>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 14:54:55 EDT >Subject: [STOPNATO.ORG.UK] "This is not the Time for Begging" - Fidel Castro > >Excerpts from the opening address by Fidel Castro Ruz, President of the >Council of State and the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Cuba and >host of the South Summit.* > > >... "Never before did humankind have such formidable scientific and >technological potential, such an extraordinary capacity to produce wealth and >well-being, but never before were disparity and inequity so deep-rooted. > > >Technological wonders that have been shrinking the planet in terms of >communications and distances co-exist today with an increasingly wide gap >separating wealth and poverty, development and underdevelopment. > > >Globalization is an objective reality underlining the fact that we are all >passengers on the same ship, that is, this planet where we all live. But, >passengers on this vessel are travelling in very different conditions. > > >Tiny minorities are travelling in luxurious cabins furnished with Internet, >cell phones and access to global communication networks. They enjoy an >abundant and nutritionally balanced diet and clean water. They have access to >sophisticated medical care and to culture. > > >But the overwhelming and distressed majority travels in conditions that >resemble the terrible slave trade from Africa to America in our colonial >past. That is, 85 per cent of the ship's passengers are crowded together in >its dirty hold and suffer hunger, disease and helplessness. > > >Obviously, this vessel is carrying too much injustice to remain afloat and it >pursues such an irrational and senseless route that it cannot call on a safe >port. This vessel seems destined to collide with an iceberg. If that >happened, we would all sink with it. > >The Heads of State and Government meeting here, who represent this >overwhelming and distressed majority, have not only the right but the >obligation to take the helm and correct this catastrophic course. It is our >duty to take our rightful place at the helm and ensure that all passengers >can travel in conditions of solidarity, equity and justice. > >For two decades, a single simplistic message has been related to the Third >World and one single policy has been imposed on it. > > >We have been told that deregulated markets, maximum privatization and the >state's withdrawal from economic activity were infallible principles leading >to economic and social development. > > >In line with this, the developed countries, particularly the United States of >America, the big transnationals benefiting from such policies, and the >International Monetary Fund have, in the last two decades, designed a world >economic order most hostile to our countries' progress and the least >sustainable in terms of the preservation of society and the environment. > > >Neoliberalism has put globalization in a straitjacket, globalizing poverty >rather than development; violating rather than respecting the national >sovereignty of our states, and, in the unequal competition of the >marketplace, each looks only to their own interests rather than promoting >solidarity amongst peoples. > > >Two decades of so-called neoliberal structural adjustment have left economic >failure and social disaster in their trail, which responsible politicians >must confront by taking the crucial decisions which are needed to rescue the >Third World from this blind alley. > > >Economic failure is evident. Under neoliberal policies, growth of the world >economy between 1975 and 1998 amounted to hardly half of that attained >between 1945 to1975 in the period of Keynesian policies of market regulation >and the active participation of the state in the economy. > > >In Latin America, where neoliberalism has been applied dogmatically, economic >growth has not been higher than that attained under the previous state >developmentalist policies. After World War II, Latin America had no debt but >today we owe almost one trillion dollars.1 This is the highest per capita >debt in the world. Also the income difference between the rich and the poor >in the region is the greatest worldwide. Now, in Latin America, the numbers >of poor, unemployed and hungry people are higher than during the worst times >in the region's history. > > >Under neoliberalism the world economy has not been growing faster in real >terms; rather instability, speculation, external debt and unequal exchange >have increased, there is a tendency for financial crises to occur more >frequently, while poverty and inequality have multiplied and the gap between >the wealthy North and the dispossessed South continues to widen. > > >Crises, instability, turmoil and uncertainty have been the most common words >used in the last two years to describe the world economic order. > > >The neoliberal deregulation and the liberalization of the capital account are >having a profound negative impact on a world economy, where speculation in >the currency and derivatives markets flourishes and daily transactions, most >of which are wholly speculative, amount to no less than 3 trillion US >dollars. > > >Our countries are urged to be more transparent with regard to information and >more effective in their supervision of the banking system, but financial >institutions like the hedge funds do not provide information on their >activities, are wholly unregulated and conduct their operations that exceed >the total reserves of all the banks together in countries of the South. > > >In an atmosphere of unrestrained speculation, the movements of short-term >capital render the countries of the South vulnerable to any external >contingency. > > >The Third World is forced to `freeze' its financial resources and become >indebted in order to have hard currency reserves, harbouring the illusion >that this will help to resist speculative attacks. In the last few years, >over 20 per cent of capital inflows were immobilized in reserves but they >were not enough to resist such attacks, as was demonstrated in the recent >financial crisis in Southeast Asia. > > >At the moment, 727 billion US dollars from the reserves of the world's >Central Banks are in the United States. This leads to the paradox that poor >countries offer their reserves as cheap long-term financing to the wealthiest >and most powerful country in the world -- reserves which could be better >invested in economic and social development. > > >If Cuba has been successful in its education, healthcare, cultural, science, >sports and other programmes, something which nobody in the world would >question, despite four decades of economic blockade, and has, moreover, >revalued its currency seven times in the last five years in relation to the >US dollar, this has been due to the privilege of not being a member of the >International Monetary Fund. > > >A financial system that forces countries to freeze such immense and much-need >resources, in order to protect themselves from the instability caused by that >very system, and which makes the poor finance the wealthy, should be >abolished. > > >The International Monetary Fund is the institutional emblem of the current >monetary system and the United States enjoys veto power over its decisions. > > >As far as the latest financial crisis is concerned, the IMF showed a lack of >foresight and inept handling of the situation. It imposed conditionalities >that paralysed the governments' social development policies, generating >serious internal problems and preventing access to the necessary resources >when they were most needed. > > >It is high time that the Third World forcefully demanded the dismantling of >an institution that is not conducive to stability in the world economy and, >instead of working to provide funds to debtor countries so as to help them >avoid liquidity crises, protects and rescues the creditors. > > >What kind or ethic or rationale underpins an international monetary order >which allows a few technocrats, whose positions depend on American support, >to design from Washington identical economic adjustment programmes to be >applied to the wide variety of countries and concrete problems found in the >Third World? > > >Who takes responsibility when the adjustment programmes bring about social >chaos, and paralyse and destabilize nations with considerable human and >natural resources, as was the case in Indonesia and Ecuador? > > >It is of crucial importance for the Third World to work to do away with this >disastrous institution and the philosophy it represents, and to replace it >with an international financial regulatory body that operates on a democratic >basis and in which no one has the right of veto -- an institution that would >not defend exclusively the wealthy creditors or impose intrusive >conditionalities, but would facilitate the regulation of financial markets so >as to prevent unbridled speculation. > > >One way of doing this would be to establish a tax on speculative financial >transactions as Mr.Tobin brilliantly proposed, but not of 0.1 per cent but >rather a minimum of 1 per cent, which would also permit the creation of a >large and crucial fund -- in the excess of one trillion dollars every year -- >to promote real, sustainable and comprehensive development in the Third World. > > >The underdeveloped nations' external debt is overwhelming by virtue of its >enormous size, and the outrageous mechanisms of subjugation and exploitation >that it involves, and the absurd manner in which the developed countries >propose to deal with it. > > >This debt already exceeds 2.5 trillion US dollars and in the present decade >it has been increasing more dangerously than in the 1970s. A large part of >this new debt can change hands easily in secondary markets, is more dispersed >and more difficult to reschedule. > > >Once again, I should repeat what we have been saying since 1985: the debt has >already been paid if note is taken of the way it was contracted, of the swift >and arbitrary increase of dollar interest rates in the previous decade and >the fall in primary product prices, a fundamental source of revenue for >countries which have yet to develop. The debt continues to feed on itself in >a vicious circle where money is borrowed to pay the interest on the debt. > > >Today, it is clearer than ever that the debt is not an economic but a >political issue and therefore requires a political solution. One cannot >continue to overlook the fact that the solution to this problemmust basically >come from those with resources and power, that is, the wealthy countries. > > >The so-called Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt Reduction Initiative has a >long name but is short in results. It can only be described as ridiculous in >that it proposes to relieve 8.3 per cent of the total debt of the countries >of the South, and, almost four years after its introduction, only four >countries among the poorest 33 have managed to get through the complicated >process, and then to forgive the minor sum of of 2,7 billion US dollars, >which is 33 per cent of what the United States spends on cosmetics every >year. > > >Today, the external debt is one of the greatest obstacles there is to >development and one more bomb ready to explode under the foundations of the >world economy at any time of economic crisis. > > >The resources needed for a real to this problem are not large when compared >to the wealth and the expenditures of the creditor countries. Every year 800 >billion US dollars are used to finance weapons and troops, even after the >cold war is over, while no less than 400 billion go into narcotics and an >additional one trillion into commercial advertising which is as alienating as >narcotics, just to mention three examples. > > >As we have said before, sincerely and realistically speaking the Third World >countries' external debt is unpayable and unrecoverable. > >World trade continues to be a means of domination by the rich countries, and >will become increasingly so under neoliberal globalization, perpetuating and >sharpening inequalities, while also providing the context in which developed >countries engage in a fierce struggle between themselves for control over >present and future markets. > >The neoliberal discourse recommends trade liberalization as the one and only >means to achieve efficiency and development. Accordingly, all nations should >remove measures protecting their domestic markets, the differences in >development levels between countries, no matter how big, not justifying any >deviation from this policy to which there is said to be no possible >alternative. After hard negotiations in the WTO, the poorest countries have >been allowed a short additional period before the full entry into force of >this iniquitous system. > > >While this neoliberalism discourse on the opportunities created by trade >liberalization continues to be repeated, the underdeveloped countries' share >of world exports was lower in 1998 than in 1953, that is, forty-five years >ago. With an area of 3.2 million square miles, a population of 168 million >and 51.1 billion US dollars in exports during 1998, Brazil is exporting less >than the Netherlands with an area of 12,978 square miles, a population of >15.7 million and exports of 198.7 billion that same year. > > >Trade liberalization has essentially consisted in the unilateral removal of >protective measures on the part of the South, developed economies have failed >to do the same so as to allow Third World exports access to their markets. > > >The wealthy nations have fostered liberalization in strategic sectors >associated with advanced technology where they enjoy enormous advantages, >which unregulated markets tend to augment. Services, information technology, >biotechnology and telecommunications are classic cases. > > >On the other hand, the agreements reached in the Uruguay Round to remove >restrictions affecting agriculture and textiles, which are particularly >significant sectors for our countries, have not been implemented because it >has not suited the developed countries to do so. > > >In the OECD, the club of the wealthiest countries, the average tariff applied >to manufactured exports from underdeveloped countries is four times higher >than that applied to the club members. A veritable wall of non-tariff >barriers is raised against the countries of the South. > > >In the field of international trade there is a hypocritical discourse which >combines ultra-liberalism with selective protectionism on the part of the >countries of the North. > > >Primary commodities are still the weakest link in world trade. In the case of >67 countries of the South such commodities account for no less than 50 per >cent of their export earnings. > > >The wave of neoliberalism has undermined the schemes intended to protect the >terms of trade of primary products. The dictates of market supremacy do not >tolerate `distortions', and hence the International Commodity Agreements and >other measures designed to deal with unequal exchange were abandoned. Today, >therefore, the purchasing power of such commodities as sugar, cocoa, coffee >and others is 20 per cent of what it used to be in 1960, and they do not even >cover their costs of production. > > >Special and differentiated treatment for poor countries has been conceived as >a temporary act of charity rather than as an act of basic justice and an >undeniable need, both in view of the fact that enormous differences in levels >of development make it inappropriate to apply the same measures to rich and >poor countries alike, and also in recompense for the colonial past. > > >The failed Seattle meeting demonstrated the fatigue and the opposition >generated by neoliberal policies among growing sectors of public opinion in >the South and in the North itself. > > >The United States of America presented the Round of Trade Negotiations that >should have begun in Seattle as a further step in trade liberalization >regardless, or perhaps forgetful, of its own aggressive and discriminatory >Foreign Trade Act still in force. That Act includes provisions like the >"Super-301", a real display of discrimination and threats to apply sanctions >to other countries for reasons that go from the assumed imposition of >barriers to American products to the arbitrary, deliberate and often cynical >assessment of others made by this government on the subject of human rights. > > >In Seattle there was a revolt against neoliberalism. Its most recent >precedent was the refusal to accept the imposition of a Multilateral >Agreement on Investment. This shows that the aggressive market >fundamentalism, which has caused great damage to our countries, is generating >strong and deserved rejection worldwide." > > >... "The world economic order works to the advantage of 20 per cent of the >population but it leaves out, demeans and degrades the remaining 80 per cent. > > >We simply cannot resign ourselves to entering into the next century as the >backward rearguard, poor and exploited, the victim of racism and xenophobia, >prevented from gaining access to knowledge and suffering the alienation of >our cultures due to the foreign consumer-oriented messages which are >transmitted globally by the media. > > >For the Group of 77, this is not the time for begging from the developed >countries or for submission, defeatism or internal divisions. This is the >time to regain our fighting spirit, our unity and cohesion in defending our >demands. > > >Fifty years ago we were promised that one day there would no longer be a gap >between developed and underdeveloped countries. We were promised bread and >justice; but today we have less and less bread and more injustice. > > >The world could be globalized under the rule of neoliberalism but it is >impossible to govern billions of people who are hungry for bread and justice. >The pictures of mothers and children under the scourge of droughts and other >catastrophes in whole regions of Africa remind us of the concentration camps >in nazi Germany; they bring back memories of piles of dead or dying men, >women and children. > >Another Nuremberg is needed to put on trial the economic order that has been >imposed on us, and which each three years kills more men, women and children >of hunger and preventable or curable diseases than all those killed by World >War II in six years. We should discuss here what is to be done about that. > > >In Cuba we say: `Our Homeland or Death!'. At this Summit of the Third World >countries we would have to say: `Either we unite and co-operate closely, or >we die!' " > > >*Unofficial translation from the Spanish by the South Centre. > > >1 In this text a billion is counted as a thousand millions, and a trillion is >a million millions or one thousand billions. > > >______________________________________________________________________ >To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Save your company time and money with Headlight.com! >-Access courses from any Internet-enabled computer, at whatever time >fits your schedule >-Save 75%-90% compared to traditional classroom solutions. >-Choose from 1,500 courses (Business, IT, desktop applications, etc.) >Click here! >http://on.linkexchange.com/?ATID=27&AID=1668 > _______________________________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi _______________________________________________________ Kominform list for general information. Subscribe/unsubscribe messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anti-Imperialism list for anti-imperialist news. Subscribe/unsubscribe messages: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________________
