permaculture

[Claude Genest <genest@together.net>]

NEWS FROM THE WORLDWATCH INSTITUTE
News from the Worldwatch Institute

Contents: Editorial

October 9, 2001

A New Marshall Plan?
Advancing Human Security and Controlling Terrorism


By Dick Bell & Michael Renner
Worldwatch Institute


What do you think of this advice from a senior U.S. military officer and
statesman about how the people of the United States should deal with a
part of the world torn by war, poverty, disease, and hunger:

  "...it is of vast importance that our people reach some general
understanding of what the complications really are, rather than react
from a passion or a prejudice or an emotion of the moment....It is
virtually impossible at this distance merely by reading, or listening,
or even seeing photographs or motion pictures, to grasp at all the real
significance of the situation. And yet the whole world of the future
hangs on a proper judgment."

        The speaker was General George C. Marshall, outlining the
Marshall Plan in an address at Harvard University on June 5, 1947.
Surveying the wrecked economies of Europe, Marshall noted the
"possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of
the people concerned." He said that there could be "no political
stability and no assured peace" without economic security, and that U.S.
policy was "directed not against any country or doctrine but against
hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos."
        
        As President Bush and his advisors review the results of the
initial bombing campaign, they might also consider the relevance of
Marshall's strategy to the moral and political problems America now
confronts. Of course we should find the people responsible for the
deaths of September 11 and bring them to justice, and work with other
nations to root out other terrorist networks. But we must do so in a way
that does not result in the deaths of even more innocent people, deaths
that would only deepen the cycle of anger and rage that led to September
11. 

What is largely missing from the administration's rhetoric is
recognition of the scale of the underlying problems that have to be
addressed, regardless of how successful we may be in the short run in
tracking down the perpetrators of the September 11th terrorist assaults.
As Marshall's words so plainly suggest, finding the terrorists should be
part of a much more ambitious campaign, one in which the rich countries
approach the appalling inequities of the world with the same boldness
and determination that the United States brought to bear in Europe under
the Marshall Plan.
                
We don't really need to spend another dime on "intelligence" to
recognize the conditions that leave whole countries in a state of
despair and misery. Some 1.2 billion people worldwide struggle to
survive on $1 day or less. 1.2 billion people lack access to safe
drinking water and 2.9 billion have inadequate access to sanitation.
About 150 million children are malnourished, and more than 10 million
children under 5 will die in 2001 alone.  At least 150 million people
are unemployed and 900 million are "underemployed"-contending with
inadequate incomes despite long hours of backbreaking work.

Globalization has raised expectations, even as modern communications
make the rising inequality between a rich, powerful, and imposing West
and the rest of the world visible to all.  Poverty and deprivation do
not automatically translate into hatred.  But people whose hopes have
worn thin, whose aspirations have been thwarted, and whose discontent is
rising, are far more likely to succumb to the siren song of extremism.
This is particularly true for the swelling ranks of young people whose
prospects for the future are bleak.  Some 34 percent of the developing
world's population is under 15 years of age.

        The United States and the other industrial nations should launch
a global "Marshall Plan" to provide everyone on earth with a decent
standard of living. We can already hear the cries of people claiming
that such a global plan would "cost too much." But let's look at the
numbers. The cost of our initial response has soared into the tens of
billions of dollars, on top of an already large proposed defense budget
of  $342.7 billion.

        For the sake of comparison, let's assume that the United States
will spend an additional $100 billion on military actions in the next 12
months. What could we buy if we matched this $100 billion military
expenditure dollar-for-dollar with spending on programs to alleviate
human suffering?

A 1998 report by the United Nations Development Programme estimated the
annual cost to achieve universal access to a number of basic social
services in all developing countries: $9 billion would provide water and
sanitation for all;  $12 billion would cover reproductive health for all
women;  $13 billion would give every person on Earth basic health and
nutrition; and $6 billion would provide basic education for all.

These sums are substantial, but they are still only a fraction of the
tens of billions of dollars we are already spending. And these social
and health expenditures pale in comparison with what is being spent on
the military by all nations-some $780 billion each year.

There is a sad irony in watching the Bush Administration's strenuous
efforts to build an international coalition.  There is no such muscular
effort underway, in the United States, or in any of the other rich
nations, to build a coalition to eradicate hunger, to immunize all
children, to provide clean water, to eradicate infectious disease, to
provide adequate jobs, to combat illiteracy, or to build decent housing.

The cost of failing to advance human security and to eliminate the
fertile ground upon which terrorism thrives is already escalating.
Since September 11, we know that sophisticated weapons offer little
protection against those who are out to seek vengeance, at any cost, for
real and perceived wrongs. Unless our priorities change, the threat is
certain to keep rising in coming years.

By choosing to mobilize adequate resources to address human suffering
around the world, President Bush has a unique opportunity to seize the
terrible moment of September 11 and earn a truly exalted place in human
history.  But first, we must all understand that in the end, weapons
alone cannot buy us a lasting peace in a world of extreme inequality,
injustice, and deprivation for billions of our fellow human beings.

-end-


Dick Bell is Vice President for Communications at the Worldwatch
Institute
(dbell@worldwatch.org)

Michael Renner is a Senior Researcher at the Worldwatch Institute
(mrenner@peconic.net)

For further information, please contact Niki Clark, 202-452-1992 x 517,
nclark@worldwatch.org

The Worldwatch Institute web site is at http://www.worldwatch.org

Copyright notice: This article may be copied, used on web sites, or
otherwise reproduced without charge providing that the user include the
address of the Worldwatch web site (http://www.worldwatch.org) and
attribute the article to the Worldwatch Institute, 1776 Massachusetts
Avenue NW, Washington DC 20036.



*************************************************************
Worldwatch News is maintained by the Worldwatch Institute
for subscribers interested in keeping up-to-date on global environmental
issues.
Postings to this list will include news releases and notification of new
publications.  The Worldwatch Institute is a nonprofit research organization
that analyzes global environmental and development issues.
To remove yourself from this mailing list, send the following command in
email
to <Majordomo@crest.org>:
unsubscribe wwnews
end
To contact Worldwatch directly, send email to <worldwatch@worldwatch.org>
*************************************************************


> From: Bob Ewing & Jocelyn Paquette <sixdegrees@baynet.net>
> Reply-To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 18:55:08 -0400
> To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Subject: Re: permaculture digest: October 13, 2001
> 
> Greetings, the idea of providing permaculture training for Afghan refugees
> while they are waiting to return home may be a very good way to actually do
> something that could have lasting impacts. I will admit I'm not sure where 
> to
> go with this but am certainly willing to work towards making it happen with
> Robyn and anyone else interested. It could be quite some time before
> conditions in Afghanistan settle down tot he point where a permaculture 
> centre
> could be set up. The existence of land mines will complicate the work as 
> will
> the economy.
> 
> more later.
> 
> Bob Ewing
> Thunder Bay, ON., Canada
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to permaculture as: genest@together.net
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu
> Get the list FAQ at:
> http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech/documents/permaculture.faq