Get Involved: The MDGs, and the long road ahead (by Mark Cavdar)

Since its inception, the United Nations has worked hard to fill the role of international mediator. At the dawn of the new millennium, the various member nations of the UN wore a pro-active, optimistic face, determined to improve the conditions of the third world by establishing a list of developmental goals for nations plagued by poverty, disease, and underdevelopment. The UN’s good intentions beam through these idealistic suggestions, with the proposed elimination of extreme poverty and hunger, and the battle against HIV/AIDS and other third world epidemics among the top priorities. The UN has set a deadline of 2015 for the implementation and stable operation of these developmental objectives.

With the deadline for their successful achievement a mere decade away, the third world is still languishing in the throes of poverty, with no apparent indicator of change looming on the horizon. While a decade may seem like more than ample time to put these Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) into motion, the world has already wasted too much time in establishing an affirmative and decisive plan of action. Is the world reacting to the MDGs agenda hastily enough to see them through to their completion, or were the MDGs merely an unachievable wish list drawn up to stroke the egos of world leaders at the UN Millennium Declaration in 2000?

In a perfect world, free of the constraints of bureaucratic red tape, the Millennium Development Goals would be a cinch to accomplish. Unfortunately, for many developed nations, merely desiring to lend a helping hand to the developing world isn’t enough. Sorely lacking in the framework of the MDGs is an effective and organized system of distribution, eliminating the problem of surplus aid on hand with no cause to work toward.

Aware of the troubles facing the success of the Millennium Development Goals, the UN recently drafted a 3000 plus page report, titled “Investing in Development,” outlining the current status of the goals, and what steps must be taken to achieve them by the preset deadline. Jeffrey Sachs, the lead author of the report and one of the scholars who worked on the MDG’s initial drafts, acknowledges that the systems currently in place simply are not working. Sachs argues “the overwhelming reality on our planet is that impoverished people get sick and die for lack of access to basic practical means that could help keep them alive and… help them achieve livelihoods and escape from poverty.”

The compassionate capacity for the developed world to aid the needy in times of urgency was wholly reaffirmed by the hasty global reaction to the tsunami disaster that befell residents of coastal Southeast Asia. Governments, matching the altruistic contributions made by private citizens to help their fellow men and women, offered an unprecedented outpouring of aid to the victims of the disaster. The necessity and generosity of the global reaction to the tsunami will not be argued; rather, the world ought to refrain from overlooking other pressing matters that are causing death, desperation and general discomfort on a mass scale in the third world.

Each month, malaria is the cause of death of over 150,000 African children, who lack sufficient medication to treat the parasite’s flu-like symptoms of high fevers and shaking chills. Translated to a statistic that exemplifies the horrendous reality of the situation, a child dies every thirty seconds because of the disease. It is the number one cause of death in the world, yet it is treatable.

What does the UN, via the “Investing in Development” report, feel the international community should do to amend these glaring problems? Among some of the stipulations found within, the report recommends that large middle-income countries (among them China, Brazil, and Mexico) ought to focus on narrowing the gaps of extreme poverty and suggests a possible increase in aid provided. The report also suggests that some developing nations be “fast-tracked” to receive larger sums of foreign aid to implement national poverty-reduction plans, naming countries such as Mali, Burkina Faso and Yemen as possible targets for this endowment. In certain instances and for certain nations, the report suggests one course of action, one that veers away from being universally favorable and acceptable. This could create problems with the goals reaching a consensus within the already divided UN.

The report calls on major nations to increase aid at a steady pace, reaching an apex of $195 billion dollars by 2015, arguing that this figure pales in comparison to the annual $900 billion the global economy pumps into the military each year. Only five nations (Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden) are on target to meet the aid requirements set for the 2015 deadline. Six others – France, Belgium, Finland, Ireland, Spain, and Britain – have made commitments to increase aid accordingly to meet the targets. While the international aid is the foundation upon which the goals will reach fruition, the increase in foreign aid shouldn’t be the UN’s sole focus.

When the goals were optimistically drafted, they were for the most part uncosted. Whether the funds can be raised or not leads into a much more grave and serious problem: with all this extra money being pumped into developing nations, will the fledgling governments that have for so long struggled to establish themselves have the capacity to put the funds to use? While foreign aid is of great benefit to developing nations, established systems of distribution are intertwined with the aid’s effective employment. Putting that cash to use is a much harder task than simply walking to the closest pharmacy and buying up a century’s supply of antibiotics.

Still, we find ourselves distracted from the real problems at hand. A decade feels like an eternity in the constantly changing global landscape. Surely, the governments of the world will be able to unite under the common banner of the UN and deliver on the lofty promises of the MDGs within the time remaining; however, as noted before, a new approach must be taken if any real, lasting change is going to be made. Foreign aid needs to steadily increase, but with it, new approaches must be taken towards implementation. Dump a pile of cash on a developing nation, and it eats for a day. Build a stable economic system of distribution for it, and watch it learn to fish.

Sources

“Frequently Asked Questions about Malaria.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2 Feb. 2005. 2 Feb. 2005. <http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/faq.htm>.

Tran, Mark. “World failing to meet UN millennium goals.” The Guardian. 17 Jan. 2005. 2. Feb 2005. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,,1392514,00.html>.

[ issue contents ] [ fmm home ] [ send feedback ]