12 November 1998 Edition
World calls to cancel Honduras and Nicaragua debts
By Mary Maguire
Honduras and Nicaragua may already have been amongst the two poorest nations of the western hemisphere. But after the ravages of Hurricane Mitch, the two states might be all together cleansed from the world map, as countries who for years exploited the natural resources of these lands today looked ready to turn a blind eye on their tragedy.
Had the hurricane hit any other American region, special measures would have been taken to help prevent human life losses and mass destruction. Ravaged economies would have been boosted by massive investment. But for so-called world powers, some interests are more precious than others, particularly when it is in their goal to continue exerting financial colonialism on developing nations.
So far, the hurricane has caused an estimated 30,000 deaths. It has affected some 2.9 million people in the region - 1.9m in Honduras, 800,000 in Nicaragua, 60,000 in El Salvador and 94,000 in Guatemala. Nearly 20% of the region's population has already been made homeless. Famine and disease could dramatically increase the current death tolls. The flooding and landslides have also devastated nearly 70% of rice cultures, black beans and corn, which is the primary production of the local agriculture.
The Central American countries' presidents reacted quickly by appealing for the debts of Nicaragua and Honduras to be written off to help them overcome the devastation. At an emergency meeting held in El Salvador, the leaders of Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Costa Rica, joined by Guatemala's foreign minister, also called for increased aid, investment and trade to help rebuild their shattered countries. Currently, the debt of Honduras and Nicaragua is estimated at $10 billion. In other terms, Nicaragua and Honduras are saddled with commitments of $1.8m per day in debt service. In 1996, Honduran spending on debt was $564 a year per citizen, compared with $240 for health and education.
The natural catastrophe that has ravaged Central America poses the old question of debt cancellation in new and unique terms. The classic argument of capitalist institutions lending money is to say that a debt can't be cancelled as it would legitimise bad management and therefore encourage so-called incapable governments into suicidal economical policies. But the situation in Central America today is totally different: the incapacity of states such as Honduras and Nicaragua to develop financially is due to the bad economic policy of a government, but simply because of natural disasters they cannot act against. In that regard, there is no valid, nor sustainable argument to wipe out the debt of these countries.
France was the first country to call upon so-called world powers to support a debt moratorium. The proposal from French foreign minister Lionel Jospin was cautiously backed by his new German counterpart Joschka Fischer when the issue was raised at a meeting of European foreign ministers in Brussels. In Mexico City on Friday, Gerry Adams will also reiterate his call for the debts of all developing countries to be cancelled. Britain came out with a proposal, although it is viewed as one of the least generous moves. British Chancellor Gordon Brown's idea would involve a moratorium on interest payments, rather than debt cancellation. But there is yet no timescale or concrete details for his proposals.
On their side of the chess board of power, the imperialist financial institutions do not seem ready to lose control over the economies of the devastated regions. The World Bank has announced it is providing a further $130m for Central American countries, bringing the total emergency aid package to about $200 million.
But the generosity is well calculated. Already, officials are saying that this money will be diverted from existing long-term projects to help the reconstruction effort.
Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund has made it clear that it expects Nicaragua to stick to economic targets, despite the death and destruction caused by the hurricane. A spokesperson said that ``the pressures of reconstruction should not lead to the abandonment of economic stability''. Under existing agreements, Nicaragua must for example reduce public spending, lay-off government workers, charge more for public services and privatise state-owned firms.
By maintaining not only the debts of Central America and other developing countries, the IMF, the World Bank and such imperialistic financial institutions are acting on behalf of interest-driven nations. Their loans are their way of keeping a steel hand of control over nations. Through financial dictatorship, they are preventing countries on which they exert their colonial reign to flourish into self-governed successful democracies whose people could finally decide on the interests of their own people. When countries such as those of Central America are in such a desperate positions, there is no need for such policies. The failure to wipe out all debts amounts to killing all hopes of even partial recovery.
This year, the 8th Sao Paulo Forum was held in Mexico City from 29 October to 1 November. Once again, Sinn Féin was invited to participate as observers. The party was represented by Pat Rice.
The Forum comprises all the main left-wing parties from Latin America and the Caribbean. They came together to discuss strategies for the region.
Guests are invited from beyond the area and, in all, this year, more than 60 parties from 34 countries were represented.
The main theme was ``Challenges for Latin America and Caribbean left in the New Millennium''.
The SF representative spoke at the meeting between the European parties and its forum and the workshop on Peace Processes in Latin America. At the end of the latter a declaration on the Irish Peace Process was formally proposed by Senator Carlos Payán of the host party, the Mexican Partido Democrátîco Revolucionare (PRD) and in the final plenary session it was passed unanimously. The declaration reads:
``The Sao Paolo Forum welcomes the Belfast Agreement as a concrete contribution to the development of the Irish Peace Process. We congratulate all involved. We recognise, as other International experiences show, that implementation of the provisions of the Agreement is critical to the maintenance of a forward momentum.
``We are concerned that the current delay in establishing the political institutions agreed could prove counter-productive to this. We would therefore urge the British and Irish governments and other parties to the Agreement to adhere to the timetable agreed for the establishment of the political institutions. We would urge all the parties to use that advance to effectively address the important issue of justice, policing, equality and the demilitarisation of society so as to speedily resolve those issues as key elements of the peace process and a lasting peace settlement''.
Pat Rice said that what he found most interesting - in four days which he found ``exhilarating and important'' - was the day-long workshop on Peace Processes in Latin America. ``For all the differences of background that exist,'' he said, ``I was constantly struck by the similarities. Carlós Gonzalez (URNG, Guatemala) spoke of the need to stick to the timetables agreed and the differences between negotiating peace and building it. The recognition by Pablo Salazar of the Mexican party in government (PRI) in reference to Chiapas that while the causes of conflict continue to exist, conflict itself will always be latent, was an idea largely echoed, in particular by Marco León of the FARC - EP (Colombia)''.
The organisers of the Forum decided - in consultation with the European parties - to meet during the first half of 1999 with the European left-wing and progressive parties in the context of the European Parliament. It will be the first such encounter in Europe.
Honduras and Nicaragua may already have been amongst the two poorest nations of the western hemisphere. But after the ravages of Hurricane Mitch, the two states might be all together cleansed from the world map, as countries who for years exploited the natural resources of these lands today looked ready to turn a blind eye on their tragedy.
Had the hurricane hit any other American region, special measures would have been taken to help prevent human life losses and mass destruction. Ravaged economies would have been boosted by massive investment. But for so-called world powers, some interests are more precious than others, particularly when it is in their goal to continue exerting financial colonialism on developing nations.
So far, the hurricane has caused an estimated 30,000 deaths. It has affected some 2.9 million people in the region - 1.9m in Honduras, 800,000 in Nicaragua, 60,000 in El Salvador and 94,000 in Guatemala. Nearly 20% of the region's population has already been made homeless. Famine and disease could dramatically increase the current death tolls. The flooding and landslides have also devastated nearly 70% of rice cultures, black beans and corn, which is the primary production of the local agriculture.
The Central American countries' presidents reacted quickly by appealing for the debts of Nicaragua and Honduras to be written off to help them overcome the devastation. At an emergency meeting held in El Salvador, the leaders of Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Costa Rica, joined by Guatemala's foreign minister, also called for increased aid, investment and trade to help rebuild their shattered countries. Currently, the debt of Honduras and Nicaragua is estimated at $10 billion. In other terms, Nicaragua and Honduras are saddled with commitments of $1.8m per day in debt service. In 1996, Honduran spending on debt was $564 a year per citizen, compared with $240 for health and education.
The natural catastrophe that has ravaged Central America poses the old question of debt cancellation in new and unique terms. The classic argument of capitalist institutions lending money is to say that a debt can't be cancelled as it would legitimise bad management and therefore encourage so-called incapable governments into suicidal economical policies. But the situation in Central America today is totally different: the incapacity of states such as Honduras and Nicaragua to develop financially is due to the bad economic policy of a government, but simply because of natural disasters they cannot act against. In that regard, there is no valid, nor sustainable argument to wipe out the debt of these countries.
France was the first country to call upon so-called world powers to support a debt moratorium. The proposal from French foreign minister Lionel Jospin was cautiously backed by his new German counterpart Joschka Fischer when the issue was raised at a meeting of European foreign ministers in Brussels. In Mexico City on Friday, Gerry Adams will also reiterate his call for the debts of all developing countries to be cancelled. Britain came out with a proposal, although it is viewed as one of the least generous moves. British Chancellor Gordon Brown's idea would involve a moratorium on interest payments, rather than debt cancellation. But there is yet no timescale or concrete details for his proposals.
On their side of the chess board of power, the imperialist financial institutions do not seem ready to lose control over the economies of the devastated regions. The World Bank has announced it is providing a further $130m for Central American countries, bringing the total emergency aid package to about $200 million.
But the generosity is well calculated. Already, officials are saying that this money will be diverted from existing long-term projects to help the reconstruction effort.
Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund has made it clear that it expects Nicaragua to stick to economic targets, despite the death and destruction caused by the hurricane. A spokesperson said that ``the pressures of reconstruction should not lead to the abandonment of economic stability''. Under existing agreements, Nicaragua must for example reduce public spending, lay-off government workers, charge more for public services and privatise state-owned firms.
By maintaining not only the debts of Central America and other developing countries, the IMF, the World Bank and such imperialistic financial institutions are acting on behalf of interest-driven nations. Their loans are their way of keeping a steel hand of control over nations. Through financial dictatorship, they are preventing countries on which they exert their colonial reign to flourish into self-governed successful democracies whose people could finally decide on the interests of their own people. When countries such as those of Central America are in such a desperate positions, there is no need for such policies. The failure to wipe out all debts amounts to killing all hopes of even partial recovery.
Sao Paulo Forum focuses on Irish peace process
This year, the 8th Sao Paulo Forum was held in Mexico City from 29 October to 1 November. Once again, Sinn Féin was invited to participate as observers. The party was represented by Pat Rice.
The Forum comprises all the main left-wing parties from Latin America and the Caribbean. They came together to discuss strategies for the region.
Guests are invited from beyond the area and, in all, this year, more than 60 parties from 34 countries were represented.
The main theme was ``Challenges for Latin America and Caribbean left in the New Millennium''.
The SF representative spoke at the meeting between the European parties and its forum and the workshop on Peace Processes in Latin America. At the end of the latter a declaration on the Irish Peace Process was formally proposed by Senator Carlos Payán of the host party, the Mexican Partido Democrátîco Revolucionare (PRD) and in the final plenary session it was passed unanimously. The declaration reads:
``The Sao Paolo Forum welcomes the Belfast Agreement as a concrete contribution to the development of the Irish Peace Process. We congratulate all involved. We recognise, as other International experiences show, that implementation of the provisions of the Agreement is critical to the maintenance of a forward momentum.
``We are concerned that the current delay in establishing the political institutions agreed could prove counter-productive to this. We would therefore urge the British and Irish governments and other parties to the Agreement to adhere to the timetable agreed for the establishment of the political institutions. We would urge all the parties to use that advance to effectively address the important issue of justice, policing, equality and the demilitarisation of society so as to speedily resolve those issues as key elements of the peace process and a lasting peace settlement''.
Pat Rice said that what he found most interesting - in four days which he found ``exhilarating and important'' - was the day-long workshop on Peace Processes in Latin America. ``For all the differences of background that exist,'' he said, ``I was constantly struck by the similarities. Carlós Gonzalez (URNG, Guatemala) spoke of the need to stick to the timetables agreed and the differences between negotiating peace and building it. The recognition by Pablo Salazar of the Mexican party in government (PRI) in reference to Chiapas that while the causes of conflict continue to exist, conflict itself will always be latent, was an idea largely echoed, in particular by Marco León of the FARC - EP (Colombia)''.
The organisers of the Forum decided - in consultation with the European parties - to meet during the first half of 1999 with the European left-wing and progressive parties in the context of the European Parliament. It will be the first such encounter in Europe.