9/21/15 9/21/15

2015 at Dawn.com)

In just one week, world leaders will gather at the United Nations General Assembly in New York to adopt the much-anticipated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) designed to steer global economic, social and environmental policies over the next 15 years.The SDGs are important and their implementation will have a critical impact on what the world will look like in 2030. After all, the previous Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) certainly contributed, among other things, to reducing extreme poverty and halving the number of annual deaths of children under five.And yet. Promises about the future are fine but I can’t help wondering: shouldn’t the focus in New York be on the need for urgent global action to tackle a raging refugee crisis which is affecting not just Europe but number of countries, including many in the developing world?The UN should use next week’s meeting to craft one over-arching “mother of all SDGs” which would tackle the deep, structural problems — poverty, inequality, conflicts, climate change — which lie behind the world’s growing refugee problem.Instead of making speeches on the SDGs, world leaders would be more credible if they hammered out a global strategy to ensure a decent, dignified life for the millions of refugees on the move today — while also taking action to deal with the wars, conflict and persecution which cause people to flee their homes.Such a blueprint should be about the current plight of the refugees — mostly from Syria, Iraq, Eritrea and Afghanistan — who are desperately seeking shelter in Europe but also in Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and many African countries.But it should be about much more as well. It should focus on the deficiencies in current global development policies which have helped to provoke the current disastrous situation.In fact, the world body doesn’t have to add on another — eighteenth — SDG which focuses specifically on refugees. It could quite simply and forcefully put its full weight behind the urgent need to link the implementation of the SDGs to the resolution of the refugee crisis.Certainly, there will need to be a sharper focus on fragile states. As Gideon Rabinowitz from the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) points out in a recent blog, “although certainly not its primary cause, the international community’s inadequate support for countries facing humanitarian and conflict-related challenges has contributed to this [refugee] crisis”.Rabinowitz underlines that funding for food vouchers for Syrian refugees has been slashed. Aid to fragile states is down.At a recent conference on the SDGs held in Brussels, there was agreement that the refugee crisis should lead to greater emphasis on peace and conflict resolution in the SDGs.“The crisis is actually a test for many of the SDGs — some of the social ones and education, health, things like that,” said James Mackie, Senior Adviser on EU Development Policy at the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM). “But the one I would really focus on would be SDG 16 on conflict, peace, justice and inclusive institutions. I think that’s where the real solution to this crisis is, and we should learn that lesson looking forward.”Certainly, attention at the moment is on European governments’ messy and discordant responses. Hungary’s odious mistreatment of the refugees is one cruel facet of the story, Germany’s still-humane reaction is another.Most “ordinary” people are going out of their way to welcome the refugees even as the Far Right screams blue murder.The sad truth is that Europe is overwhelmed by the number of people seeking entry, the collapse of its cherished Schengen border-free system and the need to rapidly craft a new and more intelligent asylum and immigration policy.All this will take time. Speedy decision-making is not something the EU is good at.But what about others? Where is the compassionate global response that could be expected, especially from Muslim Middle Eastern nations which have taken only a few escapees from the brutal conflict they are helping to finance in Syria. Saudi Arabia has offered Germany funds to build 200 mosques. Hopefully, Berlin will say no.Japan took in eleven asylum seekers last year although Tokyo faces labour shortages and the huge problem of an ageing population. The US has been slow and lumbering in its grudging decision to take in about 10,000 Syrians.Little can be expected meanwhile from Southeast Asian countries which were at loggerheads only a few months ago over their reluctance to house the Rohingya fleeing ethnic strife in Myanmar.The problem won’t go away, however. The UNHCR has warned that that worldwide displacement is at the highest level ever recorded, with the number of people forcibly displaced at the end of 2014 rising to a staggering 59.5 million compared to 51.2 million a year earlier and 37.5 million a decade ago.The increase represents the biggest leap ever seen in a single year. Moreover, the report said the situation was likely to worsen still further.Since early 2011, the main reason for the acceleration has been the war in Syria, now the world’s single-largest driver of displacement.If they are to mean anything to anyone in the coming years, the SDGs must focus on preventing, managing and resolving the many conflicts and the many inter-connected challenges of poverty, inequality and climate change which are devastating the world.So here’s my advice to the great and the good as they head for New York: tone down the rhetoric, tear up your speeches. Remember your speeches and the SDGs will be meaningless unless the new set of global development priorities also help tackle the reasons behind the global refugee crisis.

3/9/15 3/9/15

View from Abroad: New development paradigm (Originally published 08/03/2015 at dawn.com)

It used to be so simple: the world was divided into rich and poor countries. The rich provided aid and trade concessions to the poor ones. It was called Official Development Assistance (ODA) and often seen as a panacea for all problems facing “third world” countries. Rich nations promised to spend 0.7 per cent of their GDP as ODA. Developing nations were grateful for the help. It was neat and tidy. Orderly even.Only of course it wasn’t. It was messy, patronising and based on the notion of charity. Nothing wrong with charity — only that it begins at home. And as the going got tougher at home, growth rates dipped and jobs became scarcer, richer countries were less and less anxious to help the poorer ones.And then the world turned on its head as poor countries — or at least some of them — stopped being really poor. China, India, South Africa, Brazil began to rise, becoming more self confident and assertive by the day. They asked for stronger representation in international financial institutions, set up their own bank, started investing in and assisting their less well-off friends.In 2000 amid all the change and shift in power from North to South, the talk turned to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and eradicating poverty. However, it was still about the rich helping the poor, putting conditions on their aid, making sure that there was no wastage, no human rights abuses.Fast forward to 2015 and the world is a dramatically different place. The talk is of a post-2015 agenda which is about sustainable development in both the North and the South. There is a focus on governance, gender balance, and moving “beyond ODA”.There is agreement that the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will not be met by ODA alone. Their achievement will require the mobilisation of the private sector, a better use of remittances and philanthropy and more creative thinking about “blending” private and public funds.And above all there will be a focus on the mobilisation of additional resources by developing countries through domestic resource mobilisation, including through more thorough and efficient national tax collection.Yes, finally after years of beating around the bush, global attention is turning to tackling tax evasion, by companies and individuals. The question will be high up on the agenda of the third International Conference on Financing for Development which will be held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from July 13 to 16, 2015.The reason for the focus on domestic revenue mobilisation in developing countries is clearly linked to the fact that ODA is on its way down and traditional donors are getting tougher.There is good talk about the potential benefits of taxation for state-building and the long-term independence from foreign assistance. It is also of course a question of governance.Revenue from taxation and customs provides governments with the funds needed to invest in development, relieve poverty and deliver public services directed towards the physical and social infrastructure required to enhance long-term growth.Strengthening domestic resource mobilisation is not just a question of raising revenues: it is also about designing a revenue system that promotes inclusiveness, encourages good governance, improves accountability of governments to their citizens, and cultivates social justice.Non-governmental agencies such as Christian Aid have estimated that developing countries, including lower- and middle-income countries, could be losing out on as much as $160bn a year in potential tax revenue because companies are dodging taxes. This was one and a half times the combined overseas aid budget of the whole rich world at the time, and there’s no reason to think the problem has got smaller since then.In 2011, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa established a high-level panel to write a report on illicit financial flows (IFFs) in Africa and to come up with ways to combat them.The panel, presided by the former South African head of state Thabo Mbeki, warned that the cost of IFFs to the continent was around $50 billion each year.The report states: “Some have estimated that Africa’s capital stock would have expanded by more than 60 per cent if funds leaving Africa illicitly had remained on the continent, while GDP per capita would be up to 15 per cent more.”Worse still, this sum is even greater than the total official development assistance received by African countries, which was $46.1 billion in 2012.At a recent conference in Brussels, participants underlined that there was no dearth of money in the world and that in fact Africa was a rich continent. The money was just not in Africa, but hidden and hoarded in tax havens, most of them in rich countries.

12/8/14 12/8/14

View from Abroad: Pakistan’s choice (Originally published 6/12/2014 at dawn.com)

As I prepare to travel to Pakistan — the first such visit in five years — I am filled with admiration, amazement and apprehension. They say the past is a different country. And Pakistan is certainly a very different country from the one I left all those years ago.Pakistan and I have both changed. I am obviously older (but not wiser) than the young, naive and rather demure girl who boarded the plane from Islamabad to Brussels with her parents and sister. At the time, I believed I would be away for a few months, may be a couple of years. Several decades later, Europe has become a core part of my identity and existence and Brussels is “home”, a city that has nourished and nurtured me through good times and bad.Pakistan’s transformation is more starkly radical. Sometimes I can hardly recognise my country of birth. There is much still to admire and love — and to yearn for on cold European winter evenings. Family and friends of course. The food and some of the music. The stories being told by old writers and new ones whose books I devour avidly. The artists whose pieces stir long-buried memories.But what I admire most is the resilience of the people. The indomitable spirit of the so-called common man, the “ordinary” people — or the “masses” that the Pakistani politicians refer to in derision — who keep the country humming and running against all odds.You see that unbeatable spirit everywhere, among the people displaced by floods and the deadly fighting between the army and the Taliban, after the tragic deaths of innocent civilians caused by drones, among the thousand Malalas still determined to go to school and the sick people waiting patiently for a doctor to see them in crowded hospitals.But that resilience is also about being optimistic about the future. Going to work every day in packed buses, facing harassment, electricity breakdowns, rampant inflation and corruption with stubbornness and stoicism. And to keep going on and on. I admire Pakistani business leaders and innovators who still invest and believe in the country. The young and the daring entrepreneurs. People who speak up for tolerance, resist the siren song of conformity and compromise.I have seen the same energy and resilience in many other parts of Asia and in Africa. But recently rarely in Europe. The Eurozone crisis has exhausted Europe and joblessness rates are much too high, especially for young people.But speak to young people in China, India and Indonesia and it is clear that they believe in a better future. Visit the countries and it is clear that people’s lives are getting better. Of course there is still inequality, poverty and hunger. But the governments in these countries are trying hard to tackle the multiple challenges they face. Are Pakistani politicians doing the same?So what about my amazement? Well, I suppose it’s about the patience of the people, the willingness to put up with mediocre and often corrupt politicians, war-mongering soldiers, inequality and unfairness and the rampant lack of the rule of law. Elections have not led to real democracy. All that aid money pouring in, has not led to sustainable growth and development.Reading the online version of the front page of Dawn fills me with wonder at how quickly Pakistan’s political landscape has turned into a dark, cruel, repetitive circus. The scowling, angry features of former cricketer Imran Khan, the crazy pronouncements of the Canadian preacher, the ever-chubbier and dishevelled, helpless look of the prime minister and the semi-lucid mutterings of the scion of the Bhutto family.And then there is the apprehension. Despite the disappointment and the disillusionment with a country which I once called home, I suppose there is still some lingering connection, a hope that Pakistan will survive the challenges of the 21st century, stand proud and tall and become an integral part of a rising Asia.It would be nice if Pakistan was in the headlines not because of the antics of the likes of Junaid Jamshed, anti-India rants by the foreign ministry, suicide bombings and hate-Malala crazies as well as the treatment being meted out to Asia Bibi but because the country was breaking new ground, turning a fresh page, opting for sanity rather than madness.After so many years and so many wonderful experiences in Europe and Asia — not to mention the lessons in honesty, sincerity and fearlessness that I learned from my father — I wonder if I will be able to stay silent when I encounter intolerance and religiosity and the blatant disregard for the rights of women, children and minorities that seems to have become part of the national discourse.Across Asia, there is hope and progress. Viewed from Brussels, it certainly looks like this is the Asian Century, a time when Asia is coming of age, growing and developing.Pakistan has a choice: it could join the Asian mainstream and give its people the life and future they deserve or it can opt to be part of a self-destructive Middle East mindset and stay on the periphery of a dynamic and vibrant Asia. I know what I would choose — but do they?

9/8/14 9/8/14

Aid coordination key to fighting poverty (Originally published 04/04/11)

With aid budgets under pressure in most donor nations, the focus has rightly moved to improving the quality and effectiveness of international assistance, encouraging private/public partnerships, making national and international policies more coherent and helping developing nations to improve tax collection regimes.Stronger coordination, rather than aid competition, among key aid donors to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is also crucial. Closer donor dialogue and discussion on combating poverty is set to become even more urgent in view of the need for increased aid to crisis-hit North Africa and demands for more financial help from other developing countries, including many in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, facing escalating food and fuel prices.These new challenges, including those triggered by natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods and tsunamis, add to the old ones.Progress so far in achieving key MDGs remains patchy, with the United Nations pointing to huge disparities across and within countries. Sub-Saharan Africa is still struggling with continuing food insecurity, a rise in extreme poverty, stunningly high child and maternal mortality, and large numbers of people living in slums. Although Asia is the region with the fastest progress, hundreds of millions of people in the region also remain in extreme poverty.The MDGs cover targets for the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, universal primary education, gender equality, reduced child mortality, improved maternal health, lower HIV/Aids and malaria infection and more environmental sustainability. Set at the UN Millennium Summit in 2000, they are expected to be met by 2015. However, with “aid fatigue” on the rise in many Western nations, prospects for meeting the deadline appear slim.Policymakers in the European Union and the United States are struggling to make a stronger political argument for continuing – and if possible increasing – development assistance. It is proving to be an uphill struggle, however.European countries have "no right to fail" in their commitments to poorer nations, the European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid Andris Piebalgs said recently, underlining that EU countries must meet the target of spending 0.7 per cent of GNP on development aid despite the global economic turndown. "If you don't do this, it is not just the projects that it will fail. If there is no trust, there is no success. If you promise you should deliver," he said in The Irish Times.The US Administration, also seeking to step up engagement in Asia, the Pacific, Africa, Central Asia and Latin America, has said that development assistance is “as central to advancing America's interests as diplomacy and defense.”Both the US and the EU argue that investments in global health and education are investments in global peace, stability and security and have warned that the financial and economic crisis has pushed even more people into extreme poverty.At the EU-US summit in Lisbon in November 2009, both sides – representing nearly 80 per cent of global official development assistance - also agreed to intensify their development policy dialogue and increase cooperation in practical ways to achieve results, especially as regards food security, climate change and achieving the MDGs.Such cooperation is good news at a time of rising demands for assistance and increasing pressure on Western treasuries to rein back spending. International aid programmes have been trammelled for too long by competition and lack of coordination among donors. EU-US cooperation in the sector could set a good example for others.