|

Universal Development Agenda & Our Priorities

The issue of ‘universal development agenda’ is the issue of the twenty-first century. Never before have so many suffered amidst liberty and luxury for the few. The wealth of single individuals exceeds the wealth of many nations. In highly developed countries, the number of persons living past 80 years is soaring. In deprived and convulsed countries, the average longevity is but half that age. While citizens of some African and Asian countries are starving, the rich countries are beset with obesity. Discrepancies of these types are morally disturbing. The United Nations is ideally suited to ending these shocking inequalities because it hosts all the nations of the world and endows each with identical voting power in the General Assembly. The poorest and the weakest are equal to the richest and the strongest.

The most urgent priority to promoting global partnership for viable development is the ending of warfare. War, whether intramural or international, wreaks havoc on the elements necessary for health, housing, education, employment, the rule of law, the environment, and happiness generally.

War is enormously expensive. It diverts resources from schools, hospitals, roads, and telecommunications to AK-47s, Kalashnikovs, missiles, bombs, and artillery shells. Children are deprived of educational opportunities. By killing or deracinating the flower of youth, war keeps a country immersed in misery and underdevelopment.

War also arrests economic development. Capital flight is staggering. Foreign investment withers. Infrastructure is destroyed. Lawlessness hikes the risks of any business enterprise. The consequence is widespread poverty.

War also fosters disease and physical ailments. Individuals are more susceptible to crippling bacterial and viral illnesses when their housing and food is shortchanged. Further, war destroys hospitals and handicaps the supply of medicine. Medical workers frequently shy from dangerous conditions. And refugee camps are notorious for insalubrious quarters.

War also creates a culture antithetical to democracy and the rule of law. It teaches that disputes should be resolved by the bullet in lieu of the ballot box. It engenders suspicion and distrust that confound democratic politics resting on a confidence that elections will be free, fair, and accurate.

I admit that denunciation of warfare is easier than prevention. But if mankind can assemble knowledge to send men to the moon and Land Rovers to Mars, the knowledge necessary to end wars cannot be far behind. In this regard, the United Nations should summon the Nobel Laureates and ‘Elders’ to devise principles of international law and conduct that will abolish the scourge of war from the face of the planet. These exceptionally gifted individuals can be trusted to succeed by standing on the shoulders of other great men and women who have crusaded for the cause of universal peace, justice, and non-violence. The goal may be ambitious. But as Robert Browning versified, “Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?”

The second urgent global development priority should be universal literacy and education. As Socrates explained, the unexamined life is not worth living. This observation is made not to deride or degrade the uneducated, but to underscore the criticality of education to making life morally meaningful and fulfilling.

Education is also human capital that fuels economic growth. Education correlates with a worker’s ability to shift jobs and master new skills in an ever-changing global economy. Education also is a central ingredient to self-government and freedom. As United States President Thomas Jefferson lectured, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”

Mean-spirited and wicked politicians regularly exploit ill-educated voters to pursue divisive racial, ethnic or religious agendas. That explains why free and compulsory public school education is a feature of every flourishing democracy.

The United Nations should develop educational yardsticks that a nation must satisfy to receive economic or military aid from third parties, including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The yardsticks should be incorporated in a treaty to be ratified by all United Nations members.

The idea of educational yardsticks with teeth creates an agonizing moral dilemma. Suppose a misgoverned nation falls short. Economic aid ends, but the suffering is felt by the common citizen, not the typically coddled rulers. That juxtaposition seems unjust and immoral at first glance. But think of the consequences of continuing aid to a brutal government, either directly or through international or private indigenous organizations. The aid relieves misery, and dulls the popular incentive to revolt and to install a more enlightened regime that would eagerly educate the nation’s citizens. Future generations would forever inherit an uneducated nation and despotic government. Morality in public life should be the greatest good for the greatest number. And to decline sanctions on a living generation despite the greater wretchedness visited on posterity would seem to fail that test.

Third on the global development priority should be the elimination of poverty and the securing for every man, woman, and child a right to flourishing health, a clean environment, comfortable housing, and nutritious food. The goal is not a choice but a moral obligation. A preferred position for the poor is the North Star of all religions. Thus, rich countries should transfer much of their riches to poor countries.

There is no moral excuse for regimes in poor nations to forfeit the rich self-help opportunities for economic growth. As Hong Kong, Singapore, and Japan teach, economic prosperity turns more on human capital and the rule of law than on the flukes of natural resources. Think of some oil rich nations mired in misery, desolation, deprivation and destitution.

A fourth global development priority should be the ending of all racial, ethnic, or class hatreds or enmities, like Islamophobia, Xenophobia, racism, anti-Semitism, etc. Think of the horrifying quantity of violence in the world whose fundamental cause can be traced back to such social divisions. It infects every country on the planet. And if even one person suffers from invidious discrimination, then all are threatened and civilization has been tarnished. The United Nations Human Rights Council is ideally suited to fashion a program to achieve the desired result. It can assemble the best thinkers and models to draft laws and educational programs that will deter and prevent the abomination of sharp social divisions.

Next on the list of global development priorities should be the attainment of equality for women. Experience and intuition both demonstrate that women are as intelligent as men. They are as entrepreneurial and disciplined. They contribute every bit as much to economic growth and social cohesion as men. It is thus imperative that women receive the same legal rights and social dignity as men if global development objective is to advance.

Females should receive the same educational, employment, business, and professional opportunities as men. They should be equally eligible to serve in public office or to seek elective office. Women should enjoy the same social rights as men.

A clean environment is also essential to global development priorities. Pollution is more than twice cursed. It damages crops; it kills lakes and rivers; it occasions disease. The poor are invariably the worst affected by environmental pollution. They are least able to afford medical treatment. They are least able to move or change their occupation, if at all they have an occupation in the first place. They are least able to pay for the costs of self-protective measures. A clean environment, therefore, is a key element of community fairness and justice.

Let me with great humility offer a few closing observations about the entire global development agenda enterprise. It is characteristic that national or international organizations employ quantitative benchmarks to measure success in meeting enumerated objectives. For instance, a longstanding objective has been for each nation to contribute a specified percentage of its gross domestic product for humanitarian or foreign aid. Companion quantitative benchmarks have been set for literacy, vaccinations, annual income, longevity, smoking, etc.

There is nothing inherently mischievous about these development yardsticks. But they should never distract from our recognition that the highest in global development agenda consists of non-quantifiable characteristics. These would include acts of charity, humility, courage, benevolence, magnanimity, self-restraint, and non-vindictiveness. It would seem to me to turn logic and morality on their heads to award higher sustainable development acclaim to a nation whose citizens were universally economically prosperous, literate, healthy, long-lived, non-polluting, but also mean-spirited, selfish, and egotistical than to a nation whose citizens were impoverished, plagued by disease, but were generous in time, effusive in hospitality, austere in habits, and selfless for the community.

During our chapters between ashes to ashes and dust to dust, let each of us live and comport ourselves so that our tombstones will inspire and uplift for the ages.

Similar Posts

  • |

    Poverty Eradication Should Be The Theme Of The 21st Century: Dr. Fai

    Washington, D.C. June 14, 2012. The Government of Brazil in corroboration with the United Nations is organizing “Sustainable Development Dialogue” between June 16th to 19th, 2012, prior to the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20. The Rio+20 conference will be held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil between June 20th to 22nd, 2012. Over 17,000 participants, including Heads of the State, Heads of the Government and 799 NGO’s are participating in the conference. According to the organizers, the Conference will focus on two themes: (a) a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; and (b) the institutional framework for sustainable development.

     

  • |

    Reflections on Modi’s Visit to the U.S: What’s in it for Kashmir?

    “Is it true Narendra Modi just boarded a flight to visit India?” Tweeted a critic of Indian Prime Minister’s globe-trotting jaunts. “Welcome home, Pradhan Mantriji! How long will you be staying this time?” Modi has already been to 33 countries just this year alone. The Donald Trump of South Asia, the man out to make India great again, a nationalist and sectarian, divisive at home but the man with the grand plan on the global stage, on June 7, 2016 marked his fourth visit to the U.S. since taking office in 2014.

    The joint statement of Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India and President Obama on the occasion, noteworthy for its lack of any real substance, in part says, “…the leaders reviewed the deepening strategic partnership between the United States and India that is rooted in shared values of freedom, democracy, universal human rights, tolerance and pluralism, equal opportunities for all citizens, and rule of law.”

  • |

    Kashmiris stage huge demonstration in front of the White House

    Washington, D.C. May 22, 2017. Hundreds of Kashmiri Americans – men, women and children – from various states in the United States staged their huge rally in front of the White House. They were demanding United Nations – assured right of self-determination.

    Raising slogans of: “Kashmiri Lives Matter Too” “Kashmir in Pain: India in Shame” “Indian Forces: Out of Kashmir” “Demilitarize Kashmir” “U.N. Implement Resolutions on Kashmir” “Stop Forced Disappearances and Torture in Kashmir,” the marchers held candle light vigil on the sidewalk of the White House.

    Syed Ali Geelani, ‘the Keynote Speaker’ called on the world leaders to persuade India and Pakistan to initiate a meaningful dialogue with the Kashmiri leadership to settle the Kashmir dispute once and for all. He suggested that it is better for Indian authorities to shun its stubborn approach and resolve this long pending issue. “The Indian army is unleashing a new wave of terror, killing dozens and maiming hundreds of unarmed protesters, utilizing bullets and lethal pellet-guns aimed to kill and maim” emphasized Mr. Geelani. He hoped that a new dawn of prosperity, peace and stability will be guaranteed when the Kashmir dispute is resolved to the satisfaction of the people of Kashmir.

  • |

    Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai Expressed Sympathy, Condolences and Solidarity with the bereaved families in Peshawar

    Washington, D.C. December 16, 2104. These cowardly contemptible murders of 141 people, including 132 children, mostly under 16, in Peshawar, Pakistan are condemnable no matter what the motivation of the terrorists. This massacres is unmitigated evil, an earmark of barbarism contemptuous of civilization. We must understand that terrorism is never acceptable no matter how seemingly urgent the political objective or how evil the opposition. Terrorism at anytime, any place, and by anyone can never be and must not be tolerated in a civilized society. Terrorism invariably corrupts the culprits and the common human rights of mankind.

  • |

    Why does India have a hard time to accept the disputed nature of Kashmir?

    “Kashmir is an integral part of India, constitutionally, legally and morally something that is non-negotiable.” Ram Jethmalani, Outlook Magazine, October 8, 2016.

    “Let me state unequivocally that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and will always remain so.’ Sushma Swaraj September 26, 2016

    The fallacy advocated by the most celebrated Indian jurist and the Indian foreign minister deserves some clarification.

    The people of Jammu & Kashmir who number more than 129 other existing independent nations individually and have a defined historical identity, are at present engaged in a mass struggle to win freedom and release from the foreign occupation of their land. This struggle is motivated by no bigotry or ethnic prejudice; its aim is nothing but the exercise of the right of self-determination explicitly agreed by both India and Pakistan.

    To the horrors of the repression from which they suffer are added two other circumstances, each cruelly adverse. One is the apathy of the world outside, including the United States that otherwise are justly proud of their championship of democracy and human rights. The second is the fog of myths and evasive arguments, like Kashmir being an integral part of India. It is my modest attempt to help mitigate these two circumstances. My appeal is directed neither to the religious or ideological sympathies of Indian Public Square nor to their leanings towards any particular political party but solely to their conscience and human concern.