A New Marshall Plan?
Advancing Human Security and Controlling Terrorism
by Dick Bell & Michael Renner*, October
2001
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.
*Dick
Bell is Vice President for Communications at the Worldwatch
Institute
Michael
Renner is a Senior Researcher at the Worldwatch Institute
The Worldwatch Institute web site is at http://www.worldwatch.org
|