The Superior General of the Society of the Sacred Heart, Patricia Garcia de Quevedo RSCJ, has explicitly requested all Religious of the Society, and by extension members of AMASC, to support the Jubilee 2000 Petition, ‘a world-wide, ecumenical campaign for signatures in support of cancelling the debt of certain countries on the basis of clearly determined criteria.’

Her original letter is reproduced in this Newsletter for your perusal and consideration.

It is important to clarify the position of AMASC on an issue such as this:

• Most importantly, this is an issue of individual thought and conscience. The current Presidency, Advisors and Secretariat of AMASC, and the editorial team of this Newsletter, do not presume to speak or take a position on behalf of National Associations or individual members with regard to an issue which is of global significance but has extremely varied nuances and repercussions within different countries, economies and cultures. However, we take the position that this kind of issue is precisely the type where Internet technology can be so useful. We will guide you to sites and e-mail addresses where you can better appraise yourself of facts, contact relevant people, and come to your own conclusions. Please participate in this process!
  
  
• This is not a party-political issue. AMASC by definition is a global organisation which is not affiliated to any particular political persuasion. We aim to bring our members’ attention to issues which, beyond any regional, national or even supra-national political process, address universal concerns which are implicit in our values, such as human justice and dignity.

• We’ve been here before. There is a long history of debt relief. Here is some information from the Jubilee 2000 web site at Jubilee 2000 Coalition (UK), which you can visit for further details:

The present problem of countries not able to repay debts is very similar to the 1930s - and the 1880s and 1840s. But much greater debt cancellation has been offered in the past.

As part of the HIPC (Heavily Indebted Poor Countries) initiative, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Paris Club of government creditors are demanding payments three to four times what was considered sustainable in the past.

In Germany in the late 1920’s, 13%-15% debt-service-to-exports was considered so excessive that opposition to it was credited with having helped promote the Nazi take-over. This was taken into account during the negotiations over German debt after World War II. When the Allies asked Germany to use 10% of exports to repay debts, the chief German negotiator said that this was ‘impossible’. The Allies meeting in London in 1953 agreed, and German payments were limited to 3.5%.

By contrast, a country such as Mozambique paid a debt service ratio of 29% of export income in the years 1994-97 - a total of US$121 million per year! Yet this comprised only 30% of Mozambique’s scheduled debt service.

• A Project such as this requires your input. A signature on the Jubilee 2000 Petition, which is looking to amass some 22 million signatures worldwide, brings the issue of debt to the attention of the world’s leaders at forums such as the G-8 Summit to be held in Cologne in June 1999. However, we do not expect you to sign the petition without familiarising yourself with the priorities and conditions involved. You are invited to enter into a dialogue with the organisers of the Petition, with fellow members of AMASC, with representatives in your own countries and with politicians, governments or non-government agencies if you feel this is appropriate. Some contact details are available at the end of this article.

It must be clarified that the Jubilee 2000 movement is not seeking a ‘blanket’ cancellation of debt, but simply a cancellation of the backlog of ‘unpayable’ debt in the poorest countries. Such a cancellation must also occur with the condition that funds be redirected to those most in need, such as the estimated 21 million children whose lives could arguably be saved if resources diverted from debt repayments could be spent on health, clean water and sanitation.

• The issue of debt has wider implications for the world we live in. We can examine and perhaps live our values and priorities by not necessarily accepting policies imposed by national or international governments and institutions as simple 'givens'.

For example, the World Bank’s chief economist has himself admitted that the HIPC (Heavily Indebted Poor Countries) initiative is wrong.

‘Greater humility’ is needed, admitted the World Bank’s chief economist Joseph Stiglitz in a speech on 7 January 1998, in which he called for an end to ‘misguided’ policies imposed from Washington. His wide-ranging condemnation of the ‘Washington Consensus’ and the conditions imposed on poor countries raised fundamental questions about the entire debt relief process.

He undermined virtually every pillar of the structural adjustment and stabilisation policies that serve as necessary conditions under HIPC. In particular he asserted:

• Moderated inflation is not harmful. Hyper-inflation is costly, but below 40% inflation per year, ‘there is no evidence that inflation is costly.’
  
  
• Budget deficits can be OK, ‘given the high returns to government investment in such crucial areas as primary education and physical infrastructure (particularly roads and energy)'.
  
  
• Macro-economic stability is the wrong target. Minimising or avoiding major economic contractions should be one of the most important goals of policy. 'In the short run, large-scale involuntary unemployment is clearly inefficient - in purely economic terms it represents idle resources at work that could be used more productively’.
  
  
• Markets are not automatically better. Stiglitz notes in particular, that ‘left to itself, the market will tend to underprovide human capital and technology. Without government action there will be too little investment in the production and adoption of new technology'.
  
  
• ‘THE DOGMA OF LIBERALIZATION HAS BECOME AND END IN ITSELF AND NOT A MEANS TO A BETTER FINANCIAL SYSTEM.’
  
  
• Stiglitz calls for a new, post-Washington consensus’ which, he says, ‘cannot be based on Washington’. And he adds, ‘one principle of the emerging consensus is a greater degree of humility, the frank acknowledgment that we do not have all the answers’. As citizens of one world, we, as members of AMASC, must participate in the widest possible definition of 'civic duty' and 'citizenship'. We must at least engage in dialogue, and give commitment to issues we believe in.

We can be part of defining a new consensus for the new Millenium.

USEFUL LINKS AND ADDRESSES