” “The EU’s responsibility

The European Union should commit itself more to foreign debt relief and alter some of the criteria on which it is based: that’s the proposal of the Coordination of the Spanish NGOs for development. It has suggested to the Spanish government that it should assume a clearer position on the question within the European Union, and enunciate it at the Summit on funding for development to be held in Monterrey (Mexico) from 18 to 23 March. The NGOs in question, including Caritas Spain, ask the EU for specific commitments on the control of the international financial organisations and on the increase of official aid to development. We put some questions to the economist Jaime Atienza , delegate of the department for immigration of Caritas Spain, and one of the formulators of the proposals. What’s your judgement of the EU’s position on foreign debt? “The EU has let too much time slip by. Two years ago, on the occasion of the Great Jubilee of the year 2000 and the campaign for the remission of foreign debt, the Union’s response was to write off the debt of small countries with insignificant debts. This was a way of making people believe it was concerned by the issue, but also to disguise the real extent of the problem. In fact the Argentine crisis has demonstrated that this position is ineffective: the impossibility to tackle the debt shows once again that the development of the countries of the southern hemisphere involves and promotes the affluence of the developed economies”. This means that foreign debt also has negative repercussions on the developed countries? “Yes, the terrorist attacks of 11 September have shown that interdependence and globalization generate unpredictable situations. Though the argument that links poverty and terrorism is incorrect, it cannot be denied that the world economic situation produces feelings of rejection and disaffection in the poor countries. The rich countries must have the consciousness of having to do more, of taking on board the problems of the poor countries, which are beginning to spread to the West. Immigration, for example, is the other side of the coin of foreign debt. It’s not enough to formulate provisions and laws that regulate the phenomenon. What we need to do is aim at integration, analyze the problems as a whole, seek to prevent them and find solutions through the collaboration of all the social parties involved, before they can generate conflicts”. Caritas Spain and the other NGOs have proposed that the criteria for the payment of foreign debt be revised. Why? “Hitherto the criterion has been that creditors should subtract the debt contracted in their favour from the money they earn from exports. But problems arise here: the countries that have to pay so much are left without resources of their own, while prices on the raw commodities market are constantly fluctuating downwards… All this makes it impossible either to service the debt or ensure the development of these countries. We propose the opposite criterion: that of giving priority to the debtor countries and repaying foreign debt on the basis of what they have first achieved, i.e. the minimum threshold of human development. That means first investing the proceeds of exports in education, health care, development… then using the surplus money to pay the foreign debt. In essence this is a change in perspective, based on the dignity of the person and of the right of countries to development. On the basis of this criterion a decision may then be taken whether to defer, renegotiate or cancel the foreign debt”. You also have a proposal to create an international body for the arbitration of foreign debt, independent of the Club of Paris. Why? “The Paris club of creditors decides whether or not to renegotiate foreign debt. We propose an independent and neutral authority that may act as a court of arbitration between creditors and debtors, just as any citizen or human group has the right to have recourse to a neutral body to resolve conflicts, for example in the field of justice. Moreover, there have been cases of debt repayments being misappropriated, of corruption, etc. In this way there is more transparency and real criteria may be used”.