11 May 2008
analysis
Washington, DC — "Attempts to take matters outside of the United Nations (UN), such as at G7/8 meetings or at the World Economic Forum, have not been inclusive or democratic. The UN, with all its weaknesses, is still the only multilateral intergovernmental democratic institution the world has, and UNCTAD [United Nations Conference on Trade and Development] is part of that machinery.... Unfortunately, UNCTAD seems to have been further compromised in Accra." - Yash Tandon, Executive Director, South Centre
The 12th ministerial session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, held in Accra, Ghana, from April 20-25, went virtually unnoticed by the international press, yet another indication of the declining prominence of the organization in international debates. Yet, argues analyst Yash Tandon, strengthening UNCTAD remains vital to counterbalancing the dominance of Northern countries and enhancing the negotiating power of the global South in trade negotiations.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains editorial reflections from Mr. Tandon and the text of his presentation in Accra on behalf of the South Centre, an intergovernmental organization representing 51 developing countries (http://www.southcentre.org) The South Centre board is chaired by the former president of Tanzania, Benjamin Mkapa...
Another AfricaFocus Bulletin sent out today contains a statement in Accra by Dede Amanor-Wilks, summarizing a new Action Aid - South Centre report on commodity dependence and development.
For additional background on UNCTAD, see the official UNCTAD site at http://www.unctad.org and resources on UNCTAD from the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy at http://www.iatp.org/unctadxii
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on related issues, see http://www.africafocus.org/tradexp.php and
http://www.africafocus.org/agexp.php
South Bulletin: Reflections and Foresights
South Centre is an Intergovernmental Organization and Think Tank of Developing Countries
1 May 2008, Issue 14
Editorial: Reflections on UNCTAD XII
Yash Tandon, Executive Director, South Centre
In the last issue of this Bulletin, we had argued why it was in the interest of both the North as well as the South to strengthen and recreate the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) as a forum where issues of concern to them can be addressed in a proper manner. Attempts to take matters outside of the United Nations (UN), such as at G7/8 meetings or at the World Economic Forum, have not been inclusive or democratic. The UN, with all its weaknesses, is still the only multilateral intergovernmental democratic institution the world has, and UNCTAD is part of that machinery. Overhaul it if necessary, but do not diminish its capacity to address issues of trade and development which was its original mandate. This is also one of the messages of the article by Dede Amanor-Wilks appearing in this Issue.
Unfortunately, UNCTAD seems to have been further compromised in Accra. Once the UNCTAD Secretariat and others concerned have analysed the final outcome document, the extent of the damage would be clearer. For now, it looks UNCTAD has lost the ground it had partially recovered at UNCTAD XI in Sao Paulo.
The countries of the North appeared in Accra to want to diminish UNCTAD as much as they could. Even those among them that normally favour UN's multilateralism were bent on reducing UNCTAD rather than empowering it. In the anodyne language of UN diplomacy, UNCTAD should "not do everything" but should "focus" on what it is best at. In other words, UNCTAD should leave matters of trade to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and of finances to the Bretton Woods institutions and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The effect of this was major trade and finance issues of the "development agenda" were amputated out of 16 the body politic of UNCTAD. Its disfigured and mutilated body was then left with essentially the task of "research" and the provision of "technical assistance" to the countries of the South on residual matters, such as "aid for trade".
Is this a gradual denouement of UNCTAD, a carefully sequenced demise leading to its ultimate collapse at the next Conference in 2012? Possibly, but not inevitably.
Strengthening and recreating UNCTAD is not a bureaucratic act; it is a political act. Only its members can build it or destroy it.
What we need, and this is becoming even more urgent than ever before, is a redefinition of what constitutes "membership". In diplomatic parlance, only states are members of intergovernmental organizations. However, we have moved some distance from this Westphalian definition of the interstate system. Increasingly, non-state actors, among them the private sector and the civil society, are recognised agents of international discourse. And this is where the UNCTAD Secretariat could have done more than it did in the months and years between UNCTAD XI and XII.
At Accra itself, UNCTAD did set up the World Investment Forum (WIF) for the private sector and a separate forum for the civil society. The difference, however, was that the private sector was better integrated in the official deliberations that the civil society. At the WIF, high powered speakers, including the representatives of finance capital, were brought centre stage and seamlessly integrated into the mainstream deliberations, whereas the civil society was treated as largely marginal to the proceedings. "Give them a tent and email facilities, and keep them happy" appeared to be the underlying philosophy of UNCTAD towards the civil society. If UNCTAD was listening carefully, it would have learnt that it was from the civil society tent in Accra that the strongest voices were raised to defend the policy space occupied by the UNCTAD. This also came out clearly in the South Centre organized informal meeting with the CSO representatives on the sides of the main event.
How does one explain this differential treatment of the private sector and civil society? There could be many explanations: for example, preceding the Conference the private sector may have been better organised than the global civil society. But there is more to it than that. Underlying UNCTAD's present philosophy is the oft-repeated mantra that "the private sector is the engine of growth", whilst the civil society is "antiglobalizers". Simplified rhetorical propositions sometimes acquire the force of "axiomatic truths".
One can fairly discuss the merits and demerits of the private sector and the civil society without being dogmatic about either.
But to treat the private sector as "central" to UNCTAD's discourse and the civil society as "marginal" was doing disservice to UNCTAD itself, and ultimately to its own attempt to regain its past glory. Why? Because once you identify the private sector, and especially private capital flows and foreign direct investments (FDIs) as the "engine of growth", you automatically shift responsibility out of the hands of UNCTAD and into those that are "better qualified" to deal with matters of finance and investments, such as the Bretton Woods institutions, the WTO, the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), the OECD and, not accidentally, the World Association of Investment Promotion Agencies (WAIPA) which organised the WIF at UNCTAD XII.
The only speaker who seriously interrogated the underlying assumptions of the other WIF speakers at the podium was Mr.
Benjamin Mkapa, President Emeritus of the United Republic of Tanzania.
The private sector has a role, no doubt. But so does civil society.
The civil society has the role of providing a window to the "existential truth" about the reality on the ground as it affects the poor. For example, the official discourse in the "Main Forum" raised the alarm about the looming "food crisis", but it was at the Civil Society Forum that its structural as well as immediate causes were analysed. At the "Civil Society Forum" there was anguished discussion, to give another example, of the seriously flawed Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the European Union and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, but, alas, the "Main Forum" was completely oblivious to this.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
