| |
Contributions from
the Column
Facts and trends
OECD extends development assistance criteria
Lack of direction in the face of increasing poverty
The many voices of German education co-operation
“Decent work instead of exploitation” for children
US Senate investigates World Bank corruption
Development assistance rising
KfW development bank debate on fighting poverty
New dynamism for the WTO
6/2004
|
|
[ Security policy ]
OECD extends development
assistance criteria
OECD countries will apply the term “development cooperation” to three fields of security policy. In future, expenditure for promoting laws against the recruitment of child soldiers, for enhancing civilian control of the security sector and of managing defence budgets will be eligible for official development assistance (ODA). Agreement on this was reached at minister level by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) at a meeting held in Paris in mid-April.
In the draft resolution for the meeting, which had been based on preliminary work by the DAC Network on Conflict, Peace and Development Co-operation (see D+C 2004:3, p. 127), the DAC chair had recommended including seven tasks in the ODA catalogue. The ministers, however, declined most of these. They are to be rediscussed at a later date along with other similar issues. Among the rejected proposals were support for more efficient administration control of the security sector (whole-of-government approach) as well as drafting overall analyses of the security sector (security system reviews) and training soldiers in matters of human rights and democracy.
Employees of development agencies welcomed the DAC decisions in principle. Colin Gleichmann, head of the GTZ project “Security Sector Reform”, praised the way in which clear boundaries have been set for the military. According to him, not every fashionable issue should become an element of development policy. Stephan Klingebiel of the German Development Institute and co-author of a study on civil-military interfaces, said that, for the ODA definition to retain its credibility, it was correct to err on the side of caution.
The principle, according to which the military can never become a true partner for development, already prominent in the DAC draft resolution, did, however, meet some opposition. Gleichmann says that, for many practical purposes, such strict abstinence is unworkable. Demobilisation, for example, would be impossible without military cooperation. He would have preferred a clearer differentiation of when it can make sense, from a development perspective, to cooperate with the military. A security policy adviser, who did not wish to be named, bluntly complained: “Development policy thinks that it can sort things out on its own with civil society. But if you want to achieve anything in the security sector, you have to cooperate with the bad boys too.” (ell)
|
