• Commonwealth:
• Documents:
• Speeches:
• Speeches by Secretary-General Don McKinnon:
• End of the “Me Generation”?

End of the “Me Generation”?

Date: 13 Nov 2001
Speaker: Secretary-General Donald McKinnon
Location: Royal Institute of International Affairs Joint meeting with the Link Foundation for UK-New Zealand Relations

In his play entitled Six Degrees of Separation, John Guare explores the intriguing idea that each of us is connected to every other person in the world via a chain of no more than 6 intermediaries. Take a Kenyan farmer and a schoolgirl from New Zealand, for instance. At first, there seems to be no apparent connection between them. But in reality, the farmer knows a village chief who does business with a Nairobi merchant, whose brother is a civil servant, who happens to know a New Zealand NGO worker, whose sister is the schoolgirl's mother.

Statistically, it seems there would never be more than 6 degrees of separation between any two living persons on earth. I'm not sure this is absolutely true, but this idea illustrates the very tight web of connections that binds us together as human beings.

1. An interdependent world

We live in an interdependent world. Events taking place at the other end of the planet often have a direct impact on our lives. Consider, for example, the chain of events triggered by the fall of the Berlin Wall or Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.

We rely on an extended network of people across the world for the food we eat, the clothes we buy, the films we watch, the cars we drive.

Take an action as simple as a phone call. The cellular phone I use has been designed in Finland, manufactured in China, and sold in Britain. It has been marketed by an American company and the network it is linked to is owned by a Japanese multinational. As for the account, who knows who it is paid to? In this simple operation, a global network of people and countries has been brought into play.

Interdependence makes us more powerful. We have more power to buy the best goods more cheaply, more power to reach friends and family wherever they are, more power to increase our standard of living and the prospects of our children. We also enjoy more freedom. Freedom to travel; freedom to communicate; freedom to learn. But the forces of interdependence also make us more vulnerable.

Financial markets collapsing in one region of the world can trigger a recession on another continent. The decision to lower interest rates in one country could mean less buying power for pensioners in another. The pollution we produce can affect the living standards of people in faraway countries. The tremors of distant conflicts can shake the foundations of our own communities.

And of course, the 11 September attack in the United States made it clear that terrorism is a threat for all of us. We are all vulnerable. This, unfortunately, is also what interdependence means.

2. The Commonwealth in a changing world

The challenge for us today is to adapt to the rapid changes brought about by the forces of integration. We must ensure that we are able to adjust to the new political and economic landscape taking shape before us.

This challenge is particularly relevant to the Commonwealth. If we still want to be part of the game tomorrow, we must be ahead of the game today.

We need to grasp the new opportunities created by our connected world while at the same time holding on to the values that make up our common identity. We must act with vision and foresight while strengthening the close ties that unite our members together. We must embrace the forces of change and welcome the benefits of globalisation and ensure that our more vulnerable members are included in the process.

And in everything we do, we must recognise that, with increased integration comes increased responsibility. In the face of the troubles and challenges confronting the world today, indifference is not an option. By remaining indifferent, we will not make the world safer for ourselves. We will make it more dangerous for everyone, including ourselves.

We cannot disentangle ourselves from the ties that hold us together as human beings. The words of the poet John Donne are as relevant today as they were 400 years ago:

"No man is an island entire of itself", he wrote. "every man is a piece of the Continent, a part of the main…"

When a child is dying of AIDS in Africa, we should see it as our business to help.

"…Any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in Mankind…"

When a flood leaves thousands of people homeless in Mozambique or Bangladesh, we should see it as our business to provide assistance.

When a democratic government is overthrown, we should see it as our business to help restore democracy.

"…and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."

We must share this responsibility as communities, families and individuals.

This sense of responsibility is also at the heart of the Commonwealth project. It is what makes us relevant to the world today. It is what runs through all the work we do. Be it the fight against terrorism, the alleviation of poverty or the promotion of democracy.

3. Terrorism

The threat of terrorism is not new for the Commonwealth. Indeed, many of our member states have been directly affected by acts of terrorism. And many Commonwealth leaders have been the victims of attacks by extremist groups.

The Commonwealth can use the power of diversity to help make a difference. The Commonwealth has no battalions. Its strength lies in the solidarity of its members, in their common commitment to democracy, the rule of law and pluralism.
In a world that is becoming increasingly polarised, this inclusiveness is of particular relevance. By bringing together people of different faiths and cultures from a diversity of countries, large and small, rich and poor, the Commonwealth can present a united front in the fight against terrorism.

That is just what happened a few weeks ago when Commonwealth leaders issued a statement calling for resolute action against terrorist activities. This statement goes very far. It does not merely condemn acts of terrorism. It establishes that any member country which supports terrorists is in violation of the fundamental values of the Commonwealth and has no place in our organisation.

The statement also calls for greater international co-operation to combat terrorism. On extradition and the exchange of information between member countries, the Commonwealth also has an important contribution to make. The Commonwealth can assist in the implementation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1373 calling for international action against terrorism.

Moreover, we can take advantage of the common legal framework shared by many of our members to facilitate the adoption of laws in areas such as money laundering and extradition.

We will do all we can to cut the money supply of terrorists and those who support them. We are committed to co-operate with the international community to freeze and confiscate the assets of terrorists. Moreover, I constituted a Ministerial Committee to discuss ways in which the Commonwealth can move forward on some of these issues.

Of course, we can — and we must — do more. We must combat indoctrination, fanaticism and extremist ideologies, whatever form they take. We cannot engage in a dialogue with the terrorists. But we can engage with those they seek to indoctrinate. We can prevent others joining their ranks. That is why education must also be part of our strategy.

Following the 11 September, we have seen people united in their grief. In times of danger, we tend to huddle together. We re-order our priorities. We think less about ourselves and more about others. We worry less about our own needs and more about our friends, our family, our community.

Are we witnessing the end of the "me generation"? It is probably too early to say. But one thing is certain: we cannot afford to turn our backs to the troubles our world is facing. We cannot afford to always put ourselves first. We must all recognise the need to shoulder responsibility. Indifference may sometimes seem a more attractive option, but the cost of silence is always high.

As Edmund Burke once said, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

4. Poverty alleviation

It will take a while before we are able to grasp the full implications of the 11 September terrorist attack in the United States. In the aftermath of the event, economic growth is expected to fall in most developed countries.

But according to the World Bank, developing countries will be the worst hit by the economic slowdown. Ten million more people will be thrown into poverty as a result of the attacks. Tens of thousands more children will die worldwide. Why — simply because they are at the end of the line. And at the end of the line there is no food, no water, no shelter and no vaccines.

The economies of developing countries will suffer from reduced investment and falling commodity prices. According to the International Labour Organisation, job opportunities will be cut by at least 24 million. Tourism is being hit exceptionally hard. 65% of the holidays booked for the Caribbean have been cancelled. Yesterday's tragedy in Queens could hardly have helped.

These adverse consequences must strengthen our commitment to alleviate poverty. In these difficult times, more than ever, we must assume our responsibility toward the poor. 1.2 billion people live under 1$ a day. More than a third are Commonwealth citizens. The total annual wages of 1.2 million poor people in Africa amount to less than what Bernie Eccleston alone earned last year.

This is not only a moral issue. Poverty also represents a threat to civil order and world stability.

Globalisation has been blamed for increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. But globalisation, if well managed, can be — and must be — part of the solution to world poverty. Together, we must ensure that the fruits of globalisation are distributed more fairly. If globalisation is to fulfil its promise, we must make sure that it works for the benefit of the many, not the few.

It is crucial that no one is left by the wayside in the process of globalisation; that the gains from technological advances and from the opening of markets are more equitably distributed.

At the beginning of the World Trade Organisation meeting in Doha, I said that increased trade liberalisation will only work if it works for the benefit of all countries. A world of free trade where some countries have more freedom to trade than others is simply unacceptable. If we want trade negotiations to be successful, the concerns of developing countries must be taken seriously.

International trade issues are notoriously complex. But some imbalances are obvious enough. Trade barriers on manufactured products have been repeatedly lowered, and now stand at an average of 4%, while barriers for agricultural exports — a key to most developing nations' economies — have remained very high: they average 40% worldwide.

In addition, industrialised countries continue to maintain high levels of export subsidies on agricultural products. In fact, the total amount of agricultural subsidies spent every year by OECD countries is equivalent to the entire gross domestic product of sub-Saharan Africa. How can that fact alone bring confidence to farmers in developing countries?

The HIV/AIDS pandemic also demands appropriate responses. While patents of drug companies must clearly be protected to encourage investment in research, developing nations also need to have access to cheap generic drugs to treat public health disasters like AIDS. There are encouraging signs that negotiators in Doha may have finally arrived at an agreement on this issue.

Building walls around your country is a waste of time when terrorists can climb over that wall and blow up your icons in front of your eyes. There must be a shift in the way trade negotiations are conducted. In an interconnected world economy, where we want the benefits to be widespread, the rule of the game is not: "I win if you lose"; but: "I only win if we win together."

If developed countries accept to do their share today, they — and all the other nations in the world — will reap the benefits tomorrow. The truth is that we can all gain from the opening of markets provided that we all play by the same rules.

Before their meeting in Genoa a few months ago, I wrote to all G8 leaders to encourage them to embrace a vision of generous globalisation. I urged them:

To take a flexible approach to countries deep in debt

To reverse the decline in aid from the industrialised countries

To make the markets of the industrialised countries accessible to exports from developing countries.

In line with this approach, the Commonwealth has taken concrete steps to assist Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs). It was Commonwealth Finance Ministers who provided the leadership which eventually led to the initiative to reduce the debt of HIPCs. The Commonwealth continues to maintain pressure on the IMF and the World Bank to provide even greater debt reduction to these countries.

The Commonwealth has provided developing countries with a computer software that helps them to better analyse and manage their debt. An updated version of this software was launched a few weeks ago it is now being used by over 50 countries, both inside and outside the Commonwealth.

We can also use trade as a tool for reducing poverty. According to the World Bank, abolishing all trade barriers could boost global income and lift 320 million people out of poverty within the next 10 to 15 years. This is why we must urge developed countries to make a sustained effort to reduce their own trade barriers and give developing countries increased access to their markets.

The Commonwealth also recognises that small countries are particularly vulnerable to the rapid changes brought about by globalisation. This is why the Commonwealth was the first to address the special problems encountered by small states. It now runs a number of programmes aimed at reducing these states' vulnerability to external economic shocks and threats to their sovereignty and security. Again, we must act in a spirit of generous globalisation.

5. Democracy

Another important tool in the fight against poverty is the promotion of democracy. Democracy does not only empower people or bring peace and social justice; it also creates the conditions for economic growth.

Democracy is good for growth and growth is good for democracy. The two go hand in hand.

Economic growth is more likely to be achieved in a stable political environment that recognises the value of the individual and empowers all citizens to achieve their full potential. Business people will only invest in countries where there is political stability, in other words, where government is open, honest and respectful of the rights of the citizen. Multi-party-systems, freedom of speech, civil rights are important tools of economic development.

A very suggestive illustration of the link between democracy and development is the fact that, as Amartya Sen once famously remarked, "No substantial famine has ever occurred in a democracy".

And conversely, democracy depends on economic well-being. You can't have a functioning democracy if you don't have adequate shelter, healthcare, education, easy access to clean drinking water. You can't eat democracy. You won't succeed in promoting democracy in a country where the conditions under which democracy can thrive are just not there.

The Commonwealth's commitment to democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights is embodied in the 1991 Harare Declaration. In 1995, Commonwealth Heads of Government set up a Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) to deal with serious or persistent violations of the Harare principles. We are still the only international organisation where such a group exists. We are still the only international organisation that can penalise those that fall foul of the rules.

Nigeria, Sierra Leone and The Gambia were all either suspended from the Commonwealth or from its councils for various periods. In each case a civilian and democratic government has now been restored. More recently, Pakistan and Fiji have been suspended from the councils of the Commonwealth following military coups.

We also work actively behind the scenes, using "discreet diplomacy" to resolve or to prevent internal political crises, providing Election Observers, promoting democracy workshops or strengthening electoral institutions in member countries. By its very nature, some of this valuable work takes place away from the glare of publicity — and thus remains unsung. We don't win every time, but we win more often than we lose.
Conclusion

The Chinese have a proverb: "May you live in interesting times". This is meant, not as a blessing, but as a curse. Interesting times are times of conflict, violence and war. Well, no one would deny that we live in interesting times.

People have never been watching the news more avidly. Ratings for documentaries and news programmes are up, newspapers sell more. We seem to have all but forgotten about Posh and Becks and Big Brother. Instead, we buy books about religious fundamentalism and we catch up on the "war against terrorism" at every opportunity.

But living in interesting times does not necessarily need to be a curse. Interesting times are also full of opportunities. Out of the danger comes the will to change things, to better the world, to create the promise of greater justice.

Our times are also interesting because the world has become smaller, because walls are falling, because knowledge is expanding. There is hope in this. Hope that we can transform the curse into a blessing. Hope that we can make this era an era of responsibility. An era where people take more responsibility for themselves, their families, their communities and demand more international responsibility from their governments. "No man is an island entire of itself."

13 November 2001