Radicali.it - sito ufficiale di Radicali Italiani
Notizie Radicali, il giornale telematico di Radicali Italiani
cerca [dal 1999]


i testi dal 1955 al 1998

  RSS
lun 26 feb. 2024
[ cerca in archivio ] ARCHIVIO STORICO RADICALE
Archivio federalismo
The Stockholm Initiative - 22 aprile 1991
COMMON RESPONSIBILITY IN THE 1990's (2)

The Stockholm Initiative on Global Security and Governance

April 22, 1991

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

- PREFACE

- PEACE AND SECURITY

Strengthening the United Nations

Regional Security Arrangements

Limiting Arms Trade

The Peace Dividend

- DEVELOPMENT

Focus on Poverty

A Conducive International Environment

- ENVIRONMENT

- POPULATION

- DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

- GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AND INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

Reforming the United Nations

Universality in World Economic Cooperation

In the Spirit of San Francisco

- SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS

- PARTICIPANTS IN THE STOCKHOLM INITIATIVE

ENVIRONMENT

Over the ages of human existence, the issue of survival arose only in the very beginning: could the human species evolve through adapting to an often hostile environment? Humankind overcame that primary challenge, and never since then has the threat to human existence been seriously revived until now. In the second half of the 20th century, at what many would regard as the flowering of human potential, that issue of survival has grown steadily more serious and urgent. In a strange reversal of our predicament, the threat to humanity comes not from a hostile planet but from the power which man's genius has given him over the planet itself. It comes from the dominion we have assumed over our environment, from our capacity to damage it and to destroy ourselves in the process. The Brundtland Commission's definition of sustainable development as development which meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs has not only a practical but a

lso an ethical dimension. Unless we develop an ethical basis for human survival, all our technical solutions may turn out to be ineffectual in the long run. This is so because it is essentially the undeveloped nature of our global morality that has put humankind at risk: our greed, our arrogance, our lack of vision. What value should we place on our genius if, unconstrained by ethics of survival, it leads the human race to despoil its earthly habitation? A deeper understanding of ecology has led to greater awareness of the damage done to many of our planet's life support systems. Even if drastic action were to be taken today to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we are, in all probability, already condemned to some degree of global warming and adverse climatic changes. We cannot replace the plant and animal species which have already been destroyed along with the destruction of tropical forests. Perhaps a quarter of the earth's total biological diversity, amounting to about a million species, is in serious ris

k of extinction during the next 20 30 years. Irreversible damage is being done to soils in many parts of the world. Today, two fifths of Africa's non desert land risks being turned into desert, as does one third of Asia's and one fifth of Latin America's. A considerable part of the vast agricultural lands of the Soviet Union are threatened by environmental catastrophe. Important areas in East and Central Europe are contaminated by toxic substances and heavy metals. Great damage has been done to marine resources because of pollution and indiscriminate fishing practices. Environmental stress does not result exclusively from overconsumption and waste by the affluent. While the major global problems are largely caused by the industrialized countries, serious problems in developing countries have created a strong and circular relationship between poverty and environmental degradation. The imperatives of daily survival force the poor to think and live short term to over graze grasslands, to over exploit soils, t

o cut down dwindling forest stocks, and to rear large families as insurance against higher mortality. The consequent destruction of the environment, and the increasing pressure of population on natural resources, cause further immiserisation. What this means is that environmental stress in developing countries cannot be eliminated without attacking poverty and its root causes together with the related problems of high population growth. There is not necessarily a trade off between economic growth and environmentally sound development. The world can indeed must achieve both objectives, but this will require the integration of environmental considerations in every aspect of our economic, social and political life. Nations will have to make choices and decisions which are politically and economically demanding. Developmental economics recognizes today that environmental degradation involves a loss of capital and incurs social costs which are not usually taken into account in the pricing of goods and services.

Economic policies are therefore needed to ensure that these wider costs are reflected in prices which are paid for the products which incur them. This points to the need for new ways of measuring growth and accounting for national income and for the closer integration of environmental concerns in economic policies and decisions. The concept of sustainable development has been broadly accepted by governments, international organizations, and by a large community of non governmental organizations. The challenge, of course, is to put it into practice. Individual nations should use the decade of the 1990's to put into effect policies aimed at sustainable development. This can only be achieved through a broad participatory process, involving all layers of societies, both in the public and private sectors. Openness, freedom of information and the full right to democratic participation is therefore a precondition for sustainable development. While there is cause for alarm, there is also reason for hope. The deeper

understanding of the risks and mechanisms of environmental damage has led to increasing efforts to counteract and reverse the damages. What previously was seen as inevitable consequences of industrialization have in fact turned out not to be so. Most cities in the industrialized world are much more healthy now than a hundred or even twenty years ago. Many rivers that earlier appeared ecologically dead are now recovering. Environmentally damaging emissions are gradually cut back. A transition to sustainable development will be difficult and costly. In Europe, there is a particular need for investments to help the new democracies in Eastern Europe to rebuild industries which currently operate at disastrous environmental costs. In the South, developing countries need resources and technology to enable them to avoid repeating the mistakes of the North. The role of energy is particularly crucial, everywhere. Industrialization has been based on the use of cheap fossile fuels, leading to irreversible changes in th

e planet's atmosphere. The developing world will not be able to travel along the same path without further damage to the atmosphere. This illustrates sharply the predicament of development. Developing countries recognize the compelling urgency to participate in international efforts to address global environmental threats. But a transition to environment sensitive patterns of development will require large investments, which most developing countries simply cannot afford. Many developing countries see an apparent conflict between environmental and developmental priorities. There are genuine fears that resources will be diverted and that a new layer of conditionality environmental criteria are being introduced without additional financing. There is also a growing sense of disquiet that the industrialized countries are asking developing nations to scale down their economic aspirations to share the burden of averting the global ecological threats which are mainly due to the industrial countries' patterns of

consumption. These concerns are valid. However, they are not an argument to shun difficult choices on development patterns. Instead they are an argument why industrialized countries must accommodate the economic development in the South and provide additional resources for environmental investments. There is today widespread agreement on this, and considerable international work is going on to find the right forms. Moreover, we need to mobilize the private sector for investments in sustainable development in the South. A policy framework is needed with incentives and disincentives to promote private investments on a scale official flows alone cannot. We should not shun exploring new ideas in this respect, including e.g. debt for environment swaps. The progress made in setting up the Global Environment Facility under the auspices of the World Bank, UNEP and UNDP is very encouraging. The recent agreement to establish an Interim Multilateral Fund to help developing countries make the transition required by the

Montreal Protocol on the protection of the ozone layer was a welcome precursor.

We propose that fees are levied on the emission of pollutants affecting the global environment, in particular carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossile fuels.

Of the global environmental issues, the risk of global warming is particularly complex. The transformation of the patterns of energy consumption will have to be on a truly massive scale. The emissions of carbon dioxide from the combustion of oil, coal and other fossile fuels will have to be reduced drastically in the North, perhaps on the order of one half over the coming decades. At the same time, the increasing population and accelerating development in the South will require a more equitable distribution of emissions than today. The implications are farreaching. Economically and environmentally appropriate alternative sources of energy will have to be instituted to induce or force the required changes.

We propose an international energy dialogue promoting a more efficient use of the world's energy resources, and, in particular, the use of alternative and renewable energy sources, e.g. solar energy.

Domestic environmental problems in developing countries cannot be treated as if they were separate from general development problems. Financing them must be part of international development cooperation. For instance, international assistance to support joint projects to manage scarce common water resources can, in the long run, avert conflicts which may have international repercussions. Continued neglect of serious problems like soil erosion and desertification in some countries could lead, in the future, to a large scale movements of "environmental refugees". Few issues accentuate the interdependence of nations as the environmental problems. This also means that conflicting interests on related matters could be a factor threatening international security. If oil was at the centre of the Iraq Kuwait crisis, water may become the cause of a future conflict, in the Middle East and elsewhere. Disputes over natural resources may escalate into major conflicts. In order to overcome such serious threats, nations ne

ed to find regional formats for negotiations.

We propose that the United Nations be encouraged to take up environmental issues at the highest level in all appropriate fora.

The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development will provide a unique opportunity to forge a global compact on environmental problems backed by agreement on the resources and institutions which would be needed to implement a programme of action. The political will must be mobilized to find manageable solutions to both global and domestic environmental and developmental problems. A broad coalition of governments, international organizations and the various parts of the private sector must be built to secure such a political momentum to last also after the Conference.

We propose that nations resolve to make the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development a breakthrough for achieving sustainable development.

Such a breakthrough can be obtained through forward looking decisions along the following lines: a code of environmentally sound conduct, an Earth Charter, as an ethical basis for human survival; conventions on the global climate and on biological diversity; agreement on a firm action programme, the so called Agenda 21; backing up these commitments with additional resources, with measures to facilitate the transfer of environmentally sound technology and with more efficient international institutions.

POPULATION

We have repeatedly emphasized how closely linked the issues in environment and development are to questions of population. With the very rapid increases in population in many parts of the world, especially in the poorest countries, the pressures on the already strained economic, social and environmental systems are greatly exacerbated. The momentum of population growth is such that a doubling of the world's population by the middle of the next century is a distinct possibility. The rapid rate of increase must be slowed, if we are to be able to achieve sustainable development. Population issues cannot be addressed in isolation. They are intimately linked to economic and social progress. The population carrying capacity of nature is directly related to the kind of technology that is prevalent in a society. With progress in economic and social development, and especially in strengthening the role and rights of women, there should follow a slow down in population growth. There is a growing recognition of the ser

iousness of the population issues among the countries and cultures of the world. Governments are in fact taking up these difficult issues in their development strategies more explicitly. People from different religions and cultures in the world are discussing the problems and their solutions in more common terms. It is, however, clear that the issue has to be faced much more directly if we are to achieve the targets of sustainability.

We propose that national and cultural leaders mobilize the political commitment and the technical means for making a breakthrough in limiting population growth.

The International Conference on Population and Development, prepared for 1994, will serve as a focus for this political effort. It should confirm the urgency of slowing population growth and give support to development strategies with that aim. It should bring together not only governments and international organizations, but, crucially, also religious leaders and representatives from non governmental organizations. Specifically, attention should be focussed on women's economic and social rights.

We propose that the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development promote the implementation of policies and programmes to reach population stabilization goals.

DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

We recognize democracy and human rights to be truly universal values. They have their origin and history in societies on all continents. During the past years, they have become increasingly potent ideals. They have challenged political structures and transformed societies all around the world. We believe, that democracy and human rights will become still more important issues in the coming years, crucial as they are to sustaining development, and vulnerable as they are to failures in development. The past years saw not only the revolutionary transformation of Eastern Europe, but also, over the decade, the democratic breakthrough in practically all of Latin America. In other parts of the world, demands for greater democracy have developed into strong forces. In Asia, authoritarian regimes have been shaken and forced to political reforms. In Africa, many countries are reassessing and reforming political systems that were instituted after the struggle for independence was won. There and elsewhere, the political

systems are not sufficient to meet people's demand for political participation and desire to see old power structures change. Even in Western Europe and North America, where representative democracy is well established, decreasing participation in elections and the lack of focus on long term issues indicates the need for a democratic revival. Democracy and human rights are essential to the prospects of development. Only on the basis of social and economic systems that recognize the potential of the people, on both the social and individual level, can efforts in development have a chance to progress. While there are examples of authoritarian countries where economic growth has been strong, and while there are examples of countries with free elections where there has been developmental retrogression, it has become clear in one country after the other that certain democratic requisites are crucial to sustain development. Analyses differ on what these requisites are, but certainly the following are necessary pa

rts of the concept: respect for human rights, constitutional government and the rule of law, transparency in the wielding of power, and accountability for those who exercise power. Democracy cannot develop on external command, it has to evolve as a result of internal demand. Democracy is not a top down approach but has to develop from the grassroot level from local and communal structures that allow equal participation of men and women to a strong parliamentary representation at national and federal level. Nevertheless, we believe that there is a duty for the international community to support the respect for human rights and the development of democracy. Human solidarity demands it. The imperative of interdependence necessitates it. Support should be extended first and foremost to the social institutions demanding democratic change. Because civil society is built by the process of development itself, support to democracy, in a general sense, cannot be separated from the way development is supported. This

is why failure in development is such a dangerous threat against a democratic development. It is a serious reality that the conditions endured by many countries undergoing structural adjustment programmes in the interest of economic recovery, create grave political tensions in their societies. If democracy is to be sustained, freedom will have to be harnessed to constitutionalism. But, the rule of law becomes endangered if it is synonymous in the eyes of people with sustained deprivation and with the sense of injustice it breeds. This is not the stuff on which democracy thrives. As the Report of the South Commission acknowledges, as does e.g. also the OAU "African Charter on Popular Participation in Development and Transformation", without democracy, a people's potential for social and economic development cannot be fully realised. Yet, without tolerable social and economic conditions and a vision of the future that makes hope plausible, democracy itself will be unsustainable. A development strategy such as

we have suggested is, therefore, crucial to democracy. There are also many ways to give specially directed support to a democratic development. In particular, non governmental organizations in developing countries should be supported and strengthened. There are, already, a large number of these organizations which have emerged during the 1980's. It is important that they also gain support within their own societies, and get involved in decision making there. How the international community should effectively confront undemocratic governments is a problematic issue, as we see presently in the plight of oppressed minorities in Iraq. Sometimes outright sanctions against oppressors have been called for, as in the case of apartheid South Africa. On a global scale and for the longer term, it is, however, dialogue and norms building that can prove effective in strengthening democracy and human rights. Norms building came into disrepute as the big powers continued to support dictatorships and undemocratic regimes in

their respective fields of influence. They thus polarized the political debate and effectively blocked democratic development in many parts of the world. Today, the situation is different. With the ending of the Cold War, most governments can no longer blame a hostile world for not carrying through domestic democratic reforms.

The work of the United Nations in its conventions and declarations is more important than is generally given credit for. In the improved international climate, the work of the United Nations in monitoring and promoting respect for human rights can be even more forceful. The increased involvement of the UN organization in supervising elections and the behaviour of countries also in other ways is in itself an important contribution to the building of democratic norms.

We propose the strengthening of the United Nations role in monitoring how countries live up to their commitments to conventions and declarations concerning human rights and democracy, recognizing that democracy can develop only through popular internal will.

Regional organizations will also have an important role to play. The work of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe was successful in promoting the legitimacy of and the respect for human rights and democracy. Because of the confidence that is built through regional security arrangements, opposition by apprehensive regimes to democratic reform may grow less strong. We believe that similar regional negotiations should be tried also elsewhere. The strength of observing and judging should not be underestimatedwitness the influence of Amnesty International and the International Commission of Jurists as regards the respect for human rights and the rule of law. The United Nations should act firmly on the basis of internationally established standards of human rights. There are, however, situations of transition to democracy where the UN might find it difficult to pass judgment or involve itself. Overseeing elections other than those that are part of a wider process of conflict resolution or decoloniz

ation can be difficult for an intergovernmental organization like the UN to handle. To certify fairness in a highly politicized situation is controversial for the UN. The United Nations organization must fully respect the sovereignty of its member nations. At the same time, the surveillance by others of election processes is important and can facilitate democratic transition.

We propose the strengthening of independent international institutions that offer to monitor countries' observance of democratic rules and principles, in particular at time of elections, respecting the constitutional order of each country.

As countries open, many suppressed and unresolved conflicts may appear. National aspirations of peoples and minorities, ethnical strife, religious fundamentalism etc. may prove to be strong forces, strong enough to throw many countries and regions into intolerance, extremism, violence and even war. Leaders of these countries will be faced with difficult options. The risk is real that in certain regions such conflicts will overtake the positive opportunities that have been appearing in the world. A dangerous period of global instability could follow. It only further underlines how urgent it is to press ahead with international cooperation in the fields discussed above.

GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AND INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

While history calls us back to old nationalisms and unreconstructed sovereignty, the present reality is that the world is becoming one human neighbourhood. There are no sanctuaries to insulate countries and regions from military disaster, economic crisis, poverty driven migration or environmental collapse. Furthermore, the speed with which events today take place has fundamentally changed the time frame within which human beings act and societies are affected. We urgently need a strengthened system of global governance. In the previous sections of this memorandum, we have reviewed a number of areas that require concerted efforts by the international community. Our proposals have called for significantly improved global cooperation. Most of them refer to the work being done in specific international institutioris, and should be taken up by countries in those institutions. However, the present institutional set up is not adequate to enable the nations of the world to deal effectively with the global issues, to

set new rules and to enforce them. Many factors have frustrated cooperation in the United Nations, in the international financial institutions and other international bodies during the past decade. Decisions on most crucial issues are taken outside of these organizations by a small group of countries. Summits and meetings of the Group of Seven (G7) or even smaller constellations have become the focus of attention, rather than the top level meetings of the international organizations. Such an order of global leadership will not only be increasingly unacceptable to the more than 150 other nations of the world. It will also be increasingly ineffective. When interdependencies have grown to such a degree as they have, global security, economic stability and sustainable development can only be achieved by the active participation of all parts of the world. We believe that the genuine common interest in a new global order of cooperation today is such as to rationally motivate nations to build a system of global go

vernance. Cooperation on issues that require countries to act in accordance not only with national interest but also according to global norms will demand a system that more clearly defines rights and obligations of nations. When agreed upon, such rights and obligations must be respected. Norms must gradually acquire the status of law. The world therefore also needs a system of sanctions to deal with those situations when a country, for whatever reasons, chooses not to comply with the order it has agreed upon. Clearly, this will require a new concept of sovereignty. Given the interdependencies of today, the scope of sovereignty is in reality much more limited than either politicians or the public want to admit. For most nations this will be a difficult political transition for the major powers as well as for many countries where nationhood is barely a generation old. The reality of the human neighbourhood requires us urgently to seek a compact on establishing a strengthened system of global governance. Tha

t is not a new idea. Its necessity has been recognized by farsighted world leaders, from the founders of the United Nations in the 1940's to the members of the independent Commissions in the 1980's. We believe that the time now is ripe to move forward. The cessation of the Cold War removes the greatest obstacle that has hindered global cooperation. The transformed relations between East and West have created unprecedented opportunities to realize what was set out in the Charter of the United Nations and to establish a new order of global governance. The fragility of these opportunities was made obvious by the conflict in the Gulf. Practically every aspect of interdependence was exposed by the repercussions of that conflict peace and security, economy and environment, democracy and human rights. However, if political leadership can grow to meet the challenge, the lessons to be drawn from that conflict will be a part of the process of establishing a new order of global security and cooperation. What is clear

is that the process itself cannot be deferred. The old order is passing and a new world order must be established. Either we allow that new order to be determined by the fortunes of power, or we help to shape it in a conscious way responsive to human needs. One must surely take the second course, and that means returning to San Francisco not to the drawing board but to the process of designing for survival. The time is right for that journey. Already there is acknowledgement that there is now an opportunity to create a new world order. The intellectual work of appraisal and reform has actually begunthrough the international Commissions that deliberated throughout the 1980's, and work that has followed, for example the important study "A World in Need of Leadership" by Brian Urquhart and Erskine Childers. The effort now needs to be more structured, and a pathway to decision to be developed.

Reforming the United Nations

The United Nations system was founded at the end of a world war when people clearly saw the need and opportunity to create a system that could guarantee international peace and security. It sought to commit nations to respecting universal human rights. Over the years since 1945, the United Nations system has expanded its activities to deal with most spheres of human society. In striving for a new global order of cooperation, the United Nations is an invaluable asset. However, the United Nations is today not strong enough to deal with the tasks that face it. Its member states have for too long not let it become what it set out to be. Demands were loaded upon the system which then was neither given the political authority nor the financiai means to carry them out. Furthermore, the organizations and agencies within the system are beset by unclear mandates and conflicting roles. Today, we do not have the structure that is needed. The United Nations needs to be modernized, and its organization updated. We welcome

the initiatives in this direction that has already been taken. This crucial time of opportunities in the world must be used to secure a process of reform. The following proposals aim at completing such reform by the 50th anniversary of the United Nations, in 1995.

We propose that the United Nations takes on a broadened mandate at the Security Council level, following the wider understanding of security which has developed, and that its composition and the use of the veto be reviewed.

In particular, there is a need to be able to handle the security dimension of economic and ecological issues at the Security Council level. Whether this should be done by broadening the mandate of the present Security Council or by new organizational arrangements is a matter for debate. The composition of the Security Council and the veto rights of its permanent members reflect a situation that was created after the Second World War. With the changed power structure in the world and the new interdependencies, the composition of the Security Council and the extension and use of the veto need to be reviewed.

We propose that the Secretary General be given a stronger position and the means to exercise authority, and that the method of appointment of the Secretary General and of higher level staff be reviewed.

We propose that the system wide responsibilities and authority of the Secretary General concerning interagency coordination and cooperation should be firmly established.

The Secretary General should have the power to take initiatives and act swiftly when an international crisis calls for it, if need be without prior consent by the Security Council. For this to be possible he needs access also to the means, as well as the authority to begin creating a real preventive machinery. The Secretary General and his staff, especially if their powers are enlarged, need to be highly qualified with an independent capacity of analysis and a high degree of intellectual creativity. Their competence sets the managerial standards of the whole United Nations system. Methods for their appointment need to be reviewed.

We propose that the financing system of the United Nations be reviewed, and that countries who do not adhere to the flnancial rules be deprived of the right to vote.

The financial crisis of the United Nations has debilitated the organization. Withholding contributions has become a destructive way for some to exercise influence. It must not pay not to pay. Those who choose not to adhere to the financial rules should be deprived of the right to vote, strictly in accordance with the UN Charter. The United Nations would also be well served not to be so dependent on the large contributions from a few countries. The financing system needs to be reviewed, including the possibility of some developing countries in a position to do so taking on a greater part of the costs.

We propose that the activities of the United Nations in the economic and social aelds be strengthened and rationalized.

The number of organizations is too large and their roles not well enough defined. A more clear cut division of labour between the bodies that finance cooperation and assistance (mainly the UNDP) and the specialized agencies is needed. The long and cumbersome meetings of the UN organizations are inefficient and need to be modernized.

Universality in World Economic Cooperation

The roles of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have grown. They are becoming truly universal, since practically all countries of Central and Eastern Europe now have joined or, like the Soviet Union, stated the intention to join. These institutions have proved to be of essential importance for the stability and development of the world economy. Largely by way of others' default, they have expanded their activity beyond original intentions, and their tasks today are, possibly, too large. It may, for example, be questioned whether the IMF should be so heavily involved in low income countries, or whether the World Bank should engage in so many sectors. There is a need for a clearer division of labour between them, the regional banks and the UN organizations, in particular UNCTAD. However this division is arranged, it is necessary that they work in harmony. The global character of the organizations for world economic cooperation must be ensured. They must not be allowed to act as agencies of a sm

all group of countries. Their political integrity must be ensured. With the broader and more active participation of countries in the present round of world trade negotiations, the GATT stands out as an increasingly important institution. The GATT has served the world well by opening up trade. Its work should be expanded and strengthened. The current process is involving developing countries in a much more comprehensive way than ever before, which, naturally, is a reflection of the fact that many questions of great interest to them are being negotiated. The countries of Eastern Europe are now also joining or becoming active members. The GATT could thus, in the very best scenario, develop into a strong global organization, becoming the International Trade Organization that was envisioned in Bretton Woods when the IMF and the World Bank were created. Multilateralism in world trade arrangements have been under great pressure during the past years. Developing countries and smaller industrialized countries have a

clear common interest in a strengthened multilateral framework.

We propose that the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank be coordinated, among themselves and with the United Nations system and GATT, with the aim of a clearer division of labour, better harmony and full universality in their work.

Global organizations cannot replace regional ones. It is likely that regional organizations will play an even greater role in the 1990's. The differing experiences of countries will demand and make possible differing degrees of economic cooperation and integration. Regional banks, regional trade or monetary agreements, regional centres for sharing experience and building capacity should be developed and strengthened. Such cooperation may cover a sub grouping of countries with particularly strong common interests. It may as well be regional groupings covering countries both from the North and the South, such as the areas around the Mediterranean, in the Pacific or across the Americas. Global cooperation will in turn benefit from such cooperation with and within the South.

In the Spirit of San Francisco

Reviewing and restructuring the international institutions is a cumbersome task. Many vested interests have been built into the present system. Many countries feel anxious when changes are proposed, particularly in the system of the United Nations. Lacking a better correspondence between the present international organizations and the realities of the world, actual leadership either moves outside the organizations into small groups of very powerful countries, or fails to be exercised at all or both. Yet, the global challenges urgently demand a stronger system of global governance.

We propose that a World Summit on Global Governance be called, similar to the meetings in San Francisco and at Bretton Woods in the 1940's.

This summit, in a constellation that embodies the necessary political weight, would manifest a new resolve and set in motion preparations to strengthen the international institutions. It could set into motion a process that may take long to mature. Perhaps this summit will have to be followed by others, where opportunities are given to political leaders from all parts of the world to continue to feed the process. One important such opportunity is the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. The result of the process may be a decision to hold regular world summits, with carefully balanced regional representation. These summits would not be used to negotiate detailed political issues. Instead, the aim would be to set agendas, stake out directions, and charge the international institutions with the work to be done. We believe that the best form of preparation for such a summit would be the work of an independent commission, non governmental in the nature of the Commissions whose work we ha

ve referred to in this memorandum. The World Commission on Environment and Development was invited by a resolution of the General Assembly to undertake its task. We believe that a similar process might be adopted to establish an international commission on global governance with a mandate wide enough to cover the range of matters we have canvassed above. Whether the commission is initiated by the UN or otherwise it must be composed of individuals functioning in their personal capacities. The issues to be considered require dispassionate and enlightened examination before they reach the stage of inter governmental dialogue. Once that initial work is done the commission's report could become the basis for the World Summit on Global Governance that we have recommended. Until such a summit can be convened, the commission's work, together with the preparations for the UN Conference on Environment and Development, will also contribute to the discussion within the United Nations on these issues.

We propose, as a matter of priority, the establishment of an independent International Commission on Global Governance.

The outcome and effect of an independent commission cannot be predicted. The work of earlier commissions, in particular the Brandt, Palme and Brundtland Commissions, has shown, however that the ideas, jointly arrived at and jointly presented, have a particuiar weight and a lasting impact. In this memorandum, we have sought to bring out the most urgent themes from these Commissions and to turn them into proposals for action. We have presented them under the headings of peace and security, development, environment, population, democracy and human rights, and global governance. We now see an opportunity, a historical opportunity, to change the ways the increasing interdependencies are met. This opportunity may be fragile, but it is present in a way not seen since the creation of the United Nations. It must not be lost. Nations must seize it. They must live up to their common responsibility in determining the future of humankind.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS

PEACE AND SECURITY

We propose:

1. improved United Nations capabilities for anticipating and preventing conflicts, in particular the establishment of a global emergency system; 2. the elaboration of a global law enforcement arrangement, in line with the United Nations Charter, focussing on the role of sanctions and on military enforcement measures; 3. organizational and financial measures to strengthen the United Nations capabilities for peace keeping and peace making operations; 4. Regional Conferences on Security and Cooperation to be tned m regions also outside Europe; 5. that the monitoring of world arms trade, particularly by the United Nations, be strengthened with the purpose of eventually agreeing on global norms, regulating and limiting trade in arms, and focussing on both supplier and recipient countries; 6. a pledge by governments in the industrialized countries to allocate a specific part of the peace dividend for international cooperation; 7. a commitment by governments in the South to substantially reduce their armed forces,

with the purpose of creating a peace dividend to be invested in human-development.

DEVELOPMENT

We propose:

8. that the world community sets the goal to eradicate extreme poverty within the coming 25 years, through a committed effort to achieve sustainable development; 9. that the following targets for the year 2000 be emphasized and that countries' achievements be monitored closely: primary education for all children,

equal participation of boys and girls in schools,

reduction of child mortality by at least one third,

reduction in maternal mortality by one half;

10. a strengthening of the multilateral framework of trade related agreements, reducing protectionism on all fronts, and expanding opportunities for developing countries' participation in world trade; 11. a strengthened debt strategy, introducing a strong element of debt forgiveness to radically cut the debt overhang: by terms and conditions in Paris Club reschedulings that go far beyond today's in providing relief and applying to a broader range of countrles, by commercial debt restructuring that better corresponds to the secondary market value of that debt, by increased financing on appropriate terms by the international financial institutions; 12. that all industrialized nations set public time targets to provide one per cent of their GNP for international development cooperation.

ENVIRONMENT

We propose:

13. that fees are levied on the emission of pollutants affecting the global environment, in particular carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossile fuels; 14. an international energy dialogue promoting a more efficient use of the world's energy resources, and, in particular, the use of alternative and renewable energy sources, e.g. solar energy; 15. that the United Nations be encouraged to take up environmental issues at the highest level in all appropriate fora; 16. that nations resolve to make the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development a breakthrough for achieving sustainable development.

POPULATION

We propose:

17. that national and cultural leaders mobilize the political commitment and the technical means for making a breakthrough in limiting population growth; 18. that the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development promote the implementation of policies and programmes to reach population stabilization goals.

DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

We propose:

19. the strengthening of the United Nations role in monitoring how countries live up to their commitments to conventions and declarations concerning human rights and democracy, recognizing that democracy can develop only through popular internal will; 20. the strengthening of independent international institutions that offer to monitor countries' observance of democratic rules and principles, in particular at time of elections, respecting the constitutional order of each country.

GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

We propose:

21. that the United Nations takes on a broadened mandate at the Security Council level, following the wider understanding of security which has developed, and that its composition and the use of the veto be reviewed; 22. that the Secretary General be given a stronger position and the means to exercise authority, and that the method of appointment of the Secretary General and of higher level staff be reviewed; 23. that the system wide responsibilities and authority of the SecretaryGeneral concerning interagency coordination and cooperation should be firmly established; 24. that the financing system of the United Nations be reviewed, and that countries who do not adhere to the financial rules be deprived of the right to vote; 25. that the activities of the United Nations in the economic and social fields be strengthened and rationalized; 26. that the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank be coordinated, among themselves and with the United Nations system and GArr, with the aim of a clearer division of

labour, better harmony and full universality in their work; 27. that a World Summit on Global Governance be called, similar to the meetings in San Francisco and at Bretton Woods in the 1940's; 28. as a matter of priority, the establishment of an independent International Commission on Global Governance.

PARTICIPANTS IN THE STOCKHOLM INITIATIVE

Ali Alatas

Indonesia

Minister for Foreign Affairs; previously Permanent Representative to the United Nations.

Patricio Aylwin Azócar*

Chile

President.

Benazir Bhutto

Pakistan

Chairman of the Pakistan People's Party, former Prime Minister.

Willy Brandt

Federal Republic of Germany

Former Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany; President of the Socialist International; Honorary Chairman of the Social Democratic Party; Chairman of the North South Commission.

Gro Harlem Brundtland

Norway

Prime Minister; Chairman of the Norwegian Labour Party; Member of the Palme Commission, Chairman of the World Commission on Environment and Development.

Manuel Camacho Solis

Mexico

Head of the Federal District of Mexico.

Fernando Henrique Cardoso

Brazil

Senator, Partido Socialdemocrata do Brasil.

Ingvar Carlsson

Sweden

Prime Minister; Chairman of the Swedish Social Democratic Party; Chairman of the Working Group.

Jimmy Carter*

United States

Former President.

Bernard Chidzero

Zimbabwe

Senior Minister of Finance, Economic Planning and Development; former Chairman of the Development Committee of the World Bank and the IMF; former Deputy Secretary General, UNCTAD; member of the Brundtland Commission.

Reinaldo Figueredo Planchart

Venezuela

Former Minister for Foreign Affairs.

Bronislaw Geremek

Poland

Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Sejm; Professor of History; in the 1980's adviser in the Solidarity movement.

Abdlatif Al Hamad

Kuwait

Director General, Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development; former Minister of Finance; member of the Brandt and South Commissions.

Mahbub ul Haq

Pakistan

Special Adviser, United Nations Development Programme; Minister of Finance and Planning 1982--88.

Vaclav Havel*

Czech and Slovak Federal Republic

President.

Edward Heath

Great Britain

Member of Parliament, House of Commons; Prime Minister 1970-74; member of the Brandt Commission.

Enrique Iglesias

Uruguay

President, Inter American Development Bank; Foreign Minister 1985 88; Executive Secretary UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 1972 85; member of the South Commission.

Hong Koo Lee

Republic of Korea

Ambassador of the Republic of Korea to the United Kingdom. Stephen Lewis Canada Fomer Ambassador to the United Nations.

Michael Manley*

Jamaica

Prime Minister

Vladlen Martynov

Soviet Union

Director, USSR Academy of Sciences, Institute of World Economy and International Relations.

Thabo Mbeki

South Africa

Director of International Affairs and member of the Executive Committee of the African National Congress (ANC).

Robert McNamara*

United States

Member of the Board, World Resources Institute, Former President of the World Bank.

Bradford Morse

United States

Administrator of UNDP 1976 86.

Julius Nyerere

Tanzania

Former President of the United Republic of Tanzania; Chairman of the South Commission.

Babacar Ndiaye

Senegal

President of the African Development Bank.

Saburo Okita*

Japan

Former Foreign Minister (represented in Stockholm by Mitsuru Taniuchi).

Jan Pronk

The Netherlands

Minister for Development Cooperation; Deputy Secretary General UNCTAD 1980-85; ex officio member of the Brandt Commission, member of the Working Group.

Shridath Ramphal

Guyana

Commonwealth Secretary General 1975-90; Minister of Foreign Affairs 1972-75; member of the Brandt, Palme, Brundtland and South Commissions, member of the Working Group.

Nafis Sadik

Pakistan

Executive Director, United Nations Population Fund.

Salim Salim

Tanzania

Secretary-General, Organization of African Unity; former Prime Minister of the United Republic of Tanzania; member of the Palme Commission.

Arjun Sengupta

India

Ambassador of India to Belgium, Luxembourg and the European Economic Community; former special adviser to the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund.

Eduard Shevardnadze*

Soviet Union

Former Foreign Minister.

Kalevi Sorsa

Finland

Member of the Board of Management of the Bank of Finland; former Prime Minister.

Maurice Strong

Canada

Secretary General, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development; former Under-Secretary General of the United Nations; Secretary General, United Nations Conference on the Human Environment 1970-72; member of the Brundtland Commission.

Brian Urquhart*

Great Britain

The Ford Foundation.

*Could not attend, but has agreed to support the paper.

 
Argomenti correlati:
sicurezza
onu
commercio
poverta'
controllo demografico
diritti umani
integrazione
governo mondiale
stampa questo documento invia questa pagina per mail