PHA-Exch> Food for an insensitive banker's thought

[Claudio Schuftan]

Human Rights Reader 192    [No.3 of 3 in a short series on non-actors in the
human rights arena].



*HUMAN RIGHTS: WHILE SMALL SUCCESS STORIES ARE CERTAINLY POSSIBLE, NEEDED
GLOBAL REFORMS ARE BEING HAMPERED.*



1. Although the World Bank (and related international financial
institutions) pay lip service to progressive human rights (HR) policy, in
practice, they continue to promote centralized, unsustainable projects. All
summed up, it is not an exaggeration to say that the World Bank (WB) de
facto stands in the way of adequate HR policymaking. *



2. Despite the newest WB jargon --like "inclusive globalization" (supposedly
including the concerns of indigenous people, of women and of the rural poor)
-- the same does not fool many any longer, especially because it is used in
a (deliberate) confusing manner. Also, their claim to be the No.1
development knowledge-broker may be true --but the question is: of what
knowledge and information?  [May this Reader then claim to be one of the
knowledge-brokers-of-an-opposing-kind from the WB….?]



3. Looking at it dispassionately, all along, the WB has actually promoted an
agenda that has little to do with the de-facto respect, protection and
fulfillment of HR --and, therefore little to do with the social and
political determinants of poverty. Through sometimes overt and sometimes
veiled conditionalities, WB policy can even restrict the scope (and tie the
hands) of poor countries to redesign projects to respect, protect and
fulfill HR. The Bank thus successfully further postpones urgent structural
change.



4. True, the WB mentions HR and promotes these aims in some projects (but it
also continues to support controversial projects with negative HR
implications). Moreover, the Bank's financial commitment to HR is less than
modest. [It tells us that HR are the responsibility of other agencies in the
UN family…]. Currently, the funds it allocates are not sufficient to
seriously promote HR in the poor countries where it lends; a look at its
loans reveals the Bank's ultimate priorities. *



5. It seems the Bank does not feel it is dubious to suddenly expect 'the
market' to be considerate towards and to ensure HR. That must be why the
Bank continues to stress market mechanisms as the way they dream will
address HR. …But that is not a dream, it is a nightmare. So we are left with
a market-based model where key crucial decisions are left up to private
investors who stick to their ideology… as though nothing had ever gone
wrong.



6. Unheeded, the Bank continues to promote 'aggressive 'sector reform' in
poor countries, but with a twist: with the aim of mobilizing private
investors.  No representatives from civil society are consulted a priori on
the HR issues in these reforms. It is no secret that the social and
environmental track record of the same reforms is poor (if not miserable).



7. We note that such contradictions not only haunt the WB's HR rhetoric and
the HR-damaging policy decisions it makes, they are also evident in other
multilateral agencies like the Asian Development Bank. R is not yet another
approach to devHR as an organizing paradigm



8. It should be seen as no coincidence that these strategies reflect the
interests of the firmly established transnational corporations' lobby, as
well as those of the current major players in the global economy.

…The Bank's HR policies, of course, can only be as good as those of its most
influential shareholders…



Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City

cschuftan at phmovement.org

[All Readers can be found in www.humaninfo.org/aviva  under
No.69<http://www.humaninfo.org/aviva%20%20under%20No.69>
]

_______________________________________________________________

Adapted from D+C, 34:11, November 2007, and D+C, 34:12, December 2007.



*: The World Bank's 2008 Development Report is a living proof of this:

·        It focuses entirely on the conventional approaches of
liberalization, modernization and growth.

·        It claims to offer a formula to fight rural poverty and hunger, but
really does little more than advocate for agricultural growth 'a-la-WB'.

·        It fails to say how many people will lose their livelihoods in this
path of modernization.

·        It disregards issues like power, the self-interest of corrupt
elites, rent-seeking capitalism and the pillaging activity of foreign
investors.

·        It wants us to believe that pumping more capital and biotechnology
into rural areas and then simply relying on liberalized market forces will
do to turn things around.

·        It also wants us to believe that the call for good governance alone
('a-la-WB') will do the rest of the trick.

All this amounts to the World Bank's idea of what the 'new agriculture'
should be, i.e., an agriculture in which farmers ought to be businessmen
integrated into the world market (and into the production of biofuels…).
(R.Buntzel)

Without being utterly caricaturesque, the Report's recommendations can be
summed up in the HR-inconsiderate-message of: "Get modern or get out".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20080405/d8c5ab75/attachment-0001.html>