North-South Co-operation

Development or Destruction?

For long we have been led to believe that we in the North have had sincere intentions to assist the Third World out of the quagmire of underdevelopment. Through development assistance, a sense of honesty is given to our actions in relation to the poor masses of the world. We are quick to pronounce a commitment towards a common sustainable future.

The fact, however, is that the prospects for the majority of the Third World people to get out of the under-development trap is getting more and more gloomy. On the one hand, this can be seen as a failure on account of development cooperation. However, it is more realistic to regard it as a result of the actual global policies pursued from the North, which is distinctly different from the rhetorical promises.

Actually the relations between the poor South and the rich North are presently getting into an increasingly more open, cynical stage. The Third World countries are to fend for themselves, but by rules set by a hostile global structure.

The name of the game nowadays is structural adjustment. All developing countries have to accept a realistic stance and undergo a shock medicine for economic recovery. We are all too well aware of the disastrous social consequences from these policies, but is there any empirical evidence as to positive long-term economic results?

What has not been possible for the governments to achieve is now to be entrusted into the hands of a free market economy. The question to ask here is -since when did the market adopt an altruistic policy on equal distribution? For after all, is that not what the very essence of the concept of development is?

As Somalia is disintegrating, we are told that some unscrupulous Italian companies have made a deal with one of the local-lords, to be allowed dumping of toxic wastes within "his" area. This could be seen as a very doubtful business contract had it not been for the fact that the World Bank had already come to the conclusion that the Third World is under-polluted.

Export promotion and industrialization are the two pillars for any kind of development in the South. To be able to make any impact on the world market, the industrial scene has to be transformed into a capital-intensive structure. Unemployment will be one of the obvious costs for this modernization process. Further, it will be essential to attract foreign investments to boost the manufacturing production. The only visible comparative advantage, in that contest, must be regime lax in regulations, or the law enforcement on environmental protection.

As a substitute for industrial export, the continuous production of agricultural export crops is an option. Large tracts of land are reserved for this kind of production, with a growing dependence of chemical inputs. However, over-production, will be the ultimate outcome, as similar crops are being grown among most Third World countries. The consequence of this is a decreasing trend in prices for the agricultural product, compared to manufactured goods in the global market.

With a more intense cash crops sector, many peasants are being marginalised as producers. Food security among this category is becoming a difficult task to achieve on ecological sensitive soils. Our own government-subsidized over-production of grains in the North can easily out-compete an eventual surplus among the peasants, or be sold commercially in the instance of an acute shortage.

From the meagre incomes that are after all generated from the Third World exports, a certain share is immediately skimmed off, as payment of the debt. How this enormous debt has been accumulated is somewhat difficult to understand after centuries of exploitation against the present debtor nations.

Here in Sweden, we are rather complacent in relation to Third World issues. After all we are among the few countries that have ever reached one percent of the GNP in development assistance. Faced with our own present "economic crisis", all have to contribute and this share is lowered slightly. Certain liberal politicians have expressed their concern towards this decision. However, it might be better to look at the actual contents of our development assistance, rather than mere quantity.

Like other bilateral donors, Sweden is closely following the trends set by the World Bank/IMF, even if we claim to do it by giving these organisations a "human face." We are not supposed to feel ashamed anymore if development assistance is more to the benefit of Swedish industries, such as Skanska and ABB, than to the "poorest in the poor countries".

Furthermore, a substantial share of the Swedish development assistance is being "invested" in a capitalist development in the former eastern Europe and the Balkan states. Not only do we have strong potential business interests in that part of the world, there is also a possibility to counter-act the environmental disasters close by directly effecting ourselves.

Within SIDA (Swedish International Development Authority) it has been decided that the organization believes in structural adjustment programmes. Instead, a social welfare approach has to be taken by the many NGOs directly on the SIDA payroll. However, their role seems to be more or less to cushion the adverse human effects founds in the wake of the structural adjustment.

Against this background, what we the options for the people in Third World countries? In various countries a strong movement towards democracy is looming. The civil society is demanding its right to development, against the systematic disempowerment from discredited regimes. In this continuous work for a more just and sustainable future, the role of NGOs will be essential, as a catalyst to encourage the people.

Development must be a process of self-reliant mobilisation from the grassroots level. The agenda has to be set and controlled by the ones disadvantage by the present structures. If and when solidarity from the North will be called upon has to be decided from below:

The main issue will be to find our if new relations of co-operation can ever be established, which are not like the existing ones-only dictated by vested interests in favour of the mighty and the powerful of the world.



Anders Narman
University of Gothenburg
Sweden

Back to Contents