From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec
From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec
5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEActive citizens played a large role in obliging governments in bothrich and poor countries to move on the debt issue. The Freedom fromDebt Coalition in the Philippines and Koalisi Anti Utang in Indonesiaboth campaigned against ‘illegitimate debt’. In May 1998, 70,000Jubilee 2000 supporters formed a human chain around the G8 summitin Birmingham, UK and – as politicians inside the meeting laterconfirmed – forced debt onto the summit agenda, which culminatedin the Enhanced HIPC programme a year later. Global campaigningby Make Poverty History and the Global Call to Action against Povertyachieved a similar breakthrough at the G8 summit in Scotland in2005. Each time, governments swore that the latest debt relief initiativewould be the last. Luckily, citizens refused to believe them and, whenthe plight of debtor nations failed to improve, continued to campaignfor more.Naturally, creditors continued to try to set the terms of thenegotiations, but effective states proved themselves able to negotiatebetter terms. Argentina played hardball with the IMF and other creditorsafter its 2002 crisis, and was thus able to rebuild its economy atrecord speed.With HIPC, the creditors began to break new ground by actuallywriting off debts, rather than simply rescheduling them; by includingmultilateral, rather than just bilateral, debt; by dividing relief equitablyamong creditors; and, in the Enhanced HIPC initiative, by basing debtrelief on a ‘poverty reduction strategy’ drawn up by the government inconsultation with civil society (see page 301). The most recent incarnation,the MDRI, has gone still further by offering full cancellation ofcountries’ debts to the IFIs incurred up to certain dates, a limitedapplication of the ‘100 per cent cancellation’ that campaigners hadlong called for and which creditors had long claimed was impossible.Serious concerns remain about both the HIPC and the MDRI, notleast the extent to which they have entrenched the force of, in particular,IMF conditions. Countries must comply with these to get debt relief,which forces them to spend years implementing painful structuraladjustment policies in order to access the debt cancellation that waspromised to them as a solution to an urgent crisis. This is connected tothe fact that the HIPC and the MDRI are designed, implemented, andmonitored by the IFIs, with creditors treated as generous benefactors307
FROM POVERTY TO POWER– rather than those responsible for often irresponsible or self-interestedlending that contributed to the crisis in the first place – and debtors aserrant children who need to behave.Nonetheless, debt relief has translated into big money. The totaldebt relief for the 22 countries that had completed HIPC by mid-2007is estimated to be worth $70.7bn in today’s money, combining agreementswith multilateral institutions and bilateral and commercialcreditors. Because it directly frees up funds for governments to spendover many years, debt relief is a very efficient form of aid: the additionaldebt relief agreed in 2005 provided these countries with an estimated$1.3bn of extra funds in 2007 alone. 27It should be remembered, however, that debt relief is oftendwarfed by the amount that poor countries have already paid on theseloans. In 2004, the Nigerian government reported that the countryhad had original loans of $17bn, had repaid $18bn, and still owed$34bn. Its much-trumpeted 2005 debt-relief deal finally led to significantdebt cancellation, but the deal required the country to make adown payment of a further $12bn. 28Indebted countries face new threats in the shape of so-called‘vulture funds’. In 1999, as Zambia was trying to negotiate clearance ofthe debt it owed to Romania, a company called Donegal International,registered in the tax haven of the British Virgin Islands, swooped inand bought up the debt – then valued at around $30m with accruedinterest – for a knockdown price of $3.3m. The company then suedZambia in the UK courts for the full amount of the debt,plus compoundinterest, demanding a staggering $55m in total. In the end the judgeordered the Zambian government to hand over $15.5m.So far at least 40 such lawsuits have been launched by vulture fundsagainst highly indebted poor countries, and many of them are stilloutstanding. The debts known to be subject to litigation amount to$1.9bn. The bad news is that, in many cases, the law is on the side of thevulture funds: $991m has been awarded so far.A few major corporations have attempted similar legal arm-twisting.In 2003 the Big Food Group, at that time owner of the UK-basedIceland supermarket chain and other companies, sued Guyana forover £12m, only to drop the case after an outcry by UK NGOs.308
- Page 274 and 275: CLIMATE CHANGEWe have a word for it
- Page 276 and 277: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY CLIMATE CH
- Page 278 and 279: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY CLIMATE CH
- Page 280 and 281: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY CLIMATE CH
- Page 282 and 283: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY CLIMATE CH
- Page 284 and 285: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY CLIMATE CH
- Page 286 and 287: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY AFRICA’S
- Page 288 and 289: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY AFRICA’S
- Page 290 and 291: VIOLENCE AND CONFLICTHumanity will
- Page 292 and 293: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY VIOLENCE A
- Page 294 and 295: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY VIOLENCE A
- Page 296 and 297: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY VIOLENCE A
- Page 298 and 299: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY VIOLENCE A
- Page 300 and 301: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY VIOLENCE A
- Page 302 and 303: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY VIOLENCE A
- Page 304 and 305: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SHOCKS AND
- Page 306 and 307: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SHOCKS AND
- Page 308 and 309: PART FIVEWho rules the world? 292Th
- Page 310 and 311: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM WHO RULE
- Page 312 and 313: THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL SYSTEMT
- Page 314 and 315: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEm
- Page 316 and 317: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEI
- Page 318 and 319: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEw
- Page 320 and 321: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEp
- Page 322 and 323: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEp
- Page 326 and 327: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEI
- Page 328 and 329: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEB
- Page 330 and 331: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEc
- Page 332 and 333: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCE
- Page 334 and 335: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEn
- Page 336 and 337: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGB
- Page 338 and 339: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGD
- Page 340 and 341: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGA
- Page 342 and 343: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGT
- Page 344 and 345: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGH
- Page 346 and 347: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGT
- Page 348 and 349: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGA
- Page 350 and 351: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGM
- Page 352 and 353: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADING2
- Page 354 and 355: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGF
- Page 356 and 357: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGp
- Page 358 and 359: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGG
- Page 360 and 361: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGI
- Page 362 and 363: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGd
- Page 364 and 365: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGT
- Page 366 and 367: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGC
- Page 368 and 369: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TRADINGT
- Page 370 and 371: THE INTERNATIONAL AID SYSTEMA few y
- Page 372 and 373: 5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM AIDTABLE
5 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FINANCEActive citizens played a large role in obliging governments in bothrich and poor countries <strong>to</strong> move on the debt issue. The Freedom fromDebt Coalition in the Philippines and Koalisi Anti Utang in Indonesiaboth campaigned against ‘illegitimate debt’. In May 1998, 70,000Jubilee 2000 supporters formed a human chain around the G8 summitin Birmingham, UK and – as politicians inside the meeting laterconfirmed – forced debt on<strong>to</strong> the summit agenda, which culminatedin the Enhanced HIPC programme a year later. Global campaigningby Make Poverty His<strong>to</strong>ry and the Global Call <strong>to</strong> Action against Povertyachieved a similar breakthrough at the G8 summit in Scotland in2005. Each time, governments swore that the latest debt relief initiativewould be the last. Luckily, citizens refused <strong>to</strong> believe them and, whenthe plight of deb<strong>to</strong>r nations failed <strong>to</strong> improve, continued <strong>to</strong> campaignfor more.Naturally, credi<strong>to</strong>rs continued <strong>to</strong> try <strong>to</strong> set the terms of thenegotiations, but effective states proved themselves able <strong>to</strong> negotiatebetter terms. Argentina played hardball with the IMF and other credi<strong>to</strong>rsafter its 2002 crisis, and was thus able <strong>to</strong> rebuild its economy atrecord speed.With HIPC, the credi<strong>to</strong>rs began <strong>to</strong> break new ground by actuallywriting off debts, rather than simply rescheduling them; by includingmultilateral, rather than just bilateral, debt; by dividing relief equitablyamong credi<strong>to</strong>rs; and, in the Enhanced HIPC initiative, by basing debtrelief on a ‘<strong>poverty</strong> reduction strategy’ drawn up by the government inconsultation with civil society (see page 301). The most recent incarnation,the MDRI, has gone still further by offering full cancellation ofcountries’ debts <strong>to</strong> the IFIs incurred up <strong>to</strong> certain dates, a limitedapplication of the ‘100 per cent cancellation’ that campaigners hadlong called for and which credi<strong>to</strong>rs had long claimed was impossible.Serious concerns remain about both the HIPC and the MDRI, notleast the extent <strong>to</strong> which they have entrenched the force of, in particular,IMF conditions. Countries must comply with these <strong>to</strong> get debt relief,which forces them <strong>to</strong> spend years implementing painful structuraladjustment policies in order <strong>to</strong> access the debt cancellation that waspromised <strong>to</strong> them as a solution <strong>to</strong> an urgent crisis. This is connected <strong>to</strong>the fact that the HIPC and the MDRI are designed, implemented, andmoni<strong>to</strong>red by the IFIs, with credi<strong>to</strong>rs treated as generous benefac<strong>to</strong>rs307