Powell's List

View from the Mountain:

In my previous post I wrote about the imminent departure of James Wolfensohn from the Presidency of the World Bank. During his decade in that post he had been responsible for redirecting the primary efforts of the Bank toward support of international development. Major characteristics of that effort were: 1) to support debt relief for poor countries, 2) to bypass corrupt governments by channeling funds to voluntary organizations and faith based institutions that are having a direct effect on local communities and populations, 3) to promote the free exchange of information by means of the internet, making it available to poor people in every country, 4) to support major international efforts to eradicate diseases, especially HIV/AIDS that were plaguing the population of developing countries, 5) support for major environmental imperatives, and 6) to work closely with other NGOs to promote free enterprise, investment, and connection to the global economy throughout the developing world. Not a bad set of goals, I would say! Wolfensohn’s thinking seems to have been greatly influenced by the work of Nobel Prize winning economist, Amartya Sen who has declared that economic development was a fundamental human right and that promoting it was a moral obligation on the developed nations. Sen discusses his relationship with Wolfensohn here.

Colin Powell, writing in the latest issue of Foreign Policy, has sketched out a forward-looking summary of American development policy under the Bush administration. He notes that, while the popular press and the election campaigns have focused on the war in Iraq and transatlantic relations, a major effort has been ongoing in the area of international development. The Bush administration has declared development to be “a core national security issue” and has devoted as much “concern and energy” to it as to any other issue. Like Wolfensohn Bush recognizes that development involves far more than economic aid. The administration insists that sustained economic development must involve political liberalization (democracy, respect for women and minorities); and economic liberalization (respect for private property, transparency, and encouragement of entrepreneurship); as well as physical security and increasing integration into the global economy. According to Powell, the Bush administration sees a strong link between poverty and despotism and considers social injustice resulting from bad government to be “the root cause” of poverty, poverty that breeds fanaticism. Ultimately, Powell argues, the United States cannot win the war on terror unless it brings about fundamental political and economic reform in the developing world.

These principles were laid out in the President’s National Security Statement issued in September, 2002. They informed the US position at the “Financing for Development Summit” held in Monterey, Mexico in that year. They underpin the Millenium Challenge Account (MCA) which channels aid to countries based on their commitment to institute programs that promote democracy, economic freedom, and social justice. The MCA, Powell notes, provides incentives for recipient nations to guarantee freedom of speech and assembly, to expand access to credit, to protect contracts, and to suppress corruption. Instituted in 2004, the program dispensed only one billion dollars in its first year of operation, but will expand those expenditures to 2 ½ billion this year and expects to double that in 2006.

Attempts to promote reform are merely part of the Bush administration’s efforts to promote development. Health is an important imperative. In addition to its extensive funding of anti HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria efforts, amounting to about 15 billion dollars, the administration has sponsored, together with the G-8, a 3 ½ billion dollar program to fight the recurrence of polio. As recent responses to the Asian tsunami disaster have shown the US has taken the lead in providing emergency relief throughout the globe. The administration has also channeled funds through the Food for Peace program that provides food relief to poor nations and promotes education programs in impoverished regions. It sponsors a Digital Freedom Initiative that aims to make modern communications and information technology available to people throughout the developing world. At present the initiative is operating in four countries and plans to expand to twelve others in the near future. The administration has also sponsored a global initiative to protect children, seeking to end forced prostitution, forced labor, and military conscription of children. These are not inconsequential actions and programs for which the Bush administration has gotten little credit in the popular press.

Perhaps the most important example of the President’s “Compassionate Conservatism” is his response to the immigration issue. Few laymen comprehend the extent of this phenomenon. Today at least 180 million people worldwide live outside their nations of birth. By far the most popular destination for migrants has been the United States. It is estimated that each year emigrants send close to 100 billion dollars in remittances back to families and communities in their countries of origin. About a third of this comes from immigrants to the United States. These remittances are the most efficient form of aid possible. They bypass corrupt governments and are utilized directly by the people who receive them. Studies have shown that they overwhelmingly are applied to improving the lives of the recipients or are invested in small-scale entrepreneurial activities. Many small communities throughout the developing world could not survive without them. On this issue President Bush has shown immense political courage, standing up to demands by nativist elements in his own party and in the labor movement that he take direct action to stem the tide of immigration. Instead President Bush last year began negotiations with Mexico, the primary source of immigrants to the United States, to establish a temporary worker program that would enable workers free access to American labor markets and to transform the illegal and often inhumane trade in immigrants into a legal system that efficiently matches workers with opportunities and respects human dignity. Migration specialists estimate that such a program could double or even triple the level of remittances and could be a model for global mechanisms that regulate the international flow of labor.

What stands out in Powell’s recitation is the extent to which the goals of the Bush administration coincide with those of the World Bank under Wolfensohn’s direction. There is plenty of room for cooperation. So why is there a problem? It seems that the World Bank and the Bush Administration stand on opposite sides of an ideological divide. On one hand you have those who are deeply suspicious of American intentions and believe that global development should be managed through global non-governmental institutions and organizations. On the other stand those who are deeply suspicious of the effectiveness and goals of global NGOs and feel that effective development aid and security can only be provided by the United States. The difference is not so much over what should be done [the exception is with environmental initiatives, with which I will deal in another post someday] but who should direct the efforts. This is the crux of the problem. Behind it lies a continuing struggle between two visions of the post-Cold War world order. Until that struggle is resolved men of good will like George Bush and James Wolfensohn will find it difficult to cooperate on common goals.