Official opening of Cafe Nordsør

Opening remarks by Anne Kristin Sydnes Minister of International Development Studentersamfundet, Trondheim 19 October 2000

Ladies and gentlemen,

Thank you for inviting me to open this first debate meeting at the Café Nordsør – a very positive and exciting initiative.

One of my main concerns as Minister of international development is to continue the dialogue between different organizations and actors involved in development policy and to develop it further. Debate is an expression of commitment. This was recently shown by many people in Prague. However, even though commitment is important, I am not convinced that the type of action which we saw there is the best way of conducting an argument. Rough encounters like this allow no room for real dialogue.

The changes in development policy during the last few years have been so comprehensive that the term "a change of paradigm" has been used. Therefore I will begin by saying a few words about what are perhaps the three most important changes.

Firstly, the partner countries’ own priorities are given a central place. As donor countries, we are not to dictate what developing countries should do in order to eradicate poverty. This is the responsibility of the authorities. They must pursue a national policy that provides a basis for overcoming poverty.

Secondly, the donor countries must coordinate their efforts better. We must enable our cooperation partners in the south to spend their time on effective policies – not on meetings and reports according to the wishes of the donor countries.

Thirdly, sector programs are "in" and projects are "out". The focus today is on overall sector programs identified by our partner countries. In a nutshell; we tend to support national educational programs rather than building actual schools. Generally, the latter is deemed less effective – at least in the long run.

These changes are motivated by the desire to promote development and combat poverty. It is therefore encouraging to see that from 1990 to 1998 there has been a reduction both in the proportion and in the total number of people living below the poverty level of 1 dollar per day. This is positive, BUT the distribution is absolutely horrifying. Just consider these numbers:

• A quarter of the world’s population lives on less than a dollar a day.
• Almost three-quarters of the poorest people live in Africa south of the Sahara and in south Asia.
• 30 000 children in developing countries die every day of curable diseases.
• 23 million out of the 34 million people in the world who are HIV infected live in African countries south of the Sahara.

The figures speak for themselves. Despite the reductions in total numbers and percentages, combating poverty is our main challenge. This is why we take part in development cooperation. This is why the Government is increasing next year’s development assistance budget by 14 per cent.

Although we all mainly agree about what must be done, there are still areas with a traditional north-south divide. This applies primarily to financing. Developing countries maintain – and to some extent justifiably – that we as industrialized countries do not fulfil our commitments. The international goal that 0.7 per cent of GNP should be allocated to development assistance is a long way from being realized by all wealthy countries.

Norwegian development policy has concentrated on eliminating the factors that sustain poverty. These factors are numerous and complex. I will briefly mention those we regard as decisive and to which we will give priority: the debt situation, the HIV/AIDS epidemic, political instability and corruption.

Norway has been a driving force behind the establishment of binding negotiations on financing debt relief. This process must be closely followed up. Not all donor countries are equally interested in taking part. If we are to succeed, all parties must contribute:

• the developing countries – by following a policy which ensures that freed up capital is used for development-promotion purposes and that the countries are not brought back into the debt impasse which they are being helped out of.
• the donor countries – by canceling the debts owed to them and by financing the debt relief that is to be granted through the multilateral institutions.

Today the HIV/AIDS epidemic is one of the single most important obstacles to development. The AIDS tragedy is a reality we cannot ignore. Therefore we will intensify our efforts – in cooperation with actors from the private, NGO and public sectors. I have placed the fight against HIV/AIDS very high on my agenda. I address this theme wherever I go.

* * *

Now I will turn to the topic for the evening: political instability or lack of good governance, the violation of human rights – and sanctions.

Let me first say that the foreign minister has constitutional responsibility for the Government’s human rights efforts. But development cooperation is also about promoting human rights. In fact, the way I see it I work full time promoting basic human rights.

It is by no means generally accepted that we, the donor countries, raise the topic of "good governance". In the United Nations, for example, we are still struggling to gain acceptance for the use of the term.

Reform of the public sector is another area where developing countries maintain that we, the donor countries, make too much of a fuss. But here I am not willing to compromise. Good governance is absolutely essential for the development of a peaceful and democratic society. It is an unalterable requirement for our partner countries. Having said that, I should also add that this is something the countries themselves must achieve. Good governance, as development itself, must come from within.

Good governance is characterized by a political regime that meets criteria such as:

• respect for human rights,
• political willingness to be accountable for decisions, for example by holding elections,
• transparency with respect to the governing bodies and the work carried out by the state,
• active efforts to combat corruption.

What should a donor do when the authorities in a partner country are unwilling to introduce good governance? When they allow or even initiate violations of human rights? When they accept corruption and use development assistance funds to finance military action?

One solution is to do what we recently did with Zimbabwe, where as you may know we took the country off the list of priority partner countries for development cooperation.

Another solution is more relevant for this evening’s debate: international sanctions, as in the case of Iraq.

We will come back to this during the debate. For now, I will limit myself to saying that sanctions are an important tool in conflict management – a tool which Norway will seek to refine and further develop during its period in the Security Council.

I say "refine" because the use of sanctions is not without problems. The goal is of course to make an impact on a regime and not the general population. In South Africa, most observers hold, this was in many ways a success. In other cases we have failed.

Effective sanctions must be based on a careful and thorough process of evaluation. We still have a lot to learn, and we need advice from all quarters in this discussion. Refusing to use sanctions as a matter of principle is not a viable solution. The goal must be to apply sanctions at a time and in such a way that they have an impact on those who should be affected, and not on the innocent.

Of course, the calibration of sanctions is vitally important. We have a whole specter – a continuum, if you wish - of different options at our disposal – ranging from boycotts and embargoes, via a freeze in development aid, to more limited, targeted reductions in development assistance. We can also combine sticks with carrots.

* * *

The debate today will probably reveal that our views on sanctions differ. On development cooperation we stand much more united. Recent polls show that 80 per cent of the Norwegian people are in favor of development cooperation. I take this as a sign that we are on the right track.

Safeguarding the popular support for development cooperation policy in Norwegian society is extremely important. And the broad support for this policy is inspiring for me as a politician and as a fellow human being.

This is also why I welcome initiatives like Café Nordsør. I hope that during the debates this fall you will contribute to an even stronger commitment to solidarity and development cooperation.

It is therefore an honor for me to declare Café Nordsør to be officially open, and to be the first to wish you good luck. May your debates be both lively and fruitful.

Thank you.