Investing in health and education for development: A revitalized Economic and Social Council after Monterrey. (The Chronicle Interview).

Ambassador Ivan Simonovic of Croatia is the President of the Economic and Social Council. Following the International Conference on Financing for Development in Monterrey, Mexico in March, the Council will play a crucial role in implementing the follow-up mechanisms of the Conference. The next Council meetings will he in April, involving Ministers of Finance, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization, and the high-level segment of its substantive session in New York, scheduled for July. "I hope that the good practices of Monterrey will he built upon in our preparations for Johannesburg", Ambassador Simonovic said. Horst Rutsch of the UN Chronicle spoke with the Ambassador in his office on 26 March 2002.

On the Council's priorities

At this moment, one of the issues which deserves our full attention is how to structure future dialogue between the Economic and Social Council, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Another issue for our future meetings is whether it is possible for us to have a prenegotiated outcome document, as well as full involvement of the private sector and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Until now, our meetings with the Bretton Woods institutions have been closed, but we should continue to build upon successes achieved in Monterrey in bringing society and private sector on board.

Another important issue is to try to precisely measure our improvement in implementing the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The key issue is whether we can agree not only on benchmarks and indicators but also on how to keep an eye on their implementation. It is very important that we can agree on a joint process involving the Bretton Woods institutions, WTO and the Council. It also applies to principles agreed on in Monterrey. The practical implementation, regular monitoring and precise measuring of our achievements regarding MDGs and the Monterrey consensus are crucial for its success.

On the outcome of the Monterrey Conference

The Monterrey Conference was a moderate success. We managed to agree on general principles regulating more successful financing for development. Many new things emerged from it; still, there was some meat lacking. The Monterrey consensus envisages an important role for the Economic and Social Council regarding the follow-up to the Conference, and I hope that this follow-up will enable to fill that gap. The first opportunity to discuss Monterrey will be on 22 April at the Council meeting with the Bretton Woods institutions which, for the first time, will include participation of the WTO. However, the issue of implementation--how to achieve the Millennium Declaration goals with the help of the agreed principles--is still something to be worked upon. What will be very important for our April meeting is to have clear priorities on two or three questions that we would like to address. I sincerely hope we will be able to get as many Ministers of Finance as we can for our April meeting, because that will send a clea r message that the outcome document of Monterrey, on "Staying Engaged", has been taken seriously. We have had many conferences where we had Ministers of Development and Ministers of Foreign Affairs, even Heads of State at the Millennium Summit, but without the Ministers of Finance--precisely the people who plan budgets and who carry their purse with them all the time. I think that the great contribution of the Monterrey Conference was not only to bring them together at a one-time event, but to develop a certain culture of communication between Ministers of Finance, Ministers of Development and Ministers of Foreign Affairs.

On the high-level segment of the Council

The high-level segment of the Council's substantive session, which will take place from 1 to 3 July this year, is dedicated to the impact of human resources improvement, especially in health and education, and on its impact on overall economic development. It is quite clear that the impact of investment in health and education can be measured and that, taking into account the output of the invested resources, it is the most productive investment in a country's future. We have had three well attended high-level round tables on these issues so far.

It is very important that we have the Ministers of Health and of Education attending our high-level segment, so I use this opportunity to lobby their presence at our New York meeting. They can use the high-level segment and its deliberations as a powerful argument for the increased share for health and education in their national budgets.

On the Johannesburg Summit 2002

Johannesburg is a very complex conference. In Monterrey, we managed to isolate key points related to financing for development and were able to produce a relatively concise and clear document. What is important for the Johannesburg Summit is to build upon the success of Monterrey, which means to include NGOs and the private sector, to try to have a prepared draft document--this facilitated our lives in Monterrey and enabled us to go beyond disputing over commas until the last moment--and instead to invest our time spent together in a search for creative solutions.

I hope that the good practices of Monterrey will be built upon in our preparations for Johannesburg. However, it certainly won't be easy. The volume of resources should be doubled, and they should be handled better. But I do think that it is very important to get high-level representation in the ministerial part of the Preparatory Committee in Bali, because this will influence the level of presence in Johannesburg and the outcome document.

On the importance of official development assistance

One of the key issues related to financing for development, as well as for sustainable development, is to ensure how to handle billion dollars of ODA. We have had recently two expert opinions: the Zedillo Panel appointed by the SecretaryGeneral estimated that in addition to the existing $50 billion of ODA, we need an additional $50 billion to achieve the Millennium Declaration goals. Two months ago, the World Bank also released a report which indicated that, besides the existing $50 billion and how to handle the resources better, we would need an additional $40 to $60 billion. In other words, there is a common understanding among economists on the amount of resources needed. Now if we can translate that into the practical questions as to how to raise the additional $50 billion, it would also represent a substantial contribution. Monterrey prompted some announcements of the increase of ODA on behalf of the United States and the European Union. However, we are still far away from the required $100 billion.

Of course, there are other ways to envisage financing for development, especially foreign direct investment (FDI) or to remove trade barriers and open up the world market for agricultural, textile and other labour-intensive products of the developing countries. However, for some countries, especially least developed countries, ODA is still the most important source of development financing. And for these countries, we must ensure that certain social and economic preconditions, such as basic health and education, are financed through ODA due to the present lack of capacity and basic infrastructure. We cannot expect that their problems are going to be solved through FDI alone, or that we can improve their economic situation and enable their development only through greater inclusion in the world market by removing trade barriers. Of course, removing trade barriers and increasing FDI are probably vital for certain groups of countries, but for some of them ODA as a debt relief are unavoidable prerequisites for d evelopment.

On the link between peace-building and development

The nature of peacekeeping has changed--more and more efforts are needed for the prevention of conflicts or the prevention of their reoccurrence. Once active hostilities have stopped, a whole range of peace-building activities is needed, which is essential to preventing conflicts from reoccurring. The Security Council, in accordance with the UN Charter, has its own approach to problems, which is essentially that of a firefighter: they must jump into a crisis situation and be the first to move out when the conflict is over. The Economic and Social Council, on the other hand, is ideally suited for long-term investments in conflict prevention and monitoring of peace-building. The present situation is that the Security Council deals also with the prevention of conflicts and post-conflict peace-building. But these activities lie to a certain extent outside of the Security Council's mandate. If we look at Kosovo, East Timor or Afghanistan, it is perfectly clear that as an investment in security we need to help org anize free and fair democratic elections, support democratically-elected governments in carrying out basic public administration and assist them in their initial recovery effort. The Security Council is doing that now, not because it is particularly fond of getting involved in these activities, but because it is perceived as the most operational. The Economic and Social Council is now improving its coordination with the Security Council with a view to get into a sort of partnership to help in preventing conflicts, and to take over from some activities of the Security Council once a conflict is over and the peace-building process begins.

On the Council's role in peace-building

The advantage of the Economic and Social Council in dealing with peace-building matters is its coordinating role, which enables it to involve its nine functional commissions and the various agencies and programmes under its coordination. In that respect, the Council has a great potential to grow. During last year's high-level segment devoted to Africa, the Council requested a report of the Secretary-General dealing with the establishment of the Council's ad hoc working group on African countries emerging from conflict. This report will be out soon. I think that in future the Economic and Social Council will get involved into closer cooperation with the Security Council with respect to practical activities on the ground. Of course, it is important to keep in mind that the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council are separate bodies with their separate mandates. However, all main UN organs, including both Councils and the General Assembly, can contribute a lot to the reform of the United Nations to prepare it better for the challenges of the twenty-first century through better cooperation.

On the role of Croatia within the United Nations

The last five years were extremely turbulent for Southeast Europe. Fortunately, the times are now much better for Croatia and for the other countries of the Southeast Europe. Croatia was facing very difficult times and this has helped us to understand much better the problems of developing countries emerging from conflicts. On the other hand, our aspirations obviously are towards European integration, and we are approaching the European Union. So the linkage between sharing some experiences of the developing countries and countries in transition, and the aspirations with the developed world, give us, I would say, both the possibility and the credibility to enter into dialogue with all Member States, understanding fully their problems and concerns. Concerning the position of the Republic of Croatia in the United Nations, we have passed from being a recipient country of peacekeeping to a contributor of peacekeeping troops. The same applies to aid. Our past is being a recipient, our future is being a donor.

On the issue of Prevlaka

Croatia is still suffering from the scars of war, including developmental stagnation, and also from some inherited problems and traumas. However, our rate of growth was 4 per cent last year and predicted to be 3 per cent this year; we expect an excellent tourist season, and our relations with neighbouring countries have been improving year after year. After the fall of Milosevic, our relations with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia have demonstrated an absolutely positive trend. With regard to the transformation of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia into Serbia and Montenegro. I would say it is a natural continuation of the process of dissolution of the Socialist Federal Yugoslavia started in the 1990s. I firmly believe that it will positively reflect on the process of democratization that is taking place in Serbia and Montenegro and on successfully solving the issue of Prevlaka.

Prevlaka is primarily a legacy of the Milosevic regime, and its ambition to change international borders. If peninsula Prevlaka is perceived by Serbia and Montenegro as a potential threat to their security, problems can be easily solved through demilitarization of that part of the Croatian territory, or even perhaps the broader area on both sides of the border. I think that the respect for international borders is a prerequisite for democratic Serbia and Montenegro to overcome such an approach, and the Security Council should also be pushing in that direction. I think that the process is advancing in that direction and that soon there will be positive news in this regard. In this very moment, there are negotiations going on on the joint report between the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and of Croatia on the progress achieved regarding the resolution of the problem of Prevlaka.

RELATED ARTICLE: Treaty Against Financing of Terrorism Enters Into Force with Remarkable Speed

The International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism automatically entered into force on 10 April, in accordance with its provision requiring the ratification of 22 States to become effective. The speedy entry-into-force of the treaty, which was adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1999, is widely regarded as a sign of heightened international commitment to fight terrorism, especially following the 11 September 2001 attacks against the United States. Twenty-two of the 26 ratifications and/or accessions received so far took place after that date; in total, 132 countries have signed the Convention.

The 28-article text criminalizes the act of providing or collecting funds with the intention or knowledge that those funds will be used to carry out a terrorist attack, according to definitions found in nine previously adopted anti-terrorism treaties. The Convention itself provides one more definition: an act intended to cause death or serious injury to a civilian, with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a Government or organization either to carry out--or not to carry out--a particular action.

The Convention calls for efforts to identify, detect and freeze or seize any funds used or allocated for the purpose of committing a terrorist act. It also asks that States consider establishing mechanisms to use such funds to compensate victims and/or their families. In addition, it calls on financial institutions to pay special attention to unusual or suspicious transactions and to report these to government authorities. States are obliged to prosecute offenders or to extradite them to the parties that suffered from their illegal acts.