The declaration from Taegu which Patrick forwarded, is very much a declaration from a conference drafted in such a way as to win the largest possible number of signatures without going into detail that not all could sign up to. So the call for the immediate resignation of Camdessus and his staff. I do not say that is wrong, but who is to replace them? The European Parliament managed to succeed in getting the European Commission to resign and a new one appointed with assurances about the management of malpractice. What I suspect is implicit here is an assumption that the workings of international finance capital are merely a policy of a number of nasty people on world organisations. That is not a marxist approach. Even if the most oppressed can only call for the destruction of the proto world government, the question has to be posed, would they be less oppressed and exploited without the IMF altogether? I cannot see that. An anarchist solution may seem at first sight more revolutionary, but the problem is to bring capital under social control, not to abolish any organisation that might try to control it. Remember there is a coalition of class forces behind something like the Taegu declaration. That will include national bourgeois and petty bourgeois ideology. But getting Camdessus personally off their backs is not a scientific approach to political strategy. That is why the road to global revolution has to be through reforms. Otherwise we leave the field even freer for giant multi-national corporations. Chris Burford London >8 October 1999 > >TO: Leaders of the G-7 Countries > International Monetary Fund Executive Directors > International Monetary Fund Management > >We, representatives of civil society organizations gathered in >Taegu, South Korea to consider strategies to counter the damage >done by unregulated capital flows and the programs of the >international financial institutions, take note of the International >Monetary Fund's recent announcement that its structural >adjustment programs will henceforth adopt a focus on "poverty >reduction" and will be designed in conjunction with the World Bank, >through a new facility to be known as the Poverty Reduction and >Growth Facility. > >We welcome the IMF's acknowledgment, implicit in this news, that >its programs have had a negative impact on impoverished peoples >in the countries where it has imposed structural adjustment. We >note, however, that this acknowledgment comes very late: >organizations like ours have been pointing out the devastation >caused by the IMF for over 15 years. > >We are alarmed, also, that despite the apparent admission of its >incompetence in designing economic programs that will promote >the welfare of the greatest part of countries' populations, this >announcement indicates the following: > >(1) that the IMF does not intend to withdraw from its involvement >with impoverished countries, but that, on the contrary, it will now >expand its mandate by designing and implementing poverty >reduction programs; > >(2) that the IMF has taken no steps to acknowledge the impact of >its policy impositions in the countries of East Asia forced to accept >"bailout" packages in 1997 and 1998; and > >(3) the World Bank has apparently been chosen as the guarantor of >the rights of the impoverished, although we know that its structural >adjustment programs differ hardly at all from the IMF's in terms or >impact, and despite the confirmation of this in a recent internal >Bank report that finds the institutions paid no heed to the impact of >its own structural adjustment loans on the poor populations they >effect. > > >Recognizing the disastrous impact of the IMF around the world, we >make the following demands: > >1. That the IMF immediately cease imposing structural adjustment- >style conditions in conjunction with any of its loans or programs. > >2. That consequently the proposal for the new Poverty Reduction >and Growth Facility (as successor to the Enhanced Structural >Adjustment Facility) be immediately withdrawn as irrelevant. > >3. That the assets of the ESAF/PRGF be used to cancel the >debts the countries defined by the World Bank as heavily indebted >poor countries owed the IMF, and that any remaining funds be >used to cancel the debts owed the IMF by the additional countries >appearing on Jubilee 2000 U.K.'s list of 52 countries in need of debt >cancellation. > >4. That the IMF structural adjustment/stabilization programs >imposed on the East Asian economies in the aftermath of the >Asian financial crises be immediately discontinued. > >5. That Michel Camdessus, the IMF's Managing Director for over >ten years, and his top staff, including Deputy Managing Director >Stanley Fischer, express a new spirit of accountability at the IMF >by immediately resigning. > >6. That moves to amend the IMF's Articles of Agreement to >require member countries to liberalize their capital accounts be >explicitly abandoned as incompatible with the lessons of several >recent financial crises. > >7. That a global commission with over half its members >representing civil society organizations (with others from >governments and the United Nations) be immediately convened to >determine whether the IMF shall continue to exist and, if so, what >role it should play. > > >Signed in Taegu by the following, with the understanding that >organizations not able to be in Taegu will be asked to endorse the >statement in the following weeks.
