|
Statement
by M. GORBACHEV
Chairman of the Board, Green Cross
International
Commission on Sustainable Development, 13th
session
United Nations, New York
21 April 2005
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Colleagues,
There
are decisions that we make and there are decisions
that time and circumstances make for
us.
This is precisely the situation in which humankind
found itself at the end of last century, a
situation of no choice. In 1999, 1.3 billion
people - or one-fourth of the population of
the Earth – were living in extreme poverty;
800 million were suffering from malnutrition;
6.2 million orphans under 15
whose parents had died of AIDS were struggling
for survival; and one-third of the world’s
population had no adequate access to drinking
water. I fully share the view of the UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan that the paralysis of political will
is one of the main causes of such a disastrous
state of affairs.
The critics of the Millennium Development Goals
say that they are overambitious and that the
targets set are unreachable. I totally disagree
with this assessment. I believe we are talking
here about the minimum requirements for a decent
human life: the MDGs express our commitment
to a world where people have shelter, food and
access to water and sanitation; where new born
babies and their mothers do not die from the
lack of basic medical care; and where gender
inequality – that humiliating throwback
to the past – has disappeared for good.
If we cannot honour our commitment to these
basic human necessities what future is there
for our civilization, our very humanity?
Finally, we are talking about preserving the
environment, which is our common home. According
to a UN-sponsored study carried out by 1,300
experts in 95 countries 60% of the ecosystems
that support life on earth have been degraded
and exhausted to such an extent that their recovery
may no longer be possible. But problems do not
end here: scientists believe that the harmful
effects of this degradation will worsen considerably
within the next 50 years.
Five years have passed since the adoption of
the Millennium Declaration, one third of the
time
that the international community has given itself
to reach the Declaration’s goals. As you
know, in September the UN General Assembly will
discuss the progress made so far, but, already
today it is clear that the results are not reassuring.
According to UN-HABITAT, since 2003, the number
of people living in slums has grown by 50
million, which is two times the population of
Tokyo. These slums, where there is no point
in talking about the “environment”
and where most of the people live on less than
one dollar per day – are a breeding ground
for AIDS and other diseases, and their levels
of infant and maternal mortality exceed any
reasonable - or even unreasonable - limits.
Recalling his recent visit to a hospital in
Kenya, where there is one nurse for 80 patients
and one bed for three, Jeffery Sachs, Director
of the UN Millennium Project, said: “One
patient has
tuberculosis, another has AIDS and the third
- malaria. All three share the same bed –
and we call this civilized society!”
Diarrhoeal diseases have killed more children
in the past ten years than all the people lost
to
armed conflict since World War II. More than
1.1 billion people have no access to drinking
water and 2.4 billion have no access to basic
sanitation. The number of children dying every
day from the lack of drinking water and sanitation
is equivalent to the imaginary number of victims
that would result from a simultaneous crash
of thirty Boeing 747s.
If no urgent and effective measures are taken,
the situation will inevitably deteriorate further
and may become irreversible.
A lot has been said about the interrelation
of the different goals set by the UN General
Assembly.
Water is probably the best example in this respect
and progress in this area would entail positive
developments in other domains. All the tragic
situations I have mentioned are in one way or
another linked to water: thirst, hunger, hygiene,
agriculture, women’s hardship, medical
care – this list is far from complete.
It is therefore appropriate that the current
decade has as its theme “Water for Life”.
According to FAO, to satisfy the needs of the
planet’s growing population, the production
of food must increase by 67 % over the next
25 years. If today’s rate of agriculture
productivity growth continues, water demand
will increase by only 14 % over this period.
At the same time, half a billion people are
already living in countries where access to
water is
described in a recent UN report as “limited”.
Unless we manage to halt the water crisis, by
2025 this figure will have reached 3.4 billion.
Water, which is vital for the peaceful and essential
human needs I have mentioned, is becoming, like
all scarce resources, a cause of conflicts.
Unless dealt with now, these conflicts could
become
more violent and more widespread in coming decades.
Some 263 countries share water basins and almost
200 agreements have been signed over the past
50 years with regard to trans-border water resources.
To date, both international law and development
support for cooperation related to river basins
and aquifers are insufficient for meeting these
challenges. The large majority of States have
demonstrated their lack of commitment to genuine
cooperation over shared water by neither including
this objective in the WSSD agreements, nor ratifying
the 1997 UN Convention on the Non-Navigational
Uses of International Watercourses. I hope commitments
in this direction will be achieved at this session.
We, in Green Cross International know about
these problems firsthand. For many years GCI
has been implementing a number of large-scale
projects related to international integrated
watercourses management. Based on this experience,
we presented a report on National Sovereignty
and International Watercourses at the 2000 Second
World Water Forum in The Hague.
According to the estimates of UN specialized
agencies, if governments allocated an amount
equivalent to $20 per capita towards solving
the water crisis every year, it would take only
10 years to solve the problem. Moreover, according
to a recent assessment by WHO, every dollar
invested in reaching the Millennium Development
Goals can bring from 3 to 34 dollars of revenue.
Just $20 per person: here in New York that is
the cost of 20 bottles of mineral water or 20
cups of coffee – how can anyone claim that
is unattainable? The CSD NGO Consortium that
gathered international NGOs, Oxfam, WWF, WaterAid,
Care, Tearfund, Birdlife and Green Cross International
proposed to double
the spending of donors and developing countries
from US$14bn to US$30bn per year in order to
meet the water and sanitation target, with special
priority given to Africa.
If, on the other hand, the water supply and
sanitation crisis is not addressed, half of
the countries of the world will face a serious
water crisis by 2020 and one-third of the planet’s
population will be left without basic sanitation
and practically without water. That is a terrifying
prospect.
The problem of overcoming the water crisis comprises
many complex and controversial questions - How
much would it cost to provide everybody with
water and sanitation? (The Camdessus Report
estimates differ from those of the Water Supply
and Sanitation Collaborative Council and other
organizations) What is the role of the private
sector and how to cover the costs? Which methods
are the best? – while debates continue
about the General Agreement on Trade in Services
(GATS), especially after the WTO Ministerial
Conference in Cancun.
Privatization is often a stumbling block in
discussions about the water crisis and the management
of water resources and services, be it at the
level of governments or among the concerned
nongovernmental organizations. I would like
to state clearly that Green Cross International
is totally against the deregulation of water
resources and services management. However,
GCI recognizes that national and local companies,
as well as international corporations may contribute
to overcoming the water crisis, as they steadily
diversify their offer of water services. However,
they should do it only when those immediately
concerned consider it the most reasonable option
from the ecological, social
and economic standpoints. The implementation
of such projects and works must be placed under
the control of public authorities, with full
respect for the fundamental principles of the
Human Right to Water. Corruption, disregard
for the interests of the poor and failure to
inform the different participants of the process
by public or private water providers must be
immediately and severely sanctioned in each
particular case. Green Cross International believes,
however, that the issue of involving the private
sector is not the most important one and does
not hold the key to providing water to all those
who are currently deprived of it.
I am convinced that we must advance all together
instead of letting the issue of privatization
become an insurmountable obstacle for the elaboration
of a universally acceptable strategy that would
make a real contribution to reaching the Millennium
Goals and, ultimately, ensure universal access
to water.
That water is indispensable for a variety of
functions is obvious to all. However, not everybody
realizes that water cannot be considered as
a mere commodity whose various functions represent
interchangeable values.
Water for life - which is the basic function
of water for all living beings - must be unconditionally
recognized as the top priority so as to ensure
the sustainable development of ecosystems and
adequate access to water and sanitation for
all.
Water for development - which is an economic
function relating to production activities -
concerns in general private interests and should
be considered from the standpoint of its role
in improving people’s standard of living.
It is this function that is directly related
to the problems of water scarcity and pollution
arising in the world. Water supply for industries
and agriculture must not only be based on economic
efficiency but also take into account social
and ecological aspects, and it must always be
under public control so as to ensure sustainable
development.
We need more active participation by civil society
in the discussion on water-related issues. Our
position must be based on the principles of
sustainable development and justice, on a clear
understanding of water’s various functions
and on our capacity to get our priorities right,
giving preference to human rights over private
and market interests.
National governments adopt different approaches
to water-related problems. In some countries,
like Chile, the poor receive water subsidies,
in others, like South Africa, each poor household
is provided with a certain amount of water free
of charge. Some states consider this issue at
the highest legislative and political levels.
In Uruguay, for example, a national referendum
held in 2004 resulted in the right to water
being included in the country’s Constitution.
Tomorrow, the Russian Duma will discuss a draft
Water Law aimed at reforming the federal system
of public water resources management.
There are many approaches to solving water-related
problems, yet a clear common position on the
matter is still missing.
In this connection, I would like to share with
you a thought, which may appear commonplace
to some of you. I believe it indispensable that
all those who today take part in the ongoing
discussions at different levels, and particularly
those who have the power to make final decisions,
realize that we are working for the entire Millennium.
In other words, this is not about finding one-time
solutions and a little tinkering here and there,
but about drawing up a long-term and realistic
policy, which would take into account not only
the past experience but also forecasts for the
future.
However, the key issue is the moral aspect of
the problem. When reading papers and listening
to speeches on water, as well as on the Millennium
Development Goals in general, one gets the impression
that we are talking only about voluntary aid
by the rich to the poor, be it countries or
people. I cannot agree with such an approach
and I beg your pardon if I put it somewhat bluntly:
this is not about charity, no matter what form
it takes; this is about EQUALITY of all people
in satisfying their basic needs and about the
RIGHT of every person to access clean, drinkable
water and basic sanitation.
Why is it that this fundamental right is still
not guaranteed internationally? Perhaps, back
in 1948, when the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights was being drafted, its authors considered
it so obvious that all people must have access
to clean water that they did not think it necessary
to stipulate this right in international legislation
on human rights. I don’t think we should
criticize them for that.
Today, for example, we are not discussing a
human right to air, but who can guarantee that
this will not become an issue in the future?
The right to water is mentioned more or less
explicitly in a number of international legal
documents: in the Action Plan adopted by the
UN Water Conference in Mar del Plata (1977),
in the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979),
in the
Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989),
and in the Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable
Development (1992), as well as in many national
laws.
Nevertheless, there is no international instrument
that would guarantee to every person the right
to economically affordable drinking water, oblige
national authorities to respect this right and,
what is even more important, provide a model
and a mechanism for its implementation. Despite
this critical situation, governments - with
a few exceptions - are not prepared to start
the inevitably complex and lengthy negotiations
with a view to drafting a new international
law.
One important step in the right direction was
made in November 2002, when the UN Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognized
the right to water as a basic human right. In
theory, the 145 countries that have ratified
the International Convention on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights are thus obliged to gradually
ensure fair access to clean drinking water.
However, the Committee’s interpretation
of this document does not imply any legal obligation
for governments to implement its provisions.
Green Cross International and its partners propose
to start talks with a view to adopting a
Universal Convention on the Right to Water.
The ratification of such a convention by the
UN Member States would give a legal instrument
to all people to defend their right to clean
water and sanitation, between the different
aspects of water use and the related rights
and obligations of different participants in
this process at the local, national and international
levels. We are not so naïve as to think
that the Convention, or any other document for
the matter, regardless of how thoroughly it
may have been prepared, would immediately provide
water to all those who are currently deprived.
We are convinced however that only a law-based
approach to the use of water resources can gradually
make water accessible to all.
Discussions on the fundamental principles of
the proposed Convention have been going on for
four years. At the Water for Peace meeting that
took place in June 2004 in Barcelona as part
of the World Forum of Cultures, these principles
were approved by more than 1,100 representatives
from 100 non-governmental organizations from
all over the world.
In order to make governments realize the importance
of this issue, their voters must clearly and
persistently demonstrate their concern. This
is why we need a world-wide public information
campaign.
In this connection, Green Cross International,
together with other international, national
and local organizations, has initiated an international
public campaign in order to convince national
governments to start discussing the Convention
(www.watertreaty.org). The idea has been met
with interest from a number of countries and
we hope this number will grow. I call on all
participants at this meeting to seriously consider
the possibility of supporting the idea of drafting
such a Convention on the Right to Water by the
governments of your countries and by your respective
organizations.
Should the General Assembly support this initiative
this September, this would be highly appreciated
by the international community and by millions
of people in need of water as a concrete step
towards the resolution of the water crisis.
Time is a luxury not enjoyed by those whose
lives are cut cruelly short due to a lack of
clean
water, and time is also running out for the
Millennium Development Goals. But we can still
honour our commitments: failure is not an option
on the table today, we will not be given a second
chance.
Thank you.
Mikhail Gorbaciov
|
