This situation of conflict and instability poses a grave risk for the future relationship between the industrialized world and the developing world. The polarizing and paralyzing Cold War, which impacted millions of people in the developing world, has gone. The new issue that demands the attention of the international community is the need to create stable states with self-sustainable economies and stable, inclusive forms of governance.
Much of the world's attention is periodically focused on the phenomenon of so-called failed states. But of the global threats that face us today, apart from nuclear war or HIV/AIDS, the most preoccupying is not failed states. It is the failure of democracy. The global picture at the beginning of the 21st century is a story of failed democracies in the Muslim world, in Latin America, in Eastern Europe and in sub-Saharan Africa.
A startling fact today is that nearly forty percent of UN member nations are failed democracies. The greatest risk to the West itself, and to its values, is therefore the accumulation of failed democracies. That in turn will cause deep under-currents of stress, if not conflict, among societies. It is essential, in the West's own interest, to admit to itself that democracy is as fragile as any other form of human governance.
It is essential that the question be asked, in every national situation and within each society, "if democracy is failing, why is this the case?" Every effort needs to be made to help correct the situation, rather than referring dismissively to failed states. To my knowledge, democracy can fail anywhere, at any time, in any society—as it has in several well-known and well-documented situations in Europe, as recently as the last 50 years. For it is self-evident, in Europe and across the globe, that the existence of political parties and elections do not alone produce stable governments or competent leadership.
Three concepts seem to me to be essential in creating, stabilizing and strengthening democracy around the world, including among the people of Africa and Asia with whom I have worked in the past. These concepts are meritocracy, pluralism and civil society. In particular, I will ask, what role can Canada play, drawing upon her national genius, in creating or enhancing these great underpinnings of democracy in the developing world?
A recent UN audit of democracy covering 18 Latin American countries reemphasizes the virtues of democracy in advancing human development; but it also warns that stagnant per capita incomes and growing inequality, in access to civil rights as well as income, are producing doubt, impatience and civil unrest. Thus, the report underlines a key concept that you will all know instinctively, and which my experience working in the developing world has illustrated, decade after decade: the primary, daily concern of peoples everywhere is their quality of life, which is intimately connected to their value systems. When it turns toward solutions, the report recognizes a crucial fact: "An important relationship exists between citizenship and organizations of civil society, which are major actors in the strengthening of democracy, in the oversight of government stewardship and in the development of pluralism."...
Our long presence on the ground gives us an insight that confirms the UN's detailed assessment in Latin America, which is that a democracy cannot function reasonably without two preconditions.
The first is a healthy, civil society. It is an essential bulwark that provides citizens with multiple channels through which to exercise effectively both their rights and duties of citizenship. Even at a very basic level, only a strong civil society can assure isolated rural populations, and the marginalized urban poor of a reasonable prospect of humane treatment, personal security, equity, the absence of discrimination, and access to opportunity.
The second precondition is pluralism. Pluralism means peoples of diverse backgrounds and interests, coming together in organizations of varying types and goals, for different kinds and forms of creative expression, which are valuable and deserving of support by government and society as a whole.
The rejection of pluralism is pervasive across the globe and plays a significant role in breeding destructive conflicts. Examples are scattered across the world's map: in Asia, in the Middle East, in Africa, in Europe, in the Americas. No continent has been spared from the tragedies of death, of misery and of the persecution of minorities. Are such high-risk situations predictable? If the answer is, "Yes", then what can be done about them, to pre-empt the risk that the rejection of pluralism will become the spark that sets human conflict aflame? Is the onus not on leadership, in all parts of the world, to build a knowledge base about such situations and consider strategies for preventing them? For, I deeply believe that our collective conscience must accept that pluralism is no less important than human rights for ensuring peace, successful democracy and a better quality of life.
I am optimistic that much constructive work can be done, and I would cite one example—only one from the perspective of forty years of experience of agencies of the Aga Khan Development Network—in which the careful, patient development of institutions of civil society helped to created the capacity to manage and legitimize pluralism.
In Northern Pakistan, once one of the poorest areas on earth, our Network has been working for over twenty years, with CIDA as our lead partner. Isolated and bypassed rural communities of different ethnic and religious backgrounds—Shia, Sunni and non-Muslim—struggled to eke out a meager living, farming small holdings in the harsh environment of this mountain desert ecosystem. Relations among the communities were often hostile. The challenge for the Network was to create sustainable, inclusive processes of development in which diverse communities could participate together and seek joint solutions to common problems.
To summarize two decades of work in Northern Pakistan: over 3,900 village based organizations, comprising a mix of broad-based representations and interest-specific groups in such fields as women's initiatives, water usage, and savings and credit were established. The quality of life of 1.3 million people living in a rural environment, representative of the majority of the population of Asia and Africa, has been dramatically improved. Per capita income has increased by 300%, savings have soared, and there have been marked improvements in male and female education, primary health, housing, sanitation and cultural awareness. Former antagonists have debated and worked together to create new programs and social structures in Northern Pakistan, and more recently in Tajikistan. Consensus around hope in the future has replaced conflict born of despair and memories of the past.
News, Video and links about helping the poor around the world. Half the world -- nearly three billion people -- live on less than two dollars a day. Most effective solutions are pioneered by RESULTS.org, founded by Sam Daley-Harris, and his network of organizations, supporters and citizen advocates.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sam Daley-Harris message
Sometimes we forget how revolutionary microcredit is.
When banks lent to the rich microcredit programmes lent to the poor.
When banks lent to men, microcredit programmes lent to women.
When banks made large loans, microcredit programmes made small ones.
When banks required collateral, microcredit loans were collateral free.
When banks required a lot of paperwork, microcredit loans were illiterate-friendly.
When clients had to come to the bank, microbankers went to the clients.
The Microcredit Summit Campaign is passionate about breaking with business as usual in international development – by making sure that the very poor aren't excluded as they often are. We are also passionate about scaling up action as evidenced in our goal to reach 100 million of the world's poorest families, especially the women of those families, with credit for self-employment and other financial and business services by the end of 2005.
Several years ago two friends of mine were speaking with a group of 40 clients at a micro-bank in South Asia. Through the translator, they asked the 40 women what impact the bank had had on the husbands of the non-borrowers; not their husbands, but the husbands of women who are not with the bank. The clients said, ‘Before we took our loans, our husbands were day-labourers, working for others whenever they could find work. When we took our loans our husbands stopped being day-labourers and worked with us – bicycle rickshaw, husking rice, growing garlic on leased land. This caused a shortage of day-labourers in this area, so the husbands of the non-borrowers who were day-laborers—their wages went up.' That was the impact of this bank on the husbands of the non-borrowers.
Imagine what might happen when 100 million of the world's poorest families are reached.
How many other families might benefit who are not among the 100 million reached? And how might that outreach empower women and their families even more if they are armed with education in reproductive health and other health information?
When banks lent to the rich microcredit programmes lent to the poor.
When banks lent to men, microcredit programmes lent to women.
When banks made large loans, microcredit programmes made small ones.
When banks required collateral, microcredit loans were collateral free.
When banks required a lot of paperwork, microcredit loans were illiterate-friendly.
When clients had to come to the bank, microbankers went to the clients.
The Microcredit Summit Campaign is passionate about breaking with business as usual in international development – by making sure that the very poor aren't excluded as they often are. We are also passionate about scaling up action as evidenced in our goal to reach 100 million of the world's poorest families, especially the women of those families, with credit for self-employment and other financial and business services by the end of 2005.
Several years ago two friends of mine were speaking with a group of 40 clients at a micro-bank in South Asia. Through the translator, they asked the 40 women what impact the bank had had on the husbands of the non-borrowers; not their husbands, but the husbands of women who are not with the bank. The clients said, ‘Before we took our loans, our husbands were day-labourers, working for others whenever they could find work. When we took our loans our husbands stopped being day-labourers and worked with us – bicycle rickshaw, husking rice, growing garlic on leased land. This caused a shortage of day-labourers in this area, so the husbands of the non-borrowers who were day-laborers—their wages went up.' That was the impact of this bank on the husbands of the non-borrowers.
Imagine what might happen when 100 million of the world's poorest families are reached.
How many other families might benefit who are not among the 100 million reached? And how might that outreach empower women and their families even more if they are armed with education in reproductive health and other health information?
No comments:
Post a Comment