Ifda dossier 47, May/June 1985

A positive element in these negotiations was that the divi-
sion between consumer/producer was not the same as the divi-
sion between North and South. The mixed interest grouping
provided a positive base for results. There was in fact a
formal result - the establishment of the fund. The existing
structures in the international commodities markets appear
to be so strong, and appear to fear such a fund, that the
fund does not seem to be able to make the step from a docu-
ment to an activity. This causes political and economic
frustration in both North and South and in the extreme in-
volves also a security threat. In addition to being a con-
tributing element to the weakening of the world economy,
such a situation also helps strengthen the position of those
who do not believe in negotiations and political solutions,
but who believe that the use of force and weapons is the
only possible way to lift the majority of the world's popu-
lation out of poverty and misery. The motives behind the
desire for change vary. Not every one who claims to repre-
sent the poverty stricken can be said to do so, when one
analyses the policies followed. The need, however, to par-
ticipate more in the international decision taking, which
has major effects on their respective countries, will be
powerful, no matter what the political colour may be.
We are not, therefore, looking only at a social problem -
that the majority of the population in a rich world should
not live in poverty, but also a political one - that few
countries are involved in decisions of paramount importance
to many countries.
Points of mutual interest exist between small industrial
countries and Third World countries. Few, on thinking the
matter over, doubt this situation will change, given time.
The exciting question is how it will happen. By means of
negotiations, cooperation and a determined long-term change
in the conditions prevailing in the countries, or by a de-
velopment towards more chaos, force and militarism.
The peace effort has taken a central position in the politi-
cal debate in Europe and in the United States. The nuclear
weapons in particular are in focus. This is natural, and it
is important that we reduce our dependence on such weapons,
in order to reduce the threat of war and the danger that
such weapons may be used. Results may be reached by getting
the nuclear powers, first and foremost the USSR and the US,
to agree on disarmament rather than the vicious circle that
the armament race is. The results of the negotiations in
Geneva and Vienna will have a major impact on the position
Europe will find itself in at the end of the century.
It is, however, unfortunate that by focusing on disarmament
and on a reduction of the tension between East and West, we
ignore the dangers that may result in armed violence in the
coming years. A confrontation between the super powers will
hardly be a result of rational evaluations in Washington and
Moscow.