Global Development Flashcards
What is development
he word ‘development’ implies progress is being made. It has traditionally been measured using economic data, particularly growth in GDP (total or per capita) and a shift from primary industry (e.g. farming), towards manufacturing and the service sector.
Traditionally, GDP growth has been used to measure development, but development is now seen to include more than that.
Human development focuses on progress in terms of quality of life, not just wealth. It includes progress in freedom, equality and how content people are with their lives.
GDP per capita: the value of all a country’s goods and services produced in a year, divided by its population.
Advantages and Disadvantages of GDp
Why GDP is a good measure of development:
Economic growth drives other types of development
Advances in health and life expectancy can only be delivered by economic growth
Why it isn’t
The modern concept of development focuses more improving well-being and abilities: health, life expectancy and human rights (and environment?)
for example, quality of life and contentment, life expectancy, infant and maternal mortality, literacy and healthcare
GDP increases don’t specifically include ‘human development’, though some argue it leads to it
The relationship between income and life satisfaction is complex
Life satisfaction increases rapidly with wealth when incomes are low to begin with
When a medium level of income is reached, satisfaction increases only very slowly with additional income
Some people are much more satisfied than their income would suggest whereas others are much less satisfied
% with high life satisfaction:
78% - Mexicans (emerging)
66% - El Salvador (developing)
43% - Japanese (developed)
37% - Greeks (developed)
Nigerians, Russians and the Japanese have similar levels of life satisfaction despite having vastly different income levels. (around 41-3% of people have high life satisfaction)
Economic growth exploits natural resources, which negatively impacts environmental quality (which is part of development)
GDP gives a crude average which skews the income distribution. The majority of incomes could fall well below the mean, and a very wealthy minority raise the average.
The informal economy is not included in GDP or most economic measures - yet in Uganda this is estimated to produce 60% of GDP.
Countries which similar GDP may vary in life expectancy. E.g. Tajikistan 72.2 years, Lesotho 61.1
So… there are now other measures of development…
Happy planet index
A measure of human development, introduced by the New Economics Foundation in 2006
Combines environmental data on sustainability with social data on satisfaction and health - and doesn’t income data on income.
Uses global data
HPI = EW x LE / EF
EW = Experienced Well-Being -> people are asked were they place their present well-being on a ladder of ten steps
Some sources call this life satisfaction
LE = Life Expectancy
EF = Ecological Footprint -> devised by WWF, per capita amount of land required to sustain a country’s resource consumption
The countries with the highest values are not the most developed, but rather emerging. Do they balance human development with environmental management?
Six categories, three measures - each rated good/middling/poor
High HPI
Highest: Costa Rica 64.0, Vietnam 60.4 (best in Central America)
Also, Mexico, Colombia, Thailand
Middle-income, emerging countries which balance quality of life and the environment.
Medium HPI
Upper Middle: UK 47.9, Japan 47.5
Lower Middle: Singapore 39.8, Ethiopia 39.2, Namibia 38.9 <- low ranking due to the high ecological footprints
(Also, Spain , India, Indonesia, Brazil)
Very mixed group, but most lack extensive poverty and have good social conditions.
Low HPI
Lowest: Botswana 22.6, Chad 25.2
(Also, USA, Russia, Ivory Coast, South Africa)
Very wealthy but wasteful societies OR very poor developing countries. Unequal concern for social development and sustainability.
Shortcomings
2/3 of measures based on highly aggregated and subjective data
Is it reasonable to assume people perceive their well-being and the steps of the ladder in the same way?
Only life expectancy is reliable.
Welfare State
Welfare State
There is no universal model for how a society should be run in order to maximise human contentment and levels of wealth.
In most developed countries governments use taxes to fund a welfare state system. This promotes human wellbeing by redistributing resources to people in need such as children, the elderly, disabled, ill or unemployed. It provides:
Free education, usually from age 4 or 5 to 16 or 18.
Health services, which are free in some cases.
Benefits such as a basic income, housing and social services to those in need.
However, in developed countries there is large variation in terms of which benefits are provided, and how free and generous state welfare systems are.
Sharia Law
Creates a code of conduct incompatible with our perceptions of human rights.
List of countries using it includes some of the richest (Brunei, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UEA) and some of the poorest nations (Afghanistan, Mauritania, Sudan, Yemen)
What is it?
The legal system in most Muslim countries which dictates many aspects of life.
It is applied differently across the Muslim world: strictly in some countries and more flexibly in others.
Covers behaviour and beliefs (public and private)
It includes zakat, which means the payment of taxes to help less fortunate people. However, if perpetuates gender inequality, by denying fundamental human rights to women.
But, strict Sharia Law contains many human rights violations:
theft is punishable by the amputation of the right hand
converting from Islam is punishable by death
a man can beat his wife for disobeying him
a woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative
Bolivia under Evo Morales
An indigenous Aymara, first elected in 2006, who won an unprecedented third term in office in 2014
Taxes have been raised on the profits of oil TNCs to over 80% and the extra government income used to reduce poverty through health, education and other programmes including increasing the minimum wage by 50%.
Has lifted 500,000 Bolivians from poverty - extreme poverty has fallen by 43%
However Bolivia is still one of the poorest countries in Latin America, dependent on its resources for economic growth, where 1/4 still live on less than $2 a day (World Bank)
Best development goals
Hans Rosling (1948-2017) was a Swedish physician, academic, statistician, and public speaker. He felt that future goals should be to improve environmental quality, health and life expectancy of the poorest and human rights -> and that economic growth was the most important way of achieving this.
However, he argued that human rights (especially property rights) are essential to economic growth, and that these cannot exist without a good, stable government. He stressed the crucial role health plays in human development, arguing that improving health. life expectancy and environmental quality often unlocks people’s economic potential.
Economic growth is needed to built infrastructure, raise incomes to pay for medicine and education and develop journalism for human development to increase.
Both the Indian subsidy system and the radical tax redistribution of Evo Morales are seen by some as discouraging economic growth. This is because subsidies undercut some prices, and very high taxes discourage investment by TNCs. -> there is a general consensus that economic growth is important if human development is to increase in the long term.
Education and economic development
Education is crucial to economic development as it increases the value of ‘human capital’ - a.k.a. producing a literate, numerate, enterprising and skilled workforce.
Education mainly comes from schooling (primary, secondary, university) but continues during employment (training)
Education gives a better job and higher wages -> material benefits -> quality of life
The relationship between years in education and income:
A low number of years in education results in a poorly educated, unskilled workforce with low earning capacity, so incomes remain low.
High incomes mean governments have the taxes to invest in education (investing in future human capital, which in turn increases future income.
Norway: 2013 Expected years in education - 17.6
Income per person $70,600 (2016)
Niger: 5.4 years, $360
Education and Human rights
Human rights are the rights people are entitled to simply for being human: they often include freedom, equality, the right to a fair trial, the right to education and a certain standard of living.
It informs people about personal health, diet and hygiene
It allows people to understand their human rights, so they are more likely assert them when they’re undermined.
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, is part of the UN’s International Bill of Human Rights, signed by 163 countries, recognises the right to free primary education.
Education inequality
However, education varies because of poverty, and gender inequality. (meaning this view is not universally shared)
UNESCO has found that education is still inaccessible to over 60 million children of primary school age. 32 million of this is from Sub-Saharan Africa. 20 million can be found in Central Asia, East Asia and the Pacific.
Poverty
Since 1970, the highest level of education achievement has improved dramatically in Africa, but, even in 2020, 50% of 20-24 year olds are expected to leave education at the end of primary school, and fewer than 10% will have had any post-secondary education.
% No education:
Africa 1970: 59%
2020: 22%
North America 1970: 2% - 2020: 0%
% Post secondary:
Africa 1970: 4% - 2020: 9%
North America: 21% -> 24%
In Niger, one of the world’s poorest countries, only 8% of children reached Grade 4 (where basic literacy and numeracy skills are taught, end-of primary level), and learnt the basic skills in 2013-14. Standard of achievement also varies, since in Niger 51% of children reached Grade 4, but did not learn the basic skills.
In Swaziland (with a GDP per capita 9x higher), 94% of children reached grade 4, and only 2% did not learn the basic skills.
Gender inequality
In low-income Sub-Saharan Africa, fewer girls than boys finish both primary and secondary school because education often costs money and boys are prioritised. Girls are also traditionally seen as working in the home. 54% of the world’s non-schooled population are girls.
Primary school completion rate: 72% boys, 66% girls
Also 6% different in secondary school completion rate.
Inequality is also clear in the Middle East and North Africa, especially in primary school: poverty plays a role but boys tend to be valued more than girls for religious and cultural reasons (so more of them finish school)
93% boys, 87% girls
South Asia is a poor region, but education is valued highly and girls get more schooling than boys.
92% boys, 94% girls (78% and 82% for secondary)
Latin America equal for primary (99) but 76% male and 81% female for secondary.
Variations of Health in the developed world
Health is important for human development, since poor health can have the following consequences for development:
Childhood diseases can lead to stunting and poor cognitive development, affecting education later in life.
Diseases such as malaria and HIV/Aids reduce the capacity to work, and therefore earning capacity.
Family members may have to spend long periods looking after ill relatives (rather than working), because health services are poor
Medical costs use up income that could be spend on food, education and housing.
DRC as one of the worlds richest countries
For example, the DRC is one of the world’s richest countries in terms of natural resources, however:
most of the population lives in a state of moderate to severe food insecurity, and 40% of children under 5 suffer from chronic malnutrition
the water supply for 47.6% of the population is ‘unimproved’ <- comes from a river, spring, or open pond <- water borne diseases are rife
most women have their first child before the age of 20 - infant and maternal mortality rates are the world’s highest
Variations in the Developed world
The differences in life expectancy within the developed world are not as large as in the developing world, but are still significant. The average Japanese person can expect to live 13 years longer than the average Russian (about 84 and 71) . Some reasons for the variations:
Lifestyle: inactive lifestyles, combined with high fat/sugar diets, have contributed to 31% of adults in the UAE and 36% in the USA being obese, which leads to high levels of diabetes and heart disease, which lowers life expectancy. Alcoholism is a serious problem in Russia, especially among men.
Diet: Japanese and South Korean diets contain more fish, vegetables and rice than Western diets, which are high in meat protein, fat and sugar. Better diet may lead to lower levels of cancer, heart disease and skeletal/joint problems such as osteoporosis and arthritis.
Deprivation: about 40% of people in Bulgaria are at risk from poverty, despite its EU membership
Medical care: some countries, such as the UK, provide free healthcare for all (the NHS), which increases life expectancy. In the USA most people need expensive health insurance policies to cover health costs, which many cannot afford. Costs are greater when funded through private insurance and the private sector (economies of scale)
The USA has the highest health spending per capita in the world, yet it has an infant mortality rate of 5.97 per 1000, only the 38th lowest.
In Russia and Bulgaria, medical care is much less modern than in other developed countries and therefore less effective.
Variations of development in Britain
There are large variations in health and life expectancy within countries, even those with universal, free healthcare systems such as the UK. In the UK, male life expectancy at birth is around 71 in Manchester, but 86.1 in Harrow, in London. People living in Manchester have almost the same life expectancy as those in North Korea or Nepal!
In some small areas of Glasgow, male life expectancy is around 65. Blackpool (75), Middlesbrough (76), and Liverpool (76) also have male life expectancy rates lower than the national average of 79.5 for men. There are many reasons for this:
In deprived, post-industrial cities (traditional manufacturing industry closed), male unemployment is high, incomes low and levels of smoking and alcohol consumption are higher than the national average.
In north-east England, there is a much higher death rate, with a higher proportion of these deaths attributed to smoking and alcohol consumption, certain cancers, and respiratory and heart diseases.
Diet among low-income groups is often poor, with cheap, high-fat fast food consumed rather than fresh fruit and vegetables (spending on this lower in north east England).
The combination of low income and poor lifestyles leads to high levels of heart disease, diabetes, some cancers, liver and kidney failure - and hence lower life expectancy.
Gender also plays a part - in the UK the life expectancy for women is 3.7 years higher.
Ethnic variations in Britain
Inequality in health and life expectancy can also result from ethnic differences:
Australians with European ancestry live nearly 20 years longer than Aboriginal people
ATSI (Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander) men and women both live 10 years less than the average Australian.
This is due to:
relatively high mortality rates in middle age
high rates of chronic disease and injury
high levels of deprivation
a higher prevalence of modifiable and behavioural risk factors, such as smoking, drug taking and alcohol abuse
lower levels of education and employment
the social disadvantages they face
The root cause of these differences is poverty. Many Australian Aborigines live in isolated rural communities and have low-paid jobs. Levels of alcohol consumption, smoking and drug abuse are high. Food can be expensive in isolated communities, and access to healthcare is basic.
In 2009, the Australian government launched the Close the Gap initiative, which, by 2018, aimed to halve the gap in child mortality, and increase the proportion of ATSI students completing high school.
The relationship between economic and social progress
The relationship between economic and social progress is complex, however at the 2016 G20 summit in Hanzhou all 20 leaders agreed that global economic growth would lead to improved conditions for all people.
Social progress is the idea that societies can improve over time in economic, human and environmental terms. Governments play a key role in this, as their decisions can prioritise:
Economic development, through infrastructure spending, e.g. roads, railways, power grids and tax breaks to attract foreign visitors
Human development through spending on education, healthcare and benefits for disadvantaged groups, and promoting freedom and equality.
E.g. France spends 11.5% of GDP on health, or 2.8% in Bangladesh.
Environmental wellbeing, by reducing pollution (and its negative health effects), ensuring clean water and sanitation, and protecting ecosystems and species.
Most governments do all of these thing, but not equally. The Social Progress Index (SPI) attempts to quantify how well governments provide for their people. It is based on three factors:
basic human needs -> nutrition, medical care, shelter, water, sanitation and safety
foundations of wellbeing -> education, access to internet and mobile phones, life expectancy, pollution levels
opportunity -> personal rights, political freedom, gender equality, tolerance of immigrants and access to advanced education.
Neo liberal or néo-libéralisation
Reduced state intervention,
Free-market capitalism
Freedom for private businesses to trade and earn profits.
Promoting free trade between countries
with no or very few barriers (e.g. import/export taxes or quotas on the volume of exports)
Deregularising the free market
meaning money can flow easily and quickly between banks, businesses and countries.
Privatising state assets (e.g. water provision, transport).
This means they can be run to maximise profit
The belief is that this will aid development as the private wealth will trickle down, and that the poorest will eventually benefit from the strengthened economy.
Many countries are run to these neo-liberal principles, and IGOs have traditionally promoted it.
Intergovernmental Organisations are regional or global organisations of which countries are members; they manage aspects of the economy, global development and specific issues such as health or environmental issues.
These are more recently focusing on programmes to improve environmental quality, health, education and human rights.
Drawbacks to Neo-liberalisum
IGOs promote programmes such as structural adjustment, intervening in the policies of individual governments. This cuts health and education programmes, in the belief that this will improve the chances of economic growth.
There are concerns that neo-liberalism:
benefits businesses and TNCs far more than ordinary people, and so creates inequality, i.e. a growing gap between rich and poor
focuses on industrialisation, trade and jobs that tend to concentrate in cities, so rural areas miss out on economic growth and development
focuses on profit and economic growth at the expense of the environment
The World Bank
Part of the United Nations.
Lends money to emerging and developing countries to promote development
It funds projects such as roads, hydro-electric power, telecoms and water supply schemes
How it is helping education
A founding member of the Global Partnership for Education (GPE), established in 2002
This was created to have achieve the second and third MDGs (Achieve universal primary education and promote gender equality and empower women)
The GPE invests in early childhood education for all children, and aims to develop a sound educational system for children through developing early reading and numeracy skills
It helps countries set up early reading assessment systems
Focus on the poorest and most disadvantaged children, (girls, ethnic minorities, those with disabilities or in conflict zones)
More recent work has focused on secondary and higher education.
Invested over $35 million in educational programmes between 2002 and 2015
How it is helping the environment
Launches the Climate Change Action Plan in 2016
Aims to help developing countries, like India, to add 30 gigawatts of renewable energy (enough to power 150 million homes) to the world’s energy capacity
Aims to provide flooding early warning systems for 100 million people, and develop investment in agriculture for 40 countries (all by 2020)
Part of a strategy to end poverty
The IMF
Promotes global economic stability, by intervening in countries that experience economic difficulties (usually focusses on heavily indebted countries)
In return for re-arranging loans at adjusted rates of interest, and at more affordable repayments, it has imposed Structural Adjustment Programmes on the indebted countries. These SAPs consist of conditions forcing the state to reduce its role in the economy (e.g. by privatising energy or water companies) and in social welfare (spending on health and education)
This resulted in health and education provision being reduced, with TNCs benefitting
Its aim is to reduce the risk of market crashes and recessions
Role of strengthening weakening currencies, and foster stronger economic development policies
Reducing Poverty
’Poverty reduction programme’
Countries are now required to develop their own medium-term development plans to receive aid, loans and debt relief. (instead of having to do SAPs)
It is currently working with the Haitian government to make the economy more resilient, especially after Hurricane Matthew in 2016. It aims to make Haiti an emerging economy by 2030.
The WTO
Promotes free trade through negotiations between countries,
in order to promote economic development and reduce debts
however, these have frequently resulted in environmental degradation (rainforest clearance, threats to biodiversity)
e.g. Indonesia, where rainforest has been cleared for palm oil production
Since the 1950s a series of negotiating rounds have removed barriers to trade, although further progress has been limited since the 1990s
Helping the environment
Most WTO trade policies now try to:
Restrict the international movement of products or species that are potentially harmful or endangered
Challenge trade agreements where there may be implications for climate change
However, there is a conflict of interest, since the most powerful countries in the WTO may be disadvantaged by limiting trade.
UN MDG and SDG definitions
MDC- Millenium development goals
SDG- Sustainable development goals
UN MDG
The UN MDGs ran from 2000 to 2015, and aimed to improve the lives of people living in developing countries (especially South Asia and Africa) through global response. They consisted of 8 goals and subsidiary targets. Examples are:
To halve the proportion of people living on less than $1.25 a day
To halve the proportion of people who suffer from hunger
By 2015, all children can complete a full course of primary schooling, girls and boys
Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education, preferably by 2005 and at all levels by 2015
Reduce by two-thirds the under-five mortality rate
Reduce by three-quarters the maternal mortality ratio
They were ambitious goals and targets, focused on meeting basic needs in terms of health, income, food supply, water and sanitation. How successful were they?:
the health target prevented 20 million deaths between 2000 and 2015
6.2 million deaths from malaria prevented, 37 million deaths from TB prevented
infant mortality in sub-Saharan Africa fell by 53%
The rate of children dying before the age of 5 has fallen from 90 to 43 per 1000 (52% decrease)
numbers living in extreme poverty fell by 54%, from 1.9 billion in 1990 to 836 million in 2015
undernourishment fell from 20% to 13% between 2000 and 2015
primary school enrolment increased from 83% to 9!%
maternal mortality fell from 330 to 210 deaths per 100,000 live births
parliamentary representation of women increased in nearly 90% of countries
improved access to sanitation for 2.1 billion
Drawbacks to the UN MDG
These are huge gains, but:
Only one of the goals (no. 7, halving the number of people without safe access to drinking water) has been achieved.
Also, some countries, especially China, account for a large slice of this ‘success’ and can mask more limited progress in parts of South Asia and Africa.
East Asia and Latin America have made better progress than other developing regions.
500 million of those the fall in extreme poverty came from China
Gender inequality has not improved as much as hoped, and conflict in many countries (Somalia, Yemen, DRC) has set progress back.
The poorest, and those disadvantaged because of gender, age, disability or ethnicity were not benefitted
All but one MDG focused on poverty reduction rather than wealth creation (Hans Rosling criticised this)
By 2015, 800 million people still lived in extreme poverty and hunger, and 800 million lived in slum housing in cities.
UN SDG
The SDGs replaced the MDGs for the period 2015-2030. They are 17 global goals that apply to all countries, not just developing countries (as with the MDGs). They too set targets for basic needs, but in addition have to focus on sustainable development, including:
clean energy -> renewable, low carbon
decent work -> for a decent wage, avoiding exploitation
sustainable cities -> for more than 50% of the world’s population living in urban areas
protecting oceans and ecosystems.
But, they are not legally binding.
Background of the UDHR
Human rights are shared principles or values, which some argue are universal, giving humans certain rights that should never be denied. They set standards of human behaviour by being made into laws - either at a national or international level.
The term dates to the 18th century, however some of the concepts (such as the right to life and freedom) are much older.
Precursors to the modern concept of human rights can be found in:
the English Bill of Rights, 1689
the United States Declaration of Independence, 1777
the French Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen, 1789
These documents asserted the idea that people are born free, that governments should be elected freely and that property cannot be confiscated from people by those in power. The idea of a free and fair trial was also important. However, these historical documents often focussed on the rights of property-owning men, and had much less to say about the rights of women, slaves or peasants.
The UDHR
n 1948 the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in order to make the human rights specified in the 1945 United Nations Charter more clearly defined. It was largely a response to the Holocaust inflicted by the Nazis during the Second World War, to ensure that such actions were never repeated. It led to the deaths of up to 17 million people.
Since it’s adoption, the UDHR has been used:
to place political pressure on countries seen to be denying people basic human rights, and to press for change
as a justification for economic sanctions against countries
as a justification for military intervention in foreign countries seen to be committing genocide or widespread human rights abuses.
It is an important document for foreign policy because it informs the actions of countries towards other sovereign states.
Some examples of articles:
Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights
Article 3: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 5: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 10: Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 14: (1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 18: Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 20:
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 26: (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
In 1948, only the 58 UN-members voted on the UDHR. (48 in favour, 8 abstentations, 2 non-votes). Countries that have joined the UN since then have agreed to it as they joined. However, some subsequent human rights agreements have not been adopted by all UN member states.
Not all countries signed the UDHR:
the Soviet Union - because it considered that the Declaration did not sufficiently condemn Fascism and Nazism
South Africa - to protect its system of apartheid, where people were segregated by skin colour and race, because that contravened the Declaration
Saudi Arabia - because of the article that ‘everyone has the right to change their religion or belief’
Also as women’s rights are controversial issue. Only allowed to vote in 2015. May be segregated (e.g. using a separate counter at McDonald’s)
There have been two further covenants, (to serve as a legal framework to enforce the UDHR) and other additions.
The ECHR
In Europe there is a further human rights treaty called the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This:
was written by the Council of Europe and adopted by its 47 member states.
The Council of Europe is an international organisation set up in 1949 with the specific aims of upholding human rights, democracy and the rule of law in Europe.
It is not the same as the EU - but has a close relationship with it
pre-dates the founding of the EU in 1957
established the European Court of Human Rights to uphold the ECHR and bring people or organisations abusing human rights to trial and justice
The ECHR was specifically set up to prevent conflict in Europe and the sort of atrocities committed during the World Wars. It is different to the UDHR, but they have similar aims and refer to similar rights.
In the UK
In the UK, the Human Rights Act 1998 took the rights enshrined in the ECHR and made them part of UK law. This makes it easier for citizens to have their human rights upheld in the UK, rather than having to take the UK government to court at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
Remains controversial
The UDHR and ECHR are controversial to some people because of their impact on sovereignty. (idea that a country’s government determines the laws and policies in that country, and no higher authority has supreme power)
By signing international human rights treaties, sovereign states could be seen to be handing authority on human rights issues to a higher legal body (UN or Council of Europe)
In the case of the ECHR, the European Council of Human Rights in Strasbourg has a higher legal power to make judgements than national courts.
Some have criticised the concept of ‘human rights’ as being Western, put into place after WW2 by European and North American politicians and thinkers.
They argue that this Western concept of human rights does not apply easily to Islamic or Asian cultures, which have different histories and traditions.
Are certain human rights universal?
Different cultures may take a different view of gender equality, or treat some crimes more/less seriously than other cultures.
The Geneva convention
International Law also governs actions during wartime. The Geneva Conventions have a history dating back to the 1860s. The current version is the Fourth Geneva Convention, signed by 196 countries in 1949. It has been updated since with various amendments called protocols. The Geneva Conventions cover the ‘rules of war’ (acceptable conduct during one) in the following ways:
wounded and sick soldiers should be evacuated from the field of battle and given medical treatment, even by the enemy side
prisoners should be well treated, not used for forced labour and hostages should not be taken
civilians should be protected in areas that have been conquered.
The Geneva Convention helped define war crimes, (e.g. torture, rape, genocide, child soldiers, bombing civilians, chemical weapons). Those accused of war crimes can be tried at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, the Netherlands, set up in 2002. Recognition of the ICC by sovereign states is widespread (123 signatories) but not universal (the USA, China, Russia, India etc.).
Difficulties with the ICC:
international cooperation to bring war criminals to trial can be hard to achieve as not all states agree with it
war criminals have to be captured and then brought to the Hague: those accused often attempt to avoid this at all costs
gathering evidence of war crimes during a war is very difficult.
Since 2002, the ICC has investigated war crimes linked to 11 wars, and accused 42 individuals, of which 34 have had arrest warrants issued against them. As of 2018, only 5 criminals had been convicted at the ICC.
(Remember: the Geneva Convention is much narrower than the UDHR, as it only applies to conflict situations)
A key issue with the Convention, human rights law and the ICC is that many sovereign states still engage in actions that are banned by the treaties and agreements that have signed:
Amnesty International, estimates that 140 sovereign states use torture, for instance
around 25 countries still use chemical weapons
by some definitions, the USA has attempted regime change in over 30 countries since 1945, and many of these can be questioned under international law
may be through military intervention or political and economic pressure
most sovereign states consider Russia’s invasion and annexation of parts of Georgia (2008) and Ukraine (2014) illegal under international law.
Human rights Vs Economic development
All the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, France, the UK, and Canada, among others, are at the forefront of human rights. These countries have signed up to all aspects of UN human rights agreements, and enshrined protection and equality relating to ethnicity, gender, sexuality, disability and children, and issues such as modern slavery and people trafficking into their own laws.
Those countries are all ranked ‘free’ using the Freedom House, ‘Freedom in the World Index’
These are usually the first countries to ‘call out’ human rights abuses.
Sweden, Finland, Norway, Austria, Ireland and Switzerland are historically neutral countries, and are therefore often the locations chosen for international agreements on human rights, and their diplomats are often involved in negotiating agreements and settling disputes.
Some countries may prioritise economic growth over human rights, including China, Malaysia, Mexico, much of the Middle East and large parts of Africa. It could be argued that:
human rights bring financial costs, such as providing education and healthcare, and this money could be better spend on economic infrastructure
workers rights get in the way of profits, and they add costs to businesses
rights such as freedom of the press bring no economic benefit
Countries such as China defend their position by arguing that once economic development is achieved, human rights can then follow. They would argue that in the UK gender equality, universal suffrage, universal healthcare and education all emerged after the industrial revolution.
On the other hand:
people may be more productive and innovative when they have the protected freedoms that human rights bring
many of the world’s wealthiest countries have are also those with the best human rights records
Freedom in the World Index
Published by Freedom House
Ranks countries as ‘free’, ‘partly free’ and ‘not free’
Free: North America, Europe, much of South America, Australia, southern Africa, Mongolia and india
Partly Free: some Eastern European countries, South-east Asia, south-eastern Africa, western Africa, Central America, some of south Asia and South America
Not Free: most of Africa, most of Asia
Democracy
Democracy is a key aspect of human rights. A democratic political system allows people to vote out of office a government that is doing a bad job. According to the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), democracy is surprisingly rare. 163 countries into four groups:
full democracy -> civil liberties and political freedoms fully respected and protected (19 countries: Norway, Canada, UK)
flawed democracy -> elections are fair and civil liberties are protected, but there are problems, e.g. the media may not be free (57 countries: South Korea, South Africa, USA, India)
hybrid regimes -> elections are not free and fair, the legal system is not independent of the government and corruption is widespread (38 countries: Turkey, Bangladesh)
authoritarian regimes -> dictatorship, or systems where elections are meaningless; civil liberty abuses are common and the legal system is not independent. Media censored (52 countries: Russia, China, Saudi Arabia)
In hybrid and authoritarian countries freedom of speech is usually not respected at all. Freedom of speech is the right to express opinions without fear of persecution, censorship or retaliation: in some democracies it is fiercely protected, but there are often some restrictions to prevent incitement of violence or hate speech.
There has been some movement by emerging countries towards democracy, for instance South Korea transitioned to democracy in 1987, Chile in 1989 and Brazil in 1985. Other emerging countries, such as China and Turkey, have not moved this way.
China’s political system
China
Religious freedom: Christianity is barely tolerated, and Communist party members must be atheist. Buddhism and Islam are suppressed - hundred of thousands of native Uighur Muslims are locked up in camps.
Freedom of speech: ‘Subversion of state power’ is used to crack down on dissenting voices; the internet is censored.
Political freedom: The Chinese Communist Party is, in practice, the only political party that exists.
Freedom of the press: Not free. Media are monitored by the Communist Party and subject to government direction.
Indias flawed democratic system
India
Religious freedom: Despite religious freedom, religious violence and intolerance is common between Hindu, Muslim and Sikh groups.
Freedom of speech: Generally upheld: anti-government and single-issue protests are common, but so is police violence.
Political freedom: There are about 2,000 political parties in India, and its hotly contested elections are the largest democratic ones in the world.
Freedom of the press: There are numerous, privately owned media organisations that have reduced the influence of the government.
However, there are human rights problems in India related to a lack of LGBT rights, a lack of rights amongst Muslim women, and the caste system. This is a hereditary form of social hierarchy, which limits lower caste groups in terms of types of jobs they can have, and therefore their income. It has weakened, but lower caste groups are still subject to abuse, particularly the Dalit (untouchables).
Political corruption
Levels of political corruption vary and can be measured (Index of Corruption); high levels of corruption are a threat to human rights as the rule of law can be subverted.
Human rights depend on having people in power who are prepared to protect them.
Perhaps the most important aspect of this is having an independent judiciary system (courts, may even judge new laws to be illegal) that is not interfered with by politicians and cannot be ‘bought’ by people with power and money. An independent judiciary is a key principle of a democratic government, referred to as separation of powers between those who make laws (government) and those who apply them (judiciary),
The judiciary is undermined by corruption (for private benefit) because this can subvert the rule of law.
Judges can be bribed to dismiss legitimate human rights abuse cases, perhaps by wealthy business owners or TNCs
The appointment of judges can be influenced by politicians, rather than them being appointed independently
Corrupt politicians can steal government money, or foreign aid, so that it cannot be used as intended to improve human rights.
The overall impact of corruption is to create an untouchable group of powerful, wealthy people supported by a corrupt judicial system. Ordinary people are then left with no means of having their human rights upheld, so human rights abuses are widespread. Inevitably, countries with high levels of corruption (as measured by indices such as Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI)) are those with the worst track records on human rights.
Context of gender and ethinic differences
Human rights can also vary within sovereign states, especially post-colonial ones that gained their independence from European colonial powers in the period 1945-80.
Human rights in these countries have proved problematic because:
Human rights had almost no role in colonial governance, so there was little history of respecting such rights
Post-colonial poverty led to a focus on economic growth, and basic needs, but not human rights
Post-colonial national borders rarely reflected the geography of nations of people, meaning many countries contained religious and/or ethnic minority groups that were ignored or even persecuted by the majority.
Ethnicity example - the Rohingya people in Burma
Ethnicity example - the Rohingya people in Burma
Until 1948 Burma (or Myanmar) was a British colony:
The Rohingya are a Muslim people living in Rakhine State in northwest Burma, which is a majority Buddhist country
Under the 1982 Myanmar Nationality Law the Rohingya were denied nationality - meaning they had no rights are were effectively stateless.
In 1978, 1991-2, 2012 and 2015-18 military crackdowns and persecution forced more than 740,000 Rohingya to flee as refugees to Bangladesh
The 2015-18 crisis has been called a genocide and crime against humanity.
Gender example - Women in Pakistan
Gender example - Women in Pakistan
Pakistan was part of British India until Indian partition and independence in 1947.
Despite the adoption of laws to protect women’s rights in Pakistan, and some progress in improving women’s lives, progress has been very slow
Despite being illegal, child marriage is still common
Forced marriage is widespread
Female literacy is about 45% compared with 70% for men
Honour killings of women are still very common in parts of Pakistan, and despite this being murder they are often ignored or very lightly punished.
(When women are murdered for bringing ‘shame’ on the family, e.g. by having an affair)
Context of Latin America In Latin America
In Latin America there are about 45 million indigenous people, or 8% of the total population. Many live in rural areas, and a small number still lead an isolated, tribal lifestyle in places such as the Amazon Basin.
Indigenous groups frequently lack access to services and opportunities, as well as suffering discrimination because of ethnicity.
Brazil:
Women with 13 years of education - 14% (indigenous) vs 27% (non indigenous, of largely white ancestry)
Bolivia
Contraceptive use among women - 56% vs 69%
Peru
Infant mortality rate (per 1000 live births) - 38 vs 11
Mexico
Births attended by skilled medical staff - 81% vs 98%
variations in human rights and wealth in USA
The lack of human rights among women and minority religious/ethnic groups has a direct influence on quality of life. Many countries have laws that in theory should protect such groups and prevent discrimination, but these are widely ignored. This combines with prejudice among the wider population to deny access to key services and opportunities to these groups (housing, employment, education, healthcare.)
The USA
% that own home - 53% American and Alaskan Natives, 63% general population
High school diploma - 83% vs 87%
Average income - $38,500 vs $55,750
Households in poverty - 27% vs 15%
No health insurance - 21% vs 9%
Life expectancy - 73 vs 79
It is clear that indigenous people in the USA are poorer, less well educated and live shorter lives than the wider population.
Context of demands for equality
Differences in human rights do lead to real differences in income, education, health and opportunity between different groups, even within the same country. This is seen as unfair and unjustifiable, and has led to demands for equality, especially from women and ethnic minority groups. However, progress made towards equality takes place at different rates and has often been slow.
Australian demands for equality
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians were only counted in the national census, and allowed to vote, in 1967. Starting in 1976, some land rights have been granted to indigenous people, so they have the title to some of their traditional lands. However, ATSI Australians still feel under-represented in politics and business, and feel their rights (especially rights to land) have not been met. Their life expectancy is nearly 10 years less than white Australians.
Demands for equality in Afghanistan
Women lack equality in most Islamic countries, but perhaps no more so than in Afghanistan. Progress in women’s education and participation was made between 1973 and 1992, but was dramatically reversed when the Taliban took power in 1996. They are a fundamentalist religious and political group, observing an extremely strict version of Sharia law which treats women with brutality. They were the effective government of Afghanistan from 1996-2001.
Women could not go out alone, appear on TV, be visible in a house from the street, be employed or even get medical attention. Since 2001, limited progress has again been made with a more moderate government in charge, but the position of women is no better than it was in the 1970s.
Types of geopolitical interventions
Interference by one sovereign state in the affairs of another is not new. In 1827 Great Britain, Russia and France intervened in Greece to force the Ottoman Empire (modern-day Turkey) to give Greece its independence. This intervention was justified on humanitarian grounds in order to end Ottoman brutality and free the Greeks from Ottoman rule.
Intervention is an action taken by one or more sovereign states, within the territory of another, in order to change the political and social conditions in that place.
Interventions take a variety of forms, some of which are high risk because they involve the use of force.
Development Aid
Money, technical help or physical supplies (equipment, food and medicine) provided from one country to another, often involving IGOs such as the UN and/or NGOs
Aid aims to improve quality of life by meeting basic needs (food, clean water, education and healthcare)
Trade Embargoes
Otherwise known as economic sanctions, they prevent a country from undertaking international trade in the normal way
By preventing exports, or banning imports, pressure is placed on the leaders of a sovereign state to change policy because their economy suffers.
Military Aid
Money provided from one sovereign state to another to buy military equipment
Indirect Military Action
Military equipment, or military advisers, are provided from one sovereign state to another. (or another military group within it)
This is usually done in support of one side in a civil conflict.
Direct Military Action
Armed forces from one sovereign state engaging in conflict in another sovereign state
This is often done as part of a coalition, i.e. several countries acting collectively.
Interventions by IGO’s
The legal case for intervention is complex:
international law normally prohibits one sovereign state intervening in the internal affairs of another
it can take place if the state being intervened in has committed an act of aggression on another sovereign state
however, the UN Charter and UDHR provide grounds for intervention without external aggression, if human rights abuses are widespread and there is a humanitarian crisis (health, safety and wellbeing of large amount of people under threat)
the UN Security Council can authorise intervention if all five permanent members of the Security Council agree
The UN effectively has the right to intervene to protect people, although there is a view (‘responsibility to protect’), that argues that organisations such as the UN have a responsibility to intervene. This view is more proactive, and would lead to more interventions than is currently the case.
Interventions by NGO’s
NGOs
In the 21st century, human rights violations are front-page news. The internet, mobile phone cameras, social media and platforms such as YouTube mean human rights abuses can be documented like never before. There are several NGOs that campaign solely on human rights.
Amnesty International
Founded in 1961
Headquarters in London
A mass-membership organisation funded by members and supporters, that promotes direct action such as protests, letter writing and campaigning.
Human Rights Watch
Founded in 1978
Headquarters in New York
Largely funded by wealthy individuals, it puts pressure on governments to take action and intervene.
Debate of the validity of consensus of interventions
There is often widespread agreement between governments, NGOs and IGOs (UN) that human rights abuses have occurred, such as:
The 2015-18 Rohingya refugee crisis in Burma, involving the persecution of the Muslim Rohingya nation in Rakhine State by the Burmese government military forces
The Bosnian genocide of Muslim men and boys that took place during the 1992-5 Bosnian War
The genocide of the Tutsi in Rwanda by Hutu forces in 1994
The forced seclusion and ill-treatment of women during the Taliban regime in Afghanistan 1996-2001
However, there is often disagreement about the scale of the abuses and the extent to which they justify intervention. Even when the case for intervention is very strong, this may not happen due to lack of consensus (widespread agreement).
NGOs have little power to intervene, unless they are invited to by a sovereign state, or they are protected by the forces of another
the UN has no military forces of its own: it relies on member states providing and funding these
Geography might make intervention technically very difficult: land-locked countries, dense jungle, lack of air-strips to land personnel and supplies
Geopolitical considerations may prevent interventions. These include the risks that intervention could lead to wider conflict, or different sides of a conflict being allied to opposing powerful countries, e.g. the USA and Russia.
Interventions and sovergenty
In most situations the intervention of one sovereign state in the affairs of another is considered illegal under international law. Intervention breaches the principle of sovereignty, which is itself a crucial element of international law and the operation of the UN. Sovereignty is the legal right to govern a physical territory, and has four aspects:
a government, organised within a territory, has authority over that territory
the government controls movement of people and goods across the territory’s borders
the government and territory is recognised by other governments
other organisations, outside the territory, do not have higher authority
Any intervention by other sovereign states breaches these aspects of sovereignty. In practice this usually means the bar for intervention is high: there needs to be very strong moral and ethical grounds for direct military intervention, e.g. widespread and serious human rights violations.
Western governments do intervene, indirectly, in the affairs of other sovereign states by using economic levers to apply pressure. This is done in two main ways:
Offering aid to help economic and social development, but attaching conditions (‘strings attached’) that seek to improve some aspect of human rights, such as the education of women and girls, or strengthening the rights of a minority group.
Foreign aid, or ‘Official Development Assistence’ (ODA) is money (grants or loans) or technical help/equipment given from a donor country to a recipient to help economic and social developement.
Negotiating trade agreements such as lower import tariffs or removing import quotas, but on the condition that human rights are improved.
This can be seen in two ways:
Positive: ‘ethical foreign policy’, i.e. using the power of trade and aid to improve the lives of people in developing countries by strengthening their human rights.
Negative: an interference in sovereign affairs, by effectively forcing the country to change internal policy in order to gain a benefit from another country.
UK and USA aid comparison
Aid from the USA and the UK:
There is considerable overlap in the lists: countries experiencing conflict or terrorism (Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan), coping with refugee crises (Jordan - refugees from Syria) or poor, large, strategically important sub-Saharan African countries (Tanzania, Ethiopia, Nigeria) all get large sums in aid.
None of the top ten recipients are democracies or flawed democracies based on the EIU Democracy Index. (UK: mainly authoritarian, USA: mainly hybrid)
The sums of money involved are large, the USA gave a total of $16 billion in development in 2017 (and a further, separate $10 billion in military aid)
In Sub-Saharan Africa, UK and US aid is targeted at developing countries, and may improve human rights through meeting basic needs (education, health, food, water and shelter) but it is also about geopolitical influence by creating allies, fighting threats such as terrorism and countering influences from elsewhere (Russia, China)
USA main donation: Afghanistan, $1,000,000,000
UK main donation: Pakistan, £402 million
4 types of aid
Bilateral Aid
Given from one country to another, either as cash grants, loans, or technical or military equipment.
Multilateral Aid
Given from an IGO such as the World Bank. This often involves loans, with have to be repaid.
Aid from NGOs (Voluntary Aid)
Provided by charities such as Oxfam and Christian Aid, funded by donations from ordinary people.
Emergency Aid
Short-term aid, to cope with a natural disaster such as an earthquake or epidemic. This is often from NGOs and governments.
Motives of Aid
Aid donors may have complex motives for providing it, including:
A genuine desire to improve human rights and human welfare
Political ties, such as providing aid to ex-colonies, which may involve an element of guilt or responsibility for past exploitation
As a way to gain economic access for businesses and assist with trade deals (or prevent other countries from gaining influence)
As a way to strengthen political alliances.
Problems with aidf
Problems with aid
A key problem with development aid is corruption, where aid money never reaches the people it is intended to help because:
it is stolen by corrupt government officials
bribery siphons off some of the money, which is wasted on corrupt contracts costing far more than the real cost of the goods
aid money often goes to companies owned and run by government officials and local elites, making it easier to steal
It is impossible to know how much development aid is lost to corruption. It may be a larger problem with large-scale, high-cost bilateral aid and multilateral projects. NGOs are probably more able to control corruption because their sums are small, and tend to be spent more locally.
There is an argument that development aid actually promotes corruption. Some people may view it as essentially ‘free money’ which increases the temptation to get it through corrupt means. Others argue development aid has wider negative impacts because:
it reduces innovation, free enterprise and entrepreneurship because it provides a basic level of economic support
it creates dependency, so countries begin to rely on aid ‘handouts’ rather than fostering economic development
Many African countries do indeed depend heavily on aid, which makes up a significant share of their overall annual national income. In the Central African Republic and Liberia, it is more than 25% of GDP. However, the counter argument is that without it, human rights would have been much worse.
Success of aid
Global Vaccination Programmes
Led by the UN World Health Organization since the 1960s, immunisation has dramatically reduced the disease burden in developing countries.
Smallpox was eradicated in 1977, measles deaths fell by 85% in Africa from 2000 to 2014 and worldwide polio cases have fallen by 99% since 1988.
Tackling Malaria
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, an NGO, has spent $2 billion fighting malaria
Since 2005 new cases are down 25%, and deaths down 42%
Anti-mosquito bednets, better diagnosis and treatment, and improved insecticides have all contributed to controlling malaria and the mosquitoes that carry it.
Women’s Education
Under the umbrella of the Millennium Development Goals, progress has been made in gender equality
The global gender gap between male and female primary and secondary enrolment was eliminated between 2000 and 2015 (really?)
Globally, more women are in work, and more involved in politics than in 2000
Negatives of Economic Development
Like development aid, economic development can improve human rights and welfare. If businesses grow, they provide jobs and incomes and people’s lives improve. The reduction in poverty in China from 88% of people in 1981 to 5% in 2018 was largely driven by job creation in cities, fuelled by FDI in Chinese industry.
However, in low-income, developing countries, economic development is often focused on the primary economic sector (farming, mining, forestry and fishing - involves obtaining raw materials). A number of players can undertake this, including:
TNCs from developing countries, including oil and gas companies such as Shell and ExxonMobil
Government-owned companies (state-run enterprises) and agencies of developing countries.
Sovereign wealth funds from developed and emerging countries.
SWFs are government-owned investment funds. They invest national wealth in economic development projects, often overseas.
While activities such as drilling for oil, forestry and commercial farming can generate economic development, they often involve:
Pollution, such as oil drilling spills and polluted waste water from mining
Deforestation from forestry and to make new farmland
Disregard for the land rights of local and indigenous people.
This situation is made worse by the lack of environmental laws and monitoring, lack of clear land title (legal land ownership/tenure. Generally a legal document, but indigenous people often lack this) and corruption which allows illegal and damaging activities to continue unchecked in some developing countries.
Oil exports in Niger Delta
Oil exploitation in the Niger Delta
Oil exports represent about 25% of Nigeria’s GDP
Oil drilling by foreign TNCs in the Niger Delta region has generated conflict with the indigenous Ogoni people over land rights
Bombings, kidnappings, shootings and mass protests have plagued the region for decades
Thousand of oil spills, possibly of over 9 million barrels of oil since the 1950s, have caused widespread damage to forests, swamps and human health
Land grabs in Western Africa
Oil exploitation in the Niger Delta
Oil exports represent about 25% of Nigeria’s GDP
Oil drilling by foreign TNCs in the Niger Delta region has generated conflict with the indigenous Ogoni people over land rights
Bombings, kidnappings, shootings and mass protests have plagued the region for decades
Thousand of oil spills, possibly of over 9 million barrels of oil since the 1950s, have caused widespread damage to forests, swamps and human health
Military interventions
There are many examples where Western countries have undertaken military intervention in other sovereign states, however the number doing this is small.
Britain, France and the USA intervene quite regularly either as part of a United Nations intervention, a NATO led intervention (Libya in 2011, Bosnia in 1992-95) or unilaterally.
NATO = North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, a military alliance between North America, nations in Europe and Turkey
Russia tends to intervene if it perceives a threat directly on its borders (annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, USSR invasion of Afghanistan in 1979); its military intervention in the Syrian conflict since 2015 is unusual
Other countries provide troops, equipment and financial backing for UN Peacekeeping forces, but these are not offensive combat operations
These operate under the UN flag, to keep peace in areas of conflict and protect civilians. The forces are composed of troops and equipment from UN member states, with commanders appointed from one or more countries.
The terms of the peace treaties at the end of the Second World War limit the ability of Japan and Germany to undertake military intervention.
Military intervention is often justified on human rights grounds. In some examples the case for this is strong, but less so in other cases. Most interventions are more about wider global strategic interests - in other words military intervention is undertaken to protect the interests of Western powers, such as:
A need to protect strategic resources, such as oil supply, especially from the Middle East. Intervention in Iraq in the 1990s and 2000s can partly be seen in this context.
The need to protect shipping routes for oil, gas and other goods, such as the Suez and Panama canals, the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. If these narrow shipping routes were controlled by hostile countries, there could be large economic consequences.
The need to prevent wider conflict destabilising whole regions: NATO intervention in Bosnia in 1992-5 was partly to prevent the Bosnian war spilling over into other European countries.
NATO invasion of Bosnia
NATO Intervention in Bosnia, 1992-5
In 1995, an attack on Bosnian Muslims by Bosnian Serbs led to 8,000 deaths and became known as the ‘Srebrenica Massacre’. This led to the NATO Operation Deliberate Force - an offensive air and bombing campaign against the Bosnian Serbs
Strong human rights justification, which eventually led to war crimes arrests among Bosnian Serb military leaders
2003 invasion of Iraq
2003 Invasion of Iraq
A US- and UK-led invasion that led to the downfall of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. It was justified at the time on the basis of removing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, especially chemical weapons, and Iraq’s support for terrorism
Weapons of Mass Destruction (chemical/biological/nuclear weapons that kill large numbers of people indiscriminately) were never found in Iraq by USA and UK forces, and some argue that the conflict and its aftermath inflicted greater human rights abuses than before the invasion.
Does military intervention always tale place
However, military intervention does not always take place, even when it appears to be strongly justified. Recent examples of genocide include:
Darfur genocide in Sudan (2003-ongoing), with estimates of 100,000-500,000 deaths by 2018
Rwandan genocide of the Tutsi people by Hutus (1994), estimated to have led to at least 500,000 deaths.
Between 2016 and 2018 the government and military of Burma have forced about 950,000 Rohingya Muslims to flee the country, mostly to Bangladesh. This is an example of ethnic cleansing (although some NGOs have called it genocide).
In all of these examples, the UN and NGOs have intervened with emergency aid, awareness raising and, in some cases, peacekeeping forces. However, direct military action to stop the genocide/ethnic cleansing was not taken by Western powers such as the USA, UK, or France.
Military Aid
Military aid takes the form of training another country’s military personnel to fight, or operate military equipment, plus the supply of weapons either for free or at subsidised prices.
It is an important part of foreign policy of some developed and emerging countries. It is especially important to the USA, which provides military aid to over 100 countries each year. Most aid goes to the Middle East. Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel and Egypt each received over $1 billion in 2017. This aid is partly used to fight terrorism, and partly to rebuild military and police forces in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan after years of conflict. However, it has wider geopolitical aims:
By arming Iraq (2016: $5280 million), Afghanistan ($5100 million), Pakistan and Jordan the USA is creating strong allies against Iran - which the USA sees as a destabilising influence in the Middle East
The USA supports Israel (an enemy of Iran) partly because the Jewish vote is important in internal US politics, and the USA sees a powerful Israel ($3100 million) as an important component of stability in the Middle East
Egypt controls the Suez Canal, a vital world trade shipping route important to American businesses, so by giving military aid to Egypt ($1200 million) the USA may hope to safeguard access to the canal.
Developed countries sell arms (military equipment of all types - bullets->missiles-> fighter jets) to developing and emerging countries. World trade in arms is dominated by exports from six countries (USA, Russia, China, Germany, UK, France). In 2017, the USA exported $42 billion worth of arms to other countries.
The three largest buyers of US weapons are countries which themselves have questionable human rights records:
Saudi Arabia
the position of women is very poor in terms of education, personal freedom, political involvement and employment
Turkey
Since 2010 President Erdogan has restricted press and media freedom, and arrested thousands of opposition political leaders and activists. Elections are not the most democratic.
UAE
Stoning and flogging are legal punishments, homosexuality is a crime, women need the permission of a male guardian to marry and the working conditions for hundreds of thousands of South-Asian low-skilled migrants are very poor.
Both arms sales and military aid flow towards countries which have poor records on human rights. There is an argument that such assistance increases security, reduces terrorism risk, and may even help maintain peace in the Middle East. On the other hand, the billions involved could be put to work improving water and food supply, female education, or healthcare for mothers and children.
Direct military intervnetion
The phrase ‘war on terror’ was first used in 2001 by US President George W. Bush, shortly after the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. The phrase means a war against Islamic Extremism and the groups that support it, including:
Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Arabia
The Taliban in Afghanistan
Boko Haram in Nigeria
Islamic State in Syria and Iraq
Al-Shabaab in Somalia
These groups have committed atrocities in their own countries, and claimed responsibility for numerous terrorist attacks in Western countries, such as the 2015 attack on the Bataclan Theatre in Paris and the 2017 attack on Westminister Bridge in London.
Western countries, led by the USA, but often involving the UK, France and others, have justified direct military intervention in a number of countries because of the war on terror, including:
drone strikes in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere
the 2003 invasion of Iraq
conflict in Afghanistan from 2001 and continuing as of 2018
air strikes and special forces operations in Syria and Iraq, against IS
There have also been US-led operations in the Philippines, Mali and elsewhere in Africa. In 2014, Western countries used airstrikes, food-drops and military support for Kurdish forces to attempt to prevent the massacre of the Yazidi ethno-religious minority group by ISIS in Sinjar, Iraq. To some extent, French military intervention in Mali since 2013 has been to protect minority groups such as the Malian Sufis from Islamic extremists.
The War on Terror raises several difficult questions related to the UN UDHR.
To what extent do people in Muslim countries want their human rights protected by Western countries?
In 1990, 48 Muslim countries signed the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. The CDHRI is a response to criticism that the UDHR fails to take account of the Islamic perspective on human rights or the role of Sharia Law. In other words, justification for intervention based on the UDHR may have limited support in some Muslim countries.
To what extent are the actions of Western countries undermine by their own attitude towards the UDHR?
The USA has been accused of using torture at secret CIA ‘black sites’ around the world, and both US and UK forces were accused of illegal use of torture during the 2003 Iraqi war. Many Western countries have patchy records on human rights protection for their indigenous groups.
To what extent does the War on Terror risk a permanent cultural divide?
The War on Terror may risk demonising all Muslims, not just Islamists, and therefore create mistrust within Western countries (many of which have large Muslim minorities) and between Western and Muslim countries.
Variations for measuring success
Interventions in sovereign states, whether humanitarian, military or the use of development aid, should improve the lives of people in a measurable way. There is no universally accepted way of measuring the ‘success’ of interventions.
Some common measures are:
Infant mortality (deaths before age 1, per 1,000 live births)
Responds rapidly to changes in sanitation and access to basic health and nutrition
Correlates strongly with the quality of governance in a state
but…
Recording is often poor in isolated rural areas
Improvements in health systems sometimes lead to an increase in recorded infant mortality
Life expectancy (average, years from birth)
Widely understood, comparable measure
Relatively easy to calculate from existing records
but…
Responds relatively slowly to improving social conditions
National average masks wide regional, local and ethnicity variations
GDP per capita (average income per person)
Widely used, easy-to-understand measure of average wealth
Simple to calculate and update
but…
Does not indicate income distribution or income equality
Does not take into account the cost of living
Single indicators can indicate success, however an index (combines single measures into one -> increases data range and reduces impact of anomalies) is often a better method. Examples:
Human Development Index (HDI): combining per capita income. life expectancy and average years in school
Gender Inequality Index (GII): combining maternal mortality, women’s participation in higher education and parliament, and participation in the workforce
Improvements in these indices show relatively widespread progress in human well-being, the position of women and human rights. Freedom of speech, as included in the UDHR, is measured using indices such as Reporters Without Borders ‘Press Freedom Index’ or the EIU Democracy Index.
Many interventions involve the management of refugees fleeing conflict either internally or internationally. The extent to which refugees are treated humanely is important. They should be:
provided with shelter, food, water and healthcare
reunited with other family members
in time, supported to return to their homes or permanently resettled as asylum seekers
Surprisingly, Uganda is a model of refugee management. In 2018, there were around 600,000 refugees and asylum seekers in Uganda from 13 other African countries. Many are from South Sudan, Somalia and the DRC. Uganda’s progressive legal system allows:
allows refugees to work, to support their families
gives them access to social services such as healthcare and education
allows freedom of movement within Uganda
in many cases provides refugee families with land to farm
These policies contrast starkly with those in many Western countries, such as the UK, which prohibit some of these freedoms
Democracy as a success
Western governments, especially the USA (and to a lesser extent EU countries and IGOs such as the UN) see the promotion of democracy and freedom of expression as a key outcome of intervention.
Most countries that carry out interventions are Western, capitalist democracies. It is perhaps not surprising that these countries equate freedom and democracy with success. However, few countries score highly on the Cato Institute’s Human Freedom Index. In fact, less than 40% of the world’s population live in countries that are’free.’ (Much of Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand)
Freedom and democracy are less common than might be expected:
there is very little tradition of freedom, democratic elections or gender equality in the Middle East
60 years ago, most African countries were colonies; democracy has struggled to take root there
Western countries could be criticised for forcing their own economic and political model on developing and emerging countries, when ‘success’ might actually be measured in terms of rising incomes, improving life expectancy and increasing participation in education.
In 2015, a survey by Pew Research Global found that only 53% of people in Pakistan and 52% in Turkey agreed that people should be able to criticise the government’s policies. In the USA and UK, the figures were 95% and 94%. Support for complete freedom of speech is not universal.
Economic growth as a success
In some countries, the success of foreign aid, military interventions to end conflict and trade embargoes or sanctions is measured by subsequent economic growth rather than an improvement in human rights or a growth in democracy. The concept of holistic development (in all aspects of quality of life, not just one or two) where many aspects of human well-being are improved at the same time, is seen as less important than improving wealth and incomes.
In some ways, this makes sense:
In developed countries, democracy and human rights are relatively new, having developed only in the last 200 years: they were largely absent as today’s developed countries industrialised and became wealthy
In developing countries, without government-funded welfare systems people have to pay for education, healthcare and clean water: rising incomes make this possible far more than the right to vote
Families in developing countries often have to look after elderly relatives, and income is needed for this when there aren’t any government pensions.
Holistic development is a combination of economic growth, human rights and democratic institutions.
On the other hand, ignoring the need for human rights and democratic institutions as part of the development process risks authoritarian rule, poor governance and corruption, and possibly even persecution of minority groups. There are examples of countries that have transitioned to democracy as they have developed economically such as Taiwan (1996), South Korea (1987), and Ecuador (1979) which suggests that growing wealth can promote democracy and freedom.
Successes and Failures of Aid
Development aid and intervention have a very mixed record of success. In theory, intervention and aid promoted by Western countries should promote economic and social development, improve health and education, and increase human rights, however this is not always the case.
Ebola is a deadly virus present in Africa, which has periodic outbreaks and epidemics. It has a mortality rate of about 70% and it is both very hard to treat and to control its spread.
The HIV virus is a disease most often spread by sexual activity, which can develop into AIDS. AIDS can be treated, but this is costly and there isn’t a cure. It is common in the countries of southern and East Africa.
Ebola Crisis (2013-16) in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia
Epidemic that killed over 11,000 people
Reduced GDP by 10-15% in the affected countries
The World Health Organisation, the UK, the USA and France led the international response
After a slow initial response the epidemic was contained, but at a cost of over $4 billion.
Without international intervention Ebola could have spread in an uncontrolled way with even worse consequences.
Botswana (since independence in 1966)
Africa’s fastest growing and most democratic country
62% of its exports are diamonds
Tourism contributes 12% of GDP
It has received much foreign investment by TNCs in mining, tourism and finance
Democracy and lack of corruption have promoted foreign investment.
25% of the population are HIV positive, but for 20 years a sound education and health programme has attempted to control HIV/AIDS with some success.
Haiti
USA invasion and occupation 1915-34
1957-86 Haiti was ruled by father and son dictators Francois and Jean-Claude Duvalier, tolerated by the USA
US military intervention in 1994-5 to reinstate President Aristide
2004 onwards: UN intervention to stabilise Haiti’s political situation
The poorest country in the western hemisphere has been badly governed and subject to foreign intervention for over 100 years. It was ill-prepared for the devastating 2010 earthquake and subsequent cholera epidemic.
Iraq
1990-91 invasion of southern Iraq by US-led forces after retaking Kuwait, which Iraq had invaded
2003 invasion by a US-led Western coalition to overthrow President Saddam Hussein ended in 2011
Since 2014 there has been a civil war in Iraq
Military intervention freed Kuwait, and eventually removed the dictator Saddam Hussein. However, Iraq has since been a fragmented country divided by religious and ethnic conflict.
How HDI changes between 1990 and 2015 for Haiti , Ghana, Vietnam and Iraq
How HDI changed between 1990 and 2015 for Haiti, Ghana, Vietnam and Iraq
Haiti’s improvement is small and slow
1990: 0.409, 54.6 years
2017: 0.498, 63.1 years (+16%)
Ghana’s HDI increased significantly after 2000: this is partially due to increased development aid flowing to Ghana within the UN Millennium Goal framework. Since 2004 Ghana has received $1.1-1.8 billion in aid each year.
!990: 0.455, 56.8 years,
2017:0.592, 61.5 years (+8%)
Vietnam has made the fastest, steadiest progress: this is the result of foreign investment by TNCs as Vietnam globalises and copies the Chinese model of manufacturing exports.
1990: 0.475, 70.5
2017: 0.694, 75.9 (+8%)
Iraq, subject to huge foreign military intervention since 1990 and over $50 billion in aid between 2004 and 2008, has made the life expectancy. Since 2012, HDI trends have reversed because of the ongoing civil war.
1990: 0.572, 66.2 years
2017: 0.685, 69.6years (+5%)
All four countries have reported increases in life expectancy since 1990. Iraq has had the least progress, as a result of conflict, invasions, terrorism and the brutal rule of Saddam Hussein prior to 2003. Perhaps surprisingly, Haiti has made the most progress in life expectancy. However, this was from a low starting point: aid has improved health outcomes but this has often not translated into wider social and economic opportunities.
Context of development aid
Development aid, often combined with intervention that attempts to manage epidemics, natural disasters or conflict, should reduce economic inequality and improve people’s lives.
Economic inequality is often measured with the Gini coefficient. This quantifies the share of GDP going to different quintiles of the population, e.g. the poorest 20% or the richest 20%.
Income inequality
Income Inequality
Haiti
richest 20% - 47.1%
poorest 20% - 5.5%
Ghana
richest 20% - 48.8% GDP
poorest 20% - 5.4% GDP
Vietnam
richest 20% - 42.4% GDP
poorest 20% - 7.1% GDP
Both Haiti and Ghana have very unequal income distributions, which close to half the country’s wealth in the hands of the richest 20%. This suggests that development progress may be benefiting the wealthy more than the poor. In Vietnam, income inequality is lower, perhaps because the low-skilled jobs that globalisation has created are accessible to the poor.
Aid as foreign policy
A major issue with development aid is the suspicion that it often has as much to do with geopolitics as it does with improving socio-economic conditions in developing countries. This is especially true of bilateral aid given from one country to another.
Aid can be used by superpowers to assist geostrategic interests:
Chinese aid to Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Russia and Turkmenistan is linked to the Chinese Belt and Road economic plan, sometimes called the ‘New Silk Road’. This is a massive plan to develop new sea and land trade routes between China, South Asia, the Middle East and Europe.
French and UK aid is funnelled towards former colonies: English-speaking East Africa (Commonwealth countries) and Francophone West Africa which helps maintain old alliances.
French aid is perhaps the most global, as France seeks strategic partners worldwide (e.g. Indonesia, China, Brazil, Colombia)
UK and US aid often overlap, especially in the Middle East and East (North?) Africa, where is Islamic terrorism is seen as a threat that must be countered.
Aid can lubricate a number of wider interests, including:
Opening up access to natural resources such as oil, metal ores and minerals: often cited as a key reason behind Chinese aid to African nations (Angola, Mali)
Strengthening military alliances: this is one reason why France gives aid to Turkey as both are members of NATO, and why US and UK aid often goes to the same countries, because they are military allies
USA aid to Ukraine strengthens the alliance between these countries against Russia (which invaded and annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014)
Although this is very hard to prove, aid recipients might be expected to support their donor countries within IGOs such as the UN or WTO -> aid can help win political support.
Direct and indirect military interventions
There have been many direct and indirect military interventions in recent history. UN peacekeepers have been involved in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) since 1999, intervening in the Second Congo War. The war is a fight between DRC government forces under President Laurent Kabila and various rebel groups under the RCD (Rally for Congolese Democracy) flag. At stake is control of the DRC and its vast mineral wealth - including conflict minerals such as gold, diamonds and coltan (used in mobile phones).
conflict minerals are high value minerals and ores, such as gold and diamonds, that have caused war as opposite groups fight to control mining and trade.
It has an ethnic dimension, and has spilled over into Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi.
In 2017, there were 18,300 UN peacekeepers in DRc operating as MONUSCO (UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the DRC)
More than 30 member states have contributed troops
The total cost has been over $9 billion.
costs and gains of UN action
Costs and Gains of UN Action
Gains
The situation may have been worse without UN involvement
The UN may have prevented wider, direct involvement by other countries, e.g. a World War in Africa
The UN has collected evidence that may lead to war crimes trials
Humanitarian help and aid has been provided by the UN, protected by peacekeepers
Costs
Despite 20 years of UN action, in 2018 the war was still raging in the Ituri and Kivu regions
DRC is more dependent than ever on warlord-controlled conflict minerals
Over 5 million dead, including 200 UN peacekeepers
GDP per capita $458
Shocking war crimes, involving child soldiers and sexual violence, have been widespread
Sometimes individual nation states act on their own. An example is the UK’s intervention in Sierra Leone (a former British colony) in 2000. It was considered to be a failed state at the time, which is where governance has broken down and there is no effective state to protect people. Basic services have collapsed and people’s lives are risked daily by the lack of security.
Sierra Leone descended into civil war in 1991, and by 1999 more than 50,000 were dead
The UN became involved in 1999, but this intervention failed and the UK decided to step in
Operation Palliser, with 1,200 troops, naval and air support drove rebel forces back from Freetown (the capital city) and led to a ceasefire.
UK intervention saved the UN mission in Sierra Leone.
By 2002, the war was over and the country has made progress since. Several war criminals were prosecuted, including the rebel leader Charles Taylor, convicted of war crimes in 2012. The UK’s intervention is viewed as having been highly successful.
USA war on terror
The USA’s War on Terror since 2001
Military actions around the world against Islamic terrorists (Al Qaeda, Taliban, IS) in response to the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York.
Views as demonising Muslims
Turned some Muslims in Western countries into radical extremists
Contributed to the rise of IS - as an extremist response to the ‘War on Terror’
Made Middle Eastern countries take sides for or against the USA
UK and France in Libia 2011
UK and France in Libya, 2011
An air force bombing campaign in support of rebel forces fighting the government forces of Colonel Gaddafi. (In the context of the 2011 Arab Spring, a popular uprising against military dictatorships in North Africa (Libya, Tunisia, Egypt) and the Middle East (Syria, Iran) which led to the overthrow of several governments, but also longer-term conflict in Syria and Libya.)
Disagreement among NATO members over how to act
Disintegration of governance in Libya
Refugee and humanitarian crises in Libya as no effective governance has emerged since 2011
Widespread disregard for human rights
Any military intervention, either by the UN, a coalition of countries or an individual country inevitably means the sovereignty of the country where the intervention takes place is severely eroded. This means the ‘bar’ for intervention is high.
In some cases, intervention may make a bad human rights situation worse. Failed intervention risks prolonging conflict, with greater numbers of deaths, injuries and human rights abuse. The West’s failure to create a situation where a stable, unified, democratic post-intervention government could exist in Somalia, Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan begs the very difficult question as to whether these countries would have been better off without Western intervention.
Are non military interventions better
France intervened in the 2011 Second Ivorian Civil War, in order to end a brutal conflict between military supporters of Alassane Ouattara (the democratically elected president) and Laurent Gbagbo (loser of the 2010 presidential election). French special forces helped to arrest Gbagbo and restore Outtara to power. Subsequently, Cote d’Ivoire has been relatively stable and Ouattara was re-elected president in 2015.
Consquences of inaction
Lack of action also has global consequences which may impact negatively on progress in environmental, political and social development (human well-being and human rights)
It is possible to argue that military intervention can be positive, despite the risks. In a 2007 book, Professor Paul Collier (Director of Oxford’s Centre for the Study of African Economics) argued that the cost of a nation becoming a ‘failed state’ was $30 billion and recovery back to a ‘normal’ state, took 59 years on average. In other words, the long-term costs to human well-being and human rights are probably worse than the short term costs of intervening.
The costs of the Syrian Civil War that began in 2011 have been huge:
Between 350,000 and 500,000 deaths up to 2018
7.6 million people internally displaced within Syria
5.1 million international refugees
A refugee crisis, which has caused internal political division within the EU
The rise of Islamic State within Syria and beyond
Tensions between Russia, Turkey, the EU and USA in terms of how to respond
The use of chemical weapons by President Assad’s forces
Widespread destruction of ancient, globally significant heritage sites such as Aleppo and Palmyra
Environmental pollution caused by destroyed water and sewage systems, and chemical contamination from weapons, destroyed factories, and military equipment.
While the West has intervened in terms of air and missile strikes against ISIS, and Turkey and Russia have also been involved militarily (pro-Assad), there has not been a ‘boots on the ground’ intervention by the West as there was in Iraq or Afghanistan. Could this have shortened the civil war?
The long-term impact on Syrians is considerable:
By 2018, the Syrian economy was about 40% of its size in 2010
Unemployment has risen to over 50%, whereas GDP per capita has collapsed by 50%
HDI has fallen from 0.65 in 2010 to about 0.5 in 2018.
President Assad estimated that post-war reconstruction costs, once the war ends, would be $400 billion (8x the estimated annual GDP of Syria in 2018)
