21st Century Vision

The South Centre

Much has been written about the North/South divide – the divide between the largely developed northern nations and the far more non developed South. To help the South develop, The South Centre came formally into being as an intergovernmental body of developing countries on 31 July 1995, when the Intergovernmental Agreement to establish the Centre came into force.

Currently, 48 countries are members of the South Centre. The Centre, however, works for the benefit of the South as a whole, making efforts to ensure that all developing countries and interested groups and persons have access to its publications and the results of its work, irrespective of membership.

All countries signing and ratifying the Agreement appoint a representative to the Council of Representatives which meets at least once every three years and whose function is to provide guidance on the Centre’s work and activities, as well as to elect the nine-member Board and approve the appointment of the Centre’s Chairperson. The first session of the Council of Representatives was held in September 1995.
The Board, whose members are elected in their personal capacity for three-year terms, oversees the operations of the Centre, approves its work programme, assists in fund-raising and considers the budget and yearly audited accounts, and generally assists the work of the Chairperson.

The Centre -- which is not intended to be a "secretariat" -- will remain modest in size, with only a small nucleus of staff. Acting in a flexible manner, it will draw its strength from networking so as to carry out the designated work and activities in co-operation with other institutions and individuals of the South. In the process, institutional capacities in the South will be strengthened and South-wide co-operation will be further developed.

OBJECTIVES AND FUNCTIONS

According to the Intergovernmental Agreement, the South Centre has the following among its central objectives:

• To promote South solidarity, South consciousness and mutual knowledge and understanding among the countries and peoples of the South;
• To promote various types of South-South co-operation and action, South-South links, networking and information exchange;
• To contribute to South-wide collaboration in promoting common interests and co-ordinated participation by developing countries in international forums dealing with South-South and North-South matters, as well as with other global concerns;
• To foster convergent views and approaches among countries of the South with respect to global economic, political and strategic issues related to evolving concepts of development, sovereignty and security;
• To contribute to better mutual understanding and co-operation between the South and the North on the basis of equity and justice for all and, to this end, to the democratization and strengthening of the United Nations and its family of organizations.

Find out more about The South Centre ..

Don't Rob Peter To Pay Paul!

The Enfield & The Barnets United Nations Association have a number of groups who draft questions to local MPs. The answers from MPs are then published online both on our Website and Weblog and discussion is then encouraged. Our latest question is to Joan Ryan MP and concerns development. We asked Joan

The response of the British people and of the UK government to the recent tsunami disaster was exemplary. We would like assurances, however, that the money pledged will not come out of the existing aid budget.

The disaster seems to have had the side effect of finally impressing on the developed countries the urgency of helping the poor of the world. The bandwagon so ably constructed by Mr Blair and Mr Brown is now rolling. A recent TV programme included a phone-in in which 99% of viewers registered their approval of the idea that the UK should start giving 0.7% of GDP in aid immediately, rather than by 2013 as currently planned. Do you agree with the viewers, and if so will you speak out on behalf of the poor?

International Trade & Law

In January the The International Trade & Law Institute met in the House of Commons to discuss Corporate Tax Avoidance and Global Economic Development. On the surface that sounds like a dry subject but in the context of the corporate control of the world’s decision making organisations, usually existing outside of national democratic frameworks, such discussions are increasingly necessary. The International Trade & Law Institute explains it this way,

The failure of the WTO meeting if international representatives at Cacon has only thrown up long pending issues of equity in International trade transactions to the fore. The world has witnessed a situation where the developed nations want a high moral ground of free trade but doing exactly the opposite in practice. Especially in the form of high subsidies to their own agricultural and animal husbandry etc. products. It is generally felt that WTO has become an unfair instrument in the hands of the Developed countries against the trade interests of the developing countries. Despite these handicaps it was heartening to note that developing countries (G20) led by China, India, Brazil and South Africa frustrated the attempts of USA, Europe & Canada relating to trade in Agricultural goods during the recent Cacon conference. After the failure of this conference the developed countries are moving towards regional/bilateral negotiations with some developing countries to ensure that they control levers of International trade and business as well as to circumvent the multi- lateral solidarity at the WTO fora.

There is a need to challenge hegemony of the G8 countries, not only at the political level but also during the various levels of negotiations. Participant at these negotiations should not only be aware of the intricacies of the international trade negotiations but also be equipped with the appropriate knowledge and skills of the subject areas of the negotiations. The best way to meet these challenges of international competition is to build expertise in the Developing countries on the nature of trade flows, trade in services, IPRs and other issues arising from different agreements under the WTO as well as international laws including Environmental treaties. This is to ensure equitable flow of goods ,services, investments and technology etc, amongst developed and developing countries.

Find out more …

The Rush To War

The Guardian today reported the full picture of how the government manipulated the legal justification for war with Iraq, and the political pressure placed on its most senior law officer. It comments,

The attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, warned less than two weeks before the invasion of Iraq that military action could be ruled illegal.

The government was so concerned that it might be prosecuted it set up a team of lawyers to prepare for legal action in an international court.

And a parliamentary answer issued days before the war in the name of Lord Goldsmith - but presented by ministers as his official opinion before the crucial Commons vote - was drawn up in Downing Street, not in the attorney general's chambers.

It appears that Lord Goldsmith never wrote an unequivocal formal legal opinion that the invasion was lawful, as demanded by Lord Boyce, chief of defence staff at the time.

The Guardian can also disclose that in her letter of resignation in protest against the war, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, deputy legal adviser at the Foreign Office, described the planned invasion of Iraq as a "crime of aggression".

She said she could not agree to military action in circumstances she described as "so detrimental to the international order and the rule of law".

This is clearly something that we would like to get clarified by our own local MPs and their reaction to it.

See Full Article ..

The Final Proof

Global warming is a man-made disaster
The Independent recently reported that scientists have found the first unequivocal link between man-made greenhouse gases and a dramatic heating of the Earth's oceans. The researchers - many funded by the US government - have seen what they describe as a "stunning" correlation between a rise in ocean temperature over the past 40 years and pollution of the atmosphere.

The study destroys a central argument of global warming sceptics within the Bush administration - that climate change could be a natural phenomenon. It should convince George Bush to drop his objections to the Kyoto treaty on climate change, the scientists say.

Tim Barnett, a marine physicist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego and a leading member of the team, said: "We've got a serious problem. The debate is no longer: 'Is there a global warming signal?' The debate now is what are we going to do about it?"

The findings are crucial because much of the evidence of a warmer world has until now been from air temperatures, but it is the oceans that are the driving force behind the Earth's climate. Dr Barnett said: "Over the past 40 years there has been considerable warming of the planetary system and approximately 90 per cent of that warming has gone directly into the oceans."

Because the global climate is largely driven by the heat locked up in the oceans, a rise in sea temperatures could have devastating effects for many parts of the world.

Ruth Curry, from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said that warming could alter important warm-water currents such as the Gulf Stream, as melting glaciers poured massive volumes of fresh water into the North Atlantic. "These changes are happening and they are expected to amplify. It's a certainty that these changes will put serious strains on the ecosystems of the planet," Dr Curry said.

Global & Local Civil Society

Five years after the World Civil Society Forum was launched, a number of groups met in the Enfield and Barnet area to develop a Local Civil Society Forum. The original aims and objectives of the World Civil Society intended to bridge the different areas of the international arena (the environment, health, human rights, humanitarian action, development, education, peace, security, and the information society, etc.) The Forum set up the following aims and objectives which it has now been developing and following over the last few years.

• To strengthen international cooperation by:
  Facilitating cooperation between organizations of civil society and the United Nations system, including its specialized agencies and other international organizations;
• Promoting cooperation among civil society organizations across the world and working in different fields of activity, especially with developing countries and indigenous peoples;
• Creating space for dialogue on the relation between the different stakeholders of the international scene, such as civil society organizations, international organizations, governments and the private sector;
• Considering the constitution of a permanent forum that would reinforce the cooperation between civil society and international organizations.

The local Civil Society Forum in Enfield and Barnet will now begin the process of discussing their own aims and objectives within the context of the developing civil society global framework. This will include looking at a programme of education, campaigns and contact with decision makers so that there is a link between the political and the civil society areas of our local communities.

Do As I Say Not As I Do!

Despite Congress cutting funds for the US nuclear programme, it appears that George W Bush has found a way of circumventing that decision by claiming that his new programme is about the renewal of old stock rather than the introduction of a new programme. An article in Open Democracy argues that at a time when the US is attempting to stop any nuclear ambitions by Iran, it is itself pursuing a new programme of its own. The US administration argues that they stopped producing entirely new nuclear weapons at least fifteen years ago, many of the warheads in its current stockpile are far older than that, and there is no guarantee that they will work if they have to be used. But Open Democracy comments,

Arms-control experts, by contrast, claim that the US’s nuclear stockpile is sufficiently up-to-date in design terms, could be reduced much further, and has no need of a new bout of modernisation. Daryl G Kimball, executive director of prominent Washington-based group the Arms Control Association, comments:

“The existing stockpile is safe and reliable by all standards, so to design a new warhead that is even more robust is a redundant activity that could be a pretext for designing a weapon that has a new military mission.”

This is the crux of the matter – that the Bush administration seems to have found a way of circumventing Congress’s decision to cut funding for what were clearly intended to be major new nuclear weapons programmes.

So what is the impact on this of any goal of no nuclear proliferation? How can the US administration’s attitude to this be squared with their attitude to Iran? The Open Democracy article is very clear about that.

The Bush administration wants to build a coalition for countering Iranian nuclear ambitions. This means it needs to avoid giving the impression of furthering its own nuclear developments. The Congressional decision in November helped serve that purpose. The more recent reports on what is actually happening in terms of US nuclear developments do not. They lend support to those analysts who believe that the United States will take a singularly hardline stance at the NPT review conference. This may be typical of the unilateralist tendencies of the Bush administration, but will certainly not further the control of nuclear proliferation through international cooperation.

See full article ..

Local Civil Society Forum Established!

The UN Charter opens with the words ‘We the Peoples of the United Nations’, not ‘We the Governments’. The difference is being now being taken more seriously, and Kofi Annan has set in motion a process to increase the role of NGOs (or ‘civil society’) in debate and policy formation at the UN.

Yesterday the Enfield and the Barnets United Nations Association convened a meeting of over 16 local groups to take forward the idea of a local Civil Society Forum. The meeting was a great success and all the groups there were enthusiastic to take the idea forward to develop a Forum where local groups could think globally and then take local action. It was felt that a local Civil Society Forum could engage in.

• Communication and education between local groups
• Campaign on issues that are of both local and global concern and
• Lobby MPs and other decision makers about such issues

The first task they will undertake is to organise a number of Hustings in the soon expected General Election so that candidates will be able to answer questions put to them. The planning for this will start immediately.

Secondly it was felt that a number of study and campaign groups could be developed around issues such as human rights and the position of women in society. This will be developed over the next few weeks as the idea of a Civil Society Forum takes shape. The idea of a Forum is that it is not a new organisation but rather a network of existing ones with common aims and goals that can be continuously discussed and agreed.

Young Turks & Kurds In London

The Government's new universal youth programme, ConneXions, identifies young people from minority ethnic groups, asylum seekers and refugees as targeted 'at risk' groups. This research project of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation examined the position of young people within London's Turkish-speaking community. This is itself fragmented into three main groups: Cypriot Turks, mainland Turks and Kurdish refugees.

According to the 2001 census, 45 per cent of Britain's people from minority ethnic communities live in London, where they comprise 29 per cent of all residents. Yet surprisingly little is known about many of Britain's smaller minority communities. This project looked at the position of young people within one such grouping, London's Turkish-speaking community. This community is itself fragmented, comprising three main groups: Cypriot Turks, mainland Turks and Kurdish refugees. Very little research has explored the British component of the Turkish diaspora and particularly how the young people are adapting to their lives in Britain.

• Turks do not occupy a clear position in the white/non-white divide upon which current understanding of 'ethnic minorities' is based.
• Some young Turkish-speaking people believe they suffer discrimination and harassment from white people, from some minority groups and even from some other Turkish-speaking groups.
• Truancy and exclusion from school are problems for the Turkish-speaking young people, especially the Kurds, nearly a quarter of whom in the sample had been excluded.
• Few of the Turkish-speaking young people in the survey have many qualifications to help them in the labour market.
• Most of the young people with qualifications stay on in further education but need to have part-time work to fund their studies.
• The young Turks and Kurds clearly use, indeed rely on, family and kin links to help them through risky and extended transitions from adolescence to adulthood.
• Few are in employment with employers outside their own ethnic economy.
• The majority of young people do not consider looking for a job outside London, though are willing to move to a different country.
• The young people are ambivalent about what it means to be British and most are reluctant to adopt that identity. Neither do they see themselves as part of a broader Muslim community.

See the findings

Kyoto - The Beginning.

After seven years of debate, the Kyoto protocol is formally ratified today. The agreement, which seeks to limit the world's carbon emissions, was signed by 84 countries in Japan's former capital city in 1997. It has now been ratified by 140 countries. It bound the industrialised countries to cut emissions by 5 per cent from their 1990 level by 2012. It comes into force even though the world’s largest polluter, the United States, has refused to sign up to it.

Climate change experts warned of disastrous weather - including extremes of temperature, storms, droughts and floods and the melting of glaciers and the polar ice caps - if nothing is done to curb the emission of warm gases, which come mostly from transport and industry.

The environmental organisation Friends of the Earth welcomed today's development, but said more drastic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions were desperately needed. However debate still rages over whether Kyoto is enough or whether more drastic changes are needed if we are to prevent what some scientists think could be runaway global warming.

For some the Kyoto deal has been hailed as proof that the world's nations can co-operate to confront climate change. It has also been derided as an empty exercise in political posturing. Today there is an interesting article in The Independent that considers the importance or otherwise of Kyoto. As the article states,

What matters most, though, is what happens next. Somewhere out in the future is the next generation of technologies that will wean the world off fossil fuels and provide it with renewable power. But we cannot see those clearly so meanwhile we have to be careful with what we have got.

If Kyoto encourages the hunt for the new technologies - as it has - that is worth something. If it makes us think a little more about our own use of energy that is worth something too. If it is the start of a wider global process of co-operation in conservation, then it is worth a huge amount. A good day for the world

The debate over Kyoto and what we should now do to take further measures to halt global warming is one of the most important ones that we face globally. It is a debate that we should all sign up to and become involved.

See Independent article …