as a fora for getting to grips with scarcity issues)…
- and the Bretton Woods institutions and the WTO (first of all ensuring they keep their heads above water, then looking to ‘save globalization from itself’).
- Oh and be ready for the backlash – people are angry and rightfully so, but that may well lead us down some populist blind alleys.
(more…)
