THE NEW GHETTOS

By Boutros-Ghali Boutros Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

PARIS, Dec 1 2004 (IPS) - The fight against poverty must consist of a long-term policy and be monitored closely and continuously, writes Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary-General of the United Nations from 1992-1996. In this article, Boutros-Ghali writes that without underestimating the importance of emergency aid, this sort of action should be avoided because it is effective only in the short term. More and more frequently, we find that once the crisis has passed and peace is restored, the area in question is abandoned to its fate and almost certain to slide back into misery. It is also necessary to take into account the profound diversity of the situations of those in dire need of assistance. The respective plights of the population of Monrovia during the civil war, the inhabitants of a favela, and a group of refugees cannot be approached in the same manner. Each situation has its own conditions and requires a specific response.

New ghettos are cropping up around the world. They differ from the old ghettos in nature and dimension, and their number grows every day. They can be as large as a suburb, a country, a region, or a continent.

They are found, to begin with, in the forty-nine so-called Less Advanced Countries (LACs), the majority of which are in sub-Saharan Africa.

Then there are the ”broken states” whose number fluctuates with the flaring and fading of violent conflicts, both between countries and within them: for example, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sierra Leone, and Liberia. In this same category are camps for refugees and displaced people, certain indigenous populations, and oppressed minorities.

Finally there are the poor sections of the megalopolis, thousands of pockets of misery that develop not only in poor countries but very wealthy ones as well and that some call the Fourth World.

But only in the Third World do these various phenomena accumulate and build up one on top of the other.

Whatever their differences, the new ghettos are similar in that they contain hundreds of millions of people who suffer and must fight every day just to survive.

The widespread belief that the amount of misery in the world has decreased is erroneus. The reduction in poverty shown in the latest official figures is due largely to the notable expansion of the Chinese economy, which grew at an average of 9 percent per year in the 1990s. But in the same period, many developing countries stagnated or even lost ground. Today, 54 developing countries are poorer than they were in 1990.

The causes of this regression are varied. When the reason was political, it was largely the result of broken states: in Somalia, Sierra Leone, and Liberia, where power became synonymous with kleptomania and corruption spread like gangrene through the machinery of the state, or where, as in Occupied Palestine, national authority was either destroyed or dismantled.

In other cases, violent conflict was the major obstacle to development. Between 1990 and 2001 there were 57 major conflicts in 45 different areas, 13 in the poorest countries on earth. Africa was hardest struck, though not one of the developing areas was spared.

In the field of economics, it is notable that during this same decade, the foreign debt of poor countries rose as the prices of the raw materials they export went into freefall. Moreover, industrialised countries cut back their foreign aid, despite the fact that the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2626 which called on all countries to dedicate at least 0.7 percent of GDP to development aid. Thirty years later, the world’s richest countries devote a mere 0.22 percent of GDP to aid, while in the US the figure is barely 0.1 percent.

Among the health-related causes is AIDS, which in parts of the world has actually reversed the process of development in recent decades. In 1990, there were 10 million people infected with the disease; today there are almost 42 million. AIDS has caused 22 million deaths and left 13 million orphans.

Then there are social causes, like the exclusion of certain ethnic groups –as in Rwanda– or the control of territory by mafia-like organisations, as in Burma or Colombia.

I am not proposing new solutions to this plague, which is one of the greatest scandals of the new century. However, I think we should work from a clearly-stated principle. We must understand that the fight against poverty does not consist in dutifully following some model imported or imposed from abroad, nor can people achieve development when they reject their own identity.

The goal of this fight must be to reach a minimum level of prosperity, dignity, and liberty while preserving and maintaining respect for one’s own history, culture, language, and traditions.

It is necessary to take into account the profound diversity of the situations of those in dire need of assistance. The respective plights of the population of Monrovia during the civil war, the inhabitants of a favela, and a group of refugees cannot be approached in the same manner. Each situation has its own conditions and requires a specific response.

Similarly, and without underestimating the importance of emergency aid, I would argue that this sort of action should be avoided because it is effective only in the short term. More and more frequently, we find that once the crisis has passed and peace is restored, the area in question is abandoned to its fate and almost certain to slide back into misery. The fight against poverty must consist of a long-term policy and be monitored closely and continuously. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)