PRESS CONFERENCE ON DPI/NGO CONFERENCE

PRESS CONFERENCE ON DPI/NGO CONFERENCE

Next week’s Summit would be an opportunity to create the framework for a sustainable package that would help some poor countries to break the cycle of poverty and conflict, Anne O’Mahony, Regional Director of Concern Worldwide, said at a Headquarters press conference this afternoon.

That cycle would continue forever until some real solutions were found, she said, as she recounted her experiences during the 1984/1985 Ethiopian famine; in Somalia, where people died of hunger under the television cameras in 1992 while young gun-toting guerrillas prevented the offloading of food from ships in Mogadishu harbour; in post-genocide Rwanda; and more recently in Afghanistan, Haiti and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Speaking as part of a panel that briefed correspondents on the discussions held in four round tables held earlier today as part of the DPI/NGO Conference on the topic “The Future of the United Nations”, she said the Summit was an opportunity that could not be missed, but listening to what was happening in the negotiations, there was a fear that things could fall apart.  The voice of civil society in this week’s Conference was very strong, and it was unacceptable that non-governmental organization (NGOs) should go back to their members and report that the Summit had turned into just another talking shop with resolutions and decisions that were so watered down as to be meaningless.

Fellow panellist Wahu Kaara, Ecumenical Programme Coordinator for the Millennium Development Goals with the All Africa Council of Churches, said civil society was demanding that world leaders take concrete and specific actions to deliver on the commitments made five years ago.  For example, they had pledged to enable more children to attend primary school by 2005, yet that had not happened.  People could not continue to live in a world threatened by glaring poverty in which hundreds of millions of people went without food; mothers died in childbirth; children died before the age of five years; where the absence of health-care services meant a failure to deal with HIV/AIDS, malaria and other infectious diseases; and where the environment itself was under threat.

Panellist Bernice Romero, Advocacy Director of Oxfam International, said that civil society did not want an outcome document that basically said nothing because nobody could agree to anything.  Non-governmental organizations wanted to see something strong that addressed some of the fundamental issues facing people in countries that were impoverished, torn by conflict, or suffering the consequences of natural disasters.  The Conference had come up with a statement calling upon leaders not to squander the opportunity to take immediate action about such problems.

Asked about the extent to which terrorism was being used as an excuse not to put more money into fighting poverty, Ms. O’Mahony said that neglecting the underlying causes of terrorism would create very fertile ground for its growth.  There was a real opportunity in Afghanistan, for example, where parliamentary elections were due in the coming weeks.  But failure to invest in that country and using terrorism as an excuse for that failure was sowing the seeds for the country to become a haven for fugitives from justice and for a future terrorist response.

Ms. Romero added that for most people terrorism was not just Al-Qaida, but rather the conflict affecting them every day; or the arms transferred through their communities to fuel conflicts around them.  It was imperative that the outcome document include language about arms transfers and recognize that it was an enormous problem about which the international community must do something.  The Summit must also recognize the need for solid commitment to progress on the Millennium Development Goals.

Asked about concerns that the Volcker report would overshadow the Summit, Ms. Romero said that civil society would not dismiss the real problems and issues that had been raised.  It was important that the United Nations was a strong, well managed, accountable and transparent institution.  However, the Organization’s effectiveness did not stop there.  There was a huge role for it to play and that it had played positively in the past, was playing and would continue to play, which could not be overshadowed because of the scandal.  That role included elections in East Timor and elsewhere in the world, conflict resolution and assistance, including in last year’s tsunami.  The Organization had effectively assisted the world’s poor in key and crucial moments, which should not be forgotten because of the scandal.

Ms. Kaara pointed out that the scandal lay not in the founding ideals and principles of the United Nations, but rather in the actors and their motivations.  After 60 years, the founding ideals and principles had been “drowned” by the powerful interests of faceless finance capital, which had usurped the powers of many States, and made them almost useless.  The Organization must go back to its ideals and “clean out the mess”.

Referring to negative comments by NGOs about the role of the United States, another correspondent asked what could realistically be expected in light of such statements.

Ms. Kaara replied she was still hopeful because the world’s citizens were very clear that the threat lay in the insensitivity of governments, where accountability and responsibility in terms of providing hope were at risk.  Governments must be sincere and choose between the interests manifested by States today, which were those of the market and which threatened the interests of the citizens.  The world was beginning to imagine that solutions could only come about through continued faithful obedience to the demands of the market, even when those demands threatened the very lives of citizens.  The United States Government attracted such negative comment because it was the world leader.

However, Ms. Romero pointed out that a number of other governments had been reluctant to compromise over language in the outcome document.

Ms. O’Mahony said the position of the United States had opened the floodgates of commentary, enabling other countries to put their own positions in place, whereas they might otherwise have been prepared to buy into a larger goal.  At the same time, there was a role for smaller countries to come together to push an agenda which should not be sacrificed to the interests and powers of greater nations.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record