D+C Development and Cooperation (No. 6, November/December 1999,
p. 8-12)

The new German government sees a close interrelationship between security and development policy. A lesson learned in many parts of the world is that sustainable development, democracy and human rights are threatened by internal and international conflicts. Crisis prevention is, therefore, seen as an essential element of development policy. In a speech to the Federal Academy for Security Policy, the Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, outlined the new concept.

The tragedy in Kosovo shows us that we must finally go through with a crisis prevention policy, that we must look to the future and develop long-term strategies. Together with foreign and security policy, development cooperation faces the task of contributing to preventing the outbreak of crises. First of all for humanitarian reasons, but not least also for economic ones. The costs of prevention are many times lower than the costs of remedying the aftermath of wars.

Official development assistance totalling about $US 50 billion worldwide compare with annual global spending on arms totalling $US 780 billion. The number of wars and armed conflicts from the end of the Second World War in 1945 to 1989, when the Cold War ended, rose continually from about 10 at the end of the 1940s to 30 to 40 per year during the second half of the 1980s. While after the Indo-China wars there were hardly any major armed conflicts, the number of smaller wars increased dramatically. At the same time, the nature of the conflicts changed. In the 1990s alone, there were 100 armed conflicts of which only a fraction, mainly the fighting between Iraq and Iran and between Ethiopia and Eritrea, can be described as classic wars between nations. More than 175 groups and organisations at sub-national level were involved in the conflicts, which were fought mainly by militias, armed civilians, guerrillas and ethnic groups; hardly any involved regular armed forces. True, in absolute terms the annual death toll from this type of conflict is low when compared, for example, to the Korea or Vietnam wars. But the trend is rising continually due to the growing number of armed conflicts, and is including civilians to an ever greater degree. The number of people that die in wars each year totals between 500,000 and one million. In addition, due to internal conflicts the number of displaced persons and refugees is growing markedly. At the end of 1997 the UNHCR said there were 22 million refugees and displaced persons worldwide due to armed conflicts alone.

The debate at international level

The international community is attempting to react to these challenges more robustly with new peace and developmental activities at both multilateral and bilateral levels. Important steps to give a new impetus to peace policy were initiated at the beginning of the 1990s by the then United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros Ghali in his 'Agenda for Peace'.

Security today can no longer be understood mainly as 'military' security. An expanded security policy now also encompasses development policy in the sense of a global structural policy which covers economic, social, ecological and political relationships in other regions of the world.

In this context, the indicators of human security developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) should be emphasised. These include in particular:

• threats to food security;
• human rights violations;
• ethnic and religious conflicts;
• economic and social inequality;
• military spending.

These indicators also help to identify conflict potential, to determine key areas for developmental measures in the context of preventing crises and dealing with conflicts, and to set appropriate priorities.

German development policy
as peace policy

Preventing and coping with armed conflicts is a central objective of the German Federal government's international policy. Together with foreign and security policy, development policy is part of the government's peace policy. Within the framework of an overall foreign, security and development policy concept, it has two main tasks:

The first is to dismantle the structural causes of armed conflicts by improving the economic, social, ecological and political conditions in the partner countries. The second task is to establish mechanisms for peaceful resolution of conflicts.

Social conflicts as such are a recurring phenomenon inherent in development. It is solely a matter of preventing violence being used to resolve them. Such violent crises are always due to a complex bundle of causes. That is why it is also wrong to speak, for example, of "ethnic conflicts". Usually, the groups and persons with an interest in a conflict instrumentalise ethnic and religious differences in their drive for power and material advantages.

Reduce the causes of crises

Economic and social disparities are among the main structural causes of crises. That is why combating poverty and promoting social balance are important tasks for a development policy which wishes to take on crisis prevention. During the current fiscal year the German Federal government aims to invest DM 1.6 billion, or half of our new bilateral pledges, in poverty alleviation. This involves not only establishing social balance in itself, but also promoting economic growth, creating jobs and stabilising the finance sector. Equally indispensable, however, are international framework conditions which offer the developing and transition countries opportunities of a socially acceptable economic development and a share in globalisation. In that regard, the Federal government's debt relief initiative tabled at the G8 summit in Cologne set a new signal.

In addition, let me outline the link between the world economy, poverty and crises on the basis of a concrete example. A recent study carried out for us on development cooperation with Rwanda argues that the collapse of the International Coffee Agreement at the end of the 1980s was an element in the process which in the final analysis led to the genocide in Rwanda. Until the end of the 1980s the world coffee market was regulated by an agreement between the exporting and importing countries which provided for fixed export quotas during times of surplus. These quotas resulted in considerably higher prices for raw coffee on the world market than would have been possible in a free market, a situation with which we are familiar from the heydays of OPEC. When at the end of the 1980s the exporting and importing countries could no longer reach accord on the terms of continuing the agreement, the coffee price fell by about half practically overnight. That was a disaster for Rwanda, whose foreign trade earnings at that time depended heavily on coffee exports. The country's economic base and - due to tumbling export duties and other tax revenues - the fiscal base of government activities were shattered. In an already conflict-loaded situation, such an economic setback had to aggravate a crisis.

This example underlines two points: First, events which for us in Europe or North America are relatively unimportant - such as the collapse of the world market price of coffee - can under different conditions have enormous impacts. If we want to deal with issues of security and crisis prevention in our partner countries we must keep our minds open to such interrelationships and question ingrained ways of thinking. Second, we have joint responsibility for the world economic system and the countries integrated in it. The negotiations on the Coffee Agreement failed at the end of the 1980s also because of an unbending attitude by the importing industrialised nations. The consequences could be foreseen, but no conclusions were drawn from that.

The Rwanda example shows the importance of a coherent organisation of all political sectors. Coherence is a guiding concept which both development policy and security policy support. At the Munich conference on security policy on February 6,1999, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder demanded: "The political, economic, social, ecological and also military dimension must be considered together, and also brought together."

Particularly in the ecological dimension - the utilisation and preservation of the natural resource base - we recognise ever more clearly important structural causes of crises. Rivalry over access to land, water and mineral resources is often the cause of violent confrontations. In the Middle East, North Africa and the Sahel zone up to fifty per cent - and sometimes more - of river water is already used for human consumption and irrigation. Fifty per cent is considered the critical limit. Conflicts over fresh water will increase. Our developmental measures in Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian autonomy area show that there are promising approaches to better water management. A particularly serious problem is the fact that the area of arable land per capita is falling: in the industrial countries it declined from 0.6 h to 0.5 h between 1955 and 1995, and in the developing countries during the same period it dropped from 0.5 h to 0.2 h.

Large-scale ecological destruction of the bases of life has become a main reason for people fleeing. Worldwide, there are now about 125 million refugees that have left their homes because of wars, poverty and environmental destruction, as well as in the hope of a better life. Most of them have been accepted by neighbouring developing countries. The refugees compete there with local people for jobs and economic resources. Refugee movements and their resulting problems diminish the host countries' opportunities for development even further. The refugees' misery heightens social tensions and increases the pressure on natural resources.

Development cooperation supports the people in our partner countries in using their bases of life in a way that spares resources. German development cooperation in 1999 allocated about DM 1 billion for the protection of the environment and natural resources. That is a contribution to crisis prevention and attacks a main cause of flight and migration.

Promotion of social mechanisms
to resolve conflicts peacefully

Participation of the people in the political process is a central developmental concern. A society that has mechanisms for articulating and balancing the interests of its citizens and groups offers the best prerequisites for living peacefully together. Participation in political life can also take place, for example, in municipal councils and village committees at local level below a national parliament. Decentralisation and self-administration allow citizens more participation, and thus are characteristics of a democratically organised society. Development cooperation supports such democratic mechanisms, thus promoting peace and social balance.

The call for democratisation does not mean merely transferring our Western system of democracy. The Western model assumes a degree of information and education and the existence of institutions which in many developing societies are not in place. Therefore democracy must be assessed and strengthened in a historical, cultural and social context.

It is true that promoting democratic processes contributes to a peaceful balancing of interests in the long term, but in the short term it can definitely contribute to a social and political destabilisation. We can see this in Kenya. Under pressure from Western donors, Kenya at the beginning of the 1990s completed a step-by-step political opening and orientation towards more democracy. This led to more freedom of opinion, more freedom of the news media, and in general to interests being articulated more clearly and demands being raised. Unfortunately, this process has also been linked to date with an increasing tendency to violence in the society.

A participatory system needs a functioning civil society. Pressure groups, associations, corporate bodies, and organisations offer citizens opportunities to pursue and safeguard their interests. German development cooperation supports such institutions, which play an important role in peaceful conflict resolution. This support frequently is provided via the churches, political foundations and other NGOs, which are closer to the various social groups than is government. The work also includes promotion of media diversity, such as advisory services for radio and television stations and training of journalists. Access to objective information and dialogue between social groups are indispensable for peaceful coexistence and prevention of violence.

The legal system is a central element of peaceful conflict resolution. An independent judicial system to which poor and marginalised people also have access, clear laws, and an administration which acts according to constitutional principles are decisive preconditions for human security and protection of human rights. If the people trust the legal system of their country, that eliminates considerable potential for conflict. Development cooperation projects which provide consultancy on legislative and constitutional matters, for example, come under this sector.

The constitutional organisation of organs of security also is of particular importance. Security forces have an important function in safeguarding internal security. In many developing countries, however, the military and the police are more the cause of social instability. It is precisely the security forces which often are the perpetrators of human rights violations. In addition, after the end of civil wars there is the threat that armed groups will commit crimes and thus once again endanger peace. Development policy supports the partner countries in reforming their security sectors. Demobilisation and reintegration of soldiers and other combatants contributes to reducing the size of military forces and relieving government budgets. German development cooperation has supported such projects in Mozambique, Uganda and Ethiopia. The European Union, the World Bank and UNDP also finance comparable projects.

In 1999, a total of DM 175 million is available as part of bilateral government cooperation for the developmental measures I have described in the sectors of democratisation, civil society and the legal system.

A current study shows that countries that are members of many regional and international organisations are less frequently involved in military conflicts than others. European integration is the classic example that regional integration - economic, political and cultural - establishes cross-border interests and links which also strengthen interest in a peaceful coexistence and thus help to secure peace long-term. Moreover, regional organisations recently have made greater efforts on mechanisms of peaceful conflict management, such as the Organisation for African Unity (OAU), the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD), and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). In some cases, the introduction of regional peace intervention forces is also looked into, and sometimes these have been deployed. It is true that regional organisations are not always able to defuse conflicts or achieve peaceful solutions at short notice. But it should not be overlooked that the UN or NATO also do not always operate successfully. Great attention should therefore be paid to the task of supporting regional organisations - given a realistic assessment of their possibilities and limits - in building up their capacities for long-term crisis prevention and peaceful conflict resolution. For this year, German development cooperation has earmarked DM 100 million for the promotion of regional cooperation projects.

Current priorities in strengthening
peace through development

The methods described in attacking the structural causes of conflicts and promoting peaceful mechanisms to resolve conflicts are basically not new territory for development cooperation. That is why development policy is particularly qualified to assume an important role in the overall concept of crisis prevention. But a stronger focusing of development policy on peace policy requires additional steps.

First, potential sources of conflict must be identified systematically. The Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) is at present working on appropriate indicators. These, together with other sources such as the crisis atlas of the German Defence Ministry, are to flow into our country concepts and country consultation groups.

Second, we must focus our cooperation purposefully on mitigating structural causes of conflicts in countries with a high potential for conflict.

Third, conflict management in the political and social domain needs to be strengthened in the short to medium term. This is where government and non-governmental Technical Cooperation in particular can make an additional contribution. In this context, German development cooperation is building up the Civilian Peace Service (ZFD). This service differs from the present mechanisms for conflict management, in particular by its deployment in the political-social sector. Its activities are planned to cover a broad spectrum. They range, for example, from measures to strengthen the potential for peace and dismantle prejudices and hostile images of other groups (such as by peace education), to promoting human rights, contributing to reconciliation, and temporarily helping to carry out administrative tasks at municipal level. The ZFD and the instruments of development cooperation are to support each other. ZFD activities will be coordinated with comparable European and other multilateral projects and operations within the framework of existing possibilities. On the basis of bilateral experience, systematic cooperation with international institutions or in connection with international missions also is possible.

The BMZ's role in the
German Federal Security Council

The role of development cooperation as peace policy, as described, is underlined by the upgrading of this policy sector since the change of German Federal government. That is also manifested by the BMZ's membership of the Federal Security Council, which strengthens the coherence of Germany's foreign, security and development policy.

The government coalition agreement [between the Social Democratic Party and the Greens party] contains a restrictive clause on German arms exports. Approval of arms exports is in line with the EU code on such exports and the political principles of the German Federal government. Account is taken of criteria such as observation of human rights, the domestic political situation and promotion of sustainable development. In assessing these criteria the BMZ can draw on its knowledge from development cooperation with the respective countries. At the same time, all involved know that considering the various aspects is not easy. For example, we have frozen development cooperation with India and Pakistan after their nuclear tests. Against this background, I believe there can be no "business as usual" in other cooperation sectors. Another example is South Africa, which is of great importance for the security situation in the region. Modernisation of armaments on the one hand and serious domestic social tensions on the other must be reconciled.

"Small arms" problem

The easy availability of so-called small arms is a factor which makes the violent resolution of conflicts much easier. It is estimated there are at least 500 million small arms worldwide, including more than 100 million assault rifles. Small arms with a total value of at least DM 5 billion are exported every year. Since these weapons are very cheap and very hardwearing, this means that an enormous number of weapons is traded. Thus the majority of weapons used in present conflicts are not new, but simply re-used and sometimes transported from one conflict region to the next.

There is no transparency on the export of small arms or ammunition. The export regulations on small arms are not so strict as those covering more complex conventional weapons. An explanation for that might lie in the fact that during the East-West confrontation the main interest was to contain and control stocks of technologically very advanced or large-calibre conventional weapons. Another reason is probably that effective controls and export regulations can be formulated only at international level, where agreement is difficult to achieve. Small arms are produced in more than 70 countries and it is to be assumed that most of these nations have the technological capacity to manufacture modern and effective ammunition.

From the developmental point of view, a strict interpretation of the German and EU arms export regulations is indispensable not only for weapons of war but also for so-called miscellaneous armaments products, which include some of the small arms. Of course, that cannot yet solve the small arms problem in developing countries. For that, approaches at disparate levels must be realised. To start with, better transparency could deliver more information and reinforce public pressure to solve the problem. Extensive marking of small arms would make it much easier to trace the routes taken by weapons and ammunition. Non-governmental organisations and networks also should make a major contribution to gathering information on the flows of small arms.

The EU Development Ministers' Council has adopted a resolution initiated by me on the small arms problem. By that we are complementing a joint stance which was adopted within the framework of the EU's common foreign and security policy and will now be brought before the United Nations. With this resolution we have opened up the opportunity of developmental support and promotion of sincere approaches by the developing countries to control the use of existing weapons and collect most of those available. For example, as part of demobilisation programmes the buying back of weapons can also be financed. But to achieve sustainable successes such approaches must be embedded in a comprehensive programme which is supported by the conflict parties.

Concluding remarks

I must warn, however, against overloading development policy with expectations which cannot be fulfilled. In principle, development policy can play only a subsidiary role in supporting the partner countries' own efforts and the conflict parties' will for peace. In addition, there must be coherent action by all national and international actors.

But as long as the security of the people in developing countries is threatened by intolerable debt servicing, destabilising finance flows, social injustice, unbridled population growth, political repression and destruction of natural resources, short-term crisis prevention concepts alone will remain relatively ineffective.