Africa Policy Home Page | Roundtable Home Page | Roundtable Archive

14 January 2000

First of all, it is obvious to everyone that the current model of development has failed utterly. We are witnessing the rapid growth of international capital flows and an accumulation of wealth in the world. Paradoxically, however, this is accompanied by increasing impoverishment: the poor are becoming poorer while a minority grows ever richer.

In Africa, for example, more than 180 million people suffer from hunger, and the United Nations projects a doubling of this figure within ten years. This alarming fact should have motivated an increase in development aid or in investment. But we face the bitter realization that of the US$95 billion in investments directed toward the developing countries, all of sub-Saharan Africa receives only US$3 billion. What is more, this investment goes toward those countries with mineral resources and in some cases to finance wars in which the great world powers vie for geostrategic advantage. It is not by chance that Africa holds the record for coups d'etat, genocide, and mass displacement.

More than 65% of the wealth is produced in the global North. The 77 countries of Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific account for only 2% of trade and 1% of international capital flows. It is in this context that one talks about free trade, about savage market competition. It is also in this critical period that all enterprises are in the process of being privatized—that is, purchased by the multinationals. There is increasing talk of competitiveness between these struggling countries and the great world powers.

At first glance, there is an obvious paradox and it is important to explore the dialectic relationship between State sovereignty and the emergence of civil society. For example, must sovereignty be diminished so that civil society can emerge? Can civil society emerge if the states stay strong? We can even ask whether the role and space that are increasingly attributed to civil society must mean the weakening or even the suicide of the State. Does the present global environment condemn States to loss of their sovereignty and populations to silence?

These are a few of the questions to guide our reflections as we seek out strategies, actions, and mechanisms that will enable us to cope with the great challenges of the end of the century and begin the third millennium with courage and optimism. To sharpen our reflection, let us think back upon the behavior of states, of peoples, and of market forces over the last ten years. With the promotion of globalization and the rules of the World Trade Organization, it appears that certain regions such as Africa have fallen out of the picture.

We live in a time of "dumping," of unfair competition in the economic and cultural spheres. Rights are weakened as economic power supplants political power. Natural resources are degraded and consumed without restraint, and are in danger of exhaustion. Water and air are polluted and populations suffer from water-borne diseases. Deforestation and desertification proceed apace. Economic colonization by the multinationals is thus taking the place of the old colonialism. The multinationals make money, certainly, but they will never come up with policies to protect the environment or create an environment that can sustain all citizens.

Globalization works against recognition of the specific needs of development.

For this reason, the countries of the global South must form regional groupings and regional markets. The establishment of regional markets is crucial for economic development and can serve as a springboard for competitiveness. Staggering under the burden of debt and hoodwinked by the deceptive debt relief programs of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the African countries have lost their voice. Only the organizations of civil society have anything to say, but how can they make themselves heard? Through dialog.

How can those voices be taken into account, and by which institutions? How can the African states benefit from this popular movement in which the people marshal their strength and raise their voices to demand the democratization of international institutions? These are key questions.

And why do the most distressed countries take refuge in a conservatism that leaves no room for popular expression?

Our greatest need in today's world is for mechanisms that can bring us together to share our political understanding and our vision. Above all, we need faith in our internal capacities; their worth must be recognized. That is why we must have a strong and responsible civil society that can forge a space close to yet outside of governments and institutions. But we also need governments that can ensure human rights and regulate, seek and create a sustaining environment.

Can we have one without the other and still work to meet the great challenges of our time? That, dear colleagues, is the pressing question that brings us to this forum.

It is a question of building an ethic of shared responsibility.

In terms of its position, civil society faces the State, but that does not mean, in my humble opinion, that it must be inherently against the State.

The two—the State and civil society—must keep their distance in terms of their current visions. This allows them to act as counterweights and at the same time as partners that can work to create a better world in which both can remain strong and put up a strong front against the anarchical forces that would destroy the world.

Ladies, gentlemen, dear colleagues, these ideas are offered simply to start our discussion.

Africa Policy Home Page | Roundtable Home Page | Roundtable Archive