There are many aspects of United States’ policy which require our attention, either to demand more complete human rights or to attempt to redistribute the polarized wealth. As I realize more and more every week, there are policies within our nation which threaten, or already take advantage of, the personal rights of the residents within our borders. These things must be addressed for the present and future assurance of individual and national well-being. I in no way want to undermine the importance of these daunting issues. However, I do believe in focusing on the domestic issues of our national community, we overlook the fact that we are part of the world community as a whole. Focusing all our attention on the issues within our nation (which are, no doubt, noble), it becomes easy to overshadow the dire needs of other nations of the world. The responsibility we have as a leading world power to contribute to solving global issues of the international community is forgotten in light of domestic issues.
One issue of our international policy is our lack of following through with commitments. In 1970, the U.S., along with 21 other nations, pledged .7% of their gross national income to go directly to development assistance to the global community. The goal of this attempt was to “tackle poverty, hunger and disease and promote education and development” (Lederer). Last Monday, the U.N.’s report, the Millenium Declaration, stated that “global poverty can be cut in half by 2015 and eliminated by 2025 if the world’s richest countries … more than double aid to the poorest countries” (Lederer). Supporting this, the report stated that “one billion people live on a dollar a day or less, many of them going to bed hungry every night; life expectancy in the poorest countries is half that in high-income countries” (Lederer). In addition, if countries meet their pledges, “more than 50 million people can escape poverty and tens of millions can avoid certain death in the next decade” (Lederer). Yet despite this, only five countries are meeting their pledges: Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden (UN Assembly). The United States currently spends only .15% of our gross domestic product on development aid, which I see as a huge failure on our part. By not supporting development assistance, we are failing to recognize our responsibility to the world community in favor of our own economic gain. As the Millennium Declaration urges, “we must not wait for confirmation of our worst fears to put the full force of the international community behind an immediate and definitive end to the atrocities. If we fail to act here, we lose not only lives but also all credibility” (UN Assembly).
What if the United States took initiative in assisting countries in need? What if we met our pledge of .7% toward worldwide development assistance? We could lead by action, working to enact the possibility of eliminating global poverty in less than 25 years, as the U.N. discovered is possible. In addition to considering meeting the pledges we’ve made, there are other steps toward giving poverty-ridden nations a feasible chance at survival. One option is the full cancellation of poor nations’ debt. Jubilee South is an international movement network working toward the cancellation of all immoral, illegitimate, and unjust debts. They observe that debt is often used “as an instrument of exploitation and control of our peoples, resources, and countries” (Jubilee South). If the U.S. took the enormous step of canceling the debts of poverty-stricken nations, it would allow disadvantaged economies to get a jumpstart on self-sufficiency. However, canceling the external debt is not enough; “the unfair trade relations and the economic model implemented in debtor nations must be overhauled as well” (Third World Network). There would undoubtedly be challenges to this action, including questions of supporting regimes we don’t condone, what future obligations this would leave us with in regards to debt, and how to classify which countries receive the relief (not to mention the politics surrounding such a suggestion). A petition presented to the U.N. in 2000 included 22 million signatures “calling for the cancellation of debts of the world’s poorest nations” (Third World Network). In return for debt cancellation, the indebted countries would be required to show “demonstrable commitments to poverty reduction” (Third World Network). One follow up of this petition and its addressed concerns is the Millennium Declaration, mentioned earlier. The pledges made by the U.S. and other nations under this declaration are a tangible step toward concrete solutions to the problem of poverty across the world. While these pledges are an effective tool to reduce world poverty, they will only be successful if we actually meet them. The minute cost to us compared to the incredible returns it would bring to the world community makes such goals worthy of our much-needed attention. These dire needs of the world community are often overshadowed or ignored. However, it is necessary to the entire world that developed nations such as the U.S. consider what can be done to reduce world poverty, hunger, disease, and other deadly forces.
These are the places I got my information from - really good sources. Interesting too!
Jubilee South. Retrieved 20 January 2005from Jubilee South, Jubilee South news story thing, and this other one from Jubilee South.
Lederer, Edith M. U.N. Report Urges Aid to Poor Countries. Associated Press article accessed 20 January 2005 from truthout.org.
Third World Network Online. Retrieved 20 January 2005 from twnside.org and twnside.org #2.
UN Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Retrieved 20 January 2005 from www.un.org.
United Nations General Assembly. Implementation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration: Report of the Secretary-General. 27 August 2004. Retrieved 20 January 2005 from UN Millenium Declaration Implementation.
One issue of our international policy is our lack of following through with commitments. In 1970, the U.S., along with 21 other nations, pledged .7% of their gross national income to go directly to development assistance to the global community. The goal of this attempt was to “tackle poverty, hunger and disease and promote education and development” (Lederer). Last Monday, the U.N.’s report, the Millenium Declaration, stated that “global poverty can be cut in half by 2015 and eliminated by 2025 if the world’s richest countries … more than double aid to the poorest countries” (Lederer). Supporting this, the report stated that “one billion people live on a dollar a day or less, many of them going to bed hungry every night; life expectancy in the poorest countries is half that in high-income countries” (Lederer). In addition, if countries meet their pledges, “more than 50 million people can escape poverty and tens of millions can avoid certain death in the next decade” (Lederer). Yet despite this, only five countries are meeting their pledges: Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden (UN Assembly). The United States currently spends only .15% of our gross domestic product on development aid, which I see as a huge failure on our part. By not supporting development assistance, we are failing to recognize our responsibility to the world community in favor of our own economic gain. As the Millennium Declaration urges, “we must not wait for confirmation of our worst fears to put the full force of the international community behind an immediate and definitive end to the atrocities. If we fail to act here, we lose not only lives but also all credibility” (UN Assembly).
What if the United States took initiative in assisting countries in need? What if we met our pledge of .7% toward worldwide development assistance? We could lead by action, working to enact the possibility of eliminating global poverty in less than 25 years, as the U.N. discovered is possible. In addition to considering meeting the pledges we’ve made, there are other steps toward giving poverty-ridden nations a feasible chance at survival. One option is the full cancellation of poor nations’ debt. Jubilee South is an international movement network working toward the cancellation of all immoral, illegitimate, and unjust debts. They observe that debt is often used “as an instrument of exploitation and control of our peoples, resources, and countries” (Jubilee South). If the U.S. took the enormous step of canceling the debts of poverty-stricken nations, it would allow disadvantaged economies to get a jumpstart on self-sufficiency. However, canceling the external debt is not enough; “the unfair trade relations and the economic model implemented in debtor nations must be overhauled as well” (Third World Network). There would undoubtedly be challenges to this action, including questions of supporting regimes we don’t condone, what future obligations this would leave us with in regards to debt, and how to classify which countries receive the relief (not to mention the politics surrounding such a suggestion). A petition presented to the U.N. in 2000 included 22 million signatures “calling for the cancellation of debts of the world’s poorest nations” (Third World Network). In return for debt cancellation, the indebted countries would be required to show “demonstrable commitments to poverty reduction” (Third World Network). One follow up of this petition and its addressed concerns is the Millennium Declaration, mentioned earlier. The pledges made by the U.S. and other nations under this declaration are a tangible step toward concrete solutions to the problem of poverty across the world. While these pledges are an effective tool to reduce world poverty, they will only be successful if we actually meet them. The minute cost to us compared to the incredible returns it would bring to the world community makes such goals worthy of our much-needed attention. These dire needs of the world community are often overshadowed or ignored. However, it is necessary to the entire world that developed nations such as the U.S. consider what can be done to reduce world poverty, hunger, disease, and other deadly forces.
These are the places I got my information from - really good sources. Interesting too!
Jubilee South. Retrieved 20 January 2005from Jubilee South, Jubilee South news story thing, and this other one from Jubilee South.
Lederer, Edith M. U.N. Report Urges Aid to Poor Countries. Associated Press article accessed 20 January 2005 from truthout.org.
Third World Network Online. Retrieved 20 January 2005 from twnside.org and twnside.org #2.
UN Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Retrieved 20 January 2005 from www.un.org.
United Nations General Assembly. Implementation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration: Report of the Secretary-General. 27 August 2004. Retrieved 20 January 2005 from UN Millenium Declaration Implementation.
5 comments:
No one else posted, so I am...Good job Heather! Did you read these facts and formulate an opinion or do it in the opposite order? Because you ranted about America doing the opposite. And it's not good to go against a rant that you created. But I'm sure you did it the right way. We who are about to die salute you!
Sounds to me like this was a job for CUT and PASTE!
Sometimes others have already expressed in better words what we feel about something. Take psalms for example.
I'm with you all the way on this, Heather. I would add a word of caution, though, and it's something you mentioned only briefly, and that is the responsibility of the nations being forgiven. Many nations in Africa (where a lot of destitute nations exist) are run by extremely corrupt regimes called "kleptocracies" where the ruling party simply steals copious amounts of money from the nation. Others are run by factions who hoard resources and boost their tribe or clan or whatever at the expense of the rest of the nation. I doubt it would be wise to send aid to or forgive debts of nations that are too corrupt to manage themselves. But how would you even determine whether a nation like that was ready for such a gift? Should we give it anyway, knowing that it will cause many to suffer and only a greedy few to benefit greatly?
Heather, it's 11:09 on the top floor of the UPS library where no one ever goes cuz it's cold and has concrete floors and has water leaks, and I'm with my friend Darin trying to write a paper for my Humanities class about Romeo and Juliet and it isn't going well. But on the plus side I saw the Baz Luhrmann version of R&J with Leo Dicaprio last night, because that's what I'm writing my paper about. Whew. He's hot. Enjoy your day!
Heather, it's 1:45 in the basement at home. I just finished watching Blues Brothers. What a good movie! I think I should leave more comments that describe exactly where I am, what I'm doing, and what time it is. That sounds like a good blog activity. Anyway, I'm going back to UPS soon, and you're getting married soon. And I'm happy! I love you sis! Bye.
Post a Comment