|
|
[This is available as a PDF
document for offline distribution!]
We, representatives of nongovernmental organizations from the United States
of America, attending the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg
(WSSD), are ashamed at the role the Bush administration has played at this major
effort to deal with the most pressing issues facing our planet. The reasons
for our profound disagreement are as follows:
Failed responsibility.
As the wealthiest country and biggest polluter in the world, the U.S. bears
special responsibility to address these significant issues. Yet while most
of the world has worked hard to take action against environmental degradation,
persistent poverty, and growing inequality, the Bush administration has dealt
with this Summit more as an exercise in damage control than a genuine opportunity
to show leadership, and has demonstrated selfishness rather than stewardship.
Obstruction vs. action.
This Summit was supposed to be about action to implement the Rio Declaration,
Agenda 21, and the other agreements since then to overcome obstacles to sustainable
development. But the U.S. delegation has consistently obstructed concrete
targets, timetables, and significant actions in areas like:
- The goal of halving those without access to clean water and sanitation
by 2015, which the U.S. delegation initially resisted, then accepted only
in exchange for scrapping the target of 10% of new energy renewables by
2010 (though renewable energy targets would also help solve the water crisis,
e.g. by reducing fossil fuels" impact on climate change
- Detailed guidelines for good governance, Kyoto targets, and its backdoor
actions to sabotage new agreements and actions on corporate accountability
are other examples
Partnerships & business.
The "partnerships" pushed by the U.S. delegation as the most concrete
outcome of the WSSD are all too often "business as usual"—driven
by the needs of multinationals rather than the needs of sustainable development.
Genuine partnerships to remedy the notorious failures of governmental efforts
since Rio must:
-
complement and not replace effective government action, or
be a cover for privatization
- be responsive to local community needs, and therefore be inclusive and
participatory
- be transparent and accountable, with adequate monitoring, evaluation,
and follow up.
Backward steps.
While supporting references to anti-corruption and good governance in general,
the delegation has encouraged backward steps on international standards by:
- seeking to remove detailed human rights
references (e.g. on the right to development)
- lukewarm support even for civil and political
rights to information and participation
- seeking
to remove or dilute important previously agreed principles like the precautionary
principle, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities for
rich and poor countries, and the principle of sustainable debt relief.
Old vs. new ideas.
Instead of promoting new ideas, the Bush administration has been:
-
excessively market-oriented, reflecting outmoded economic
development ideas that fail to address the needs of people
- out of step with the rest of the world, which sees economic freedoms as
not only property rights, but also the rights to a clean environment and
robust biodiversity, food, water, shelter, education, health, work, an adequate
standard of living, and nondiscrimination
- supporting science when it promotes the corporate agenda, as with genetically
modified foods and organisms, but not when it hinders it, as with the science
on climate change
- opposing the need for a new global architecture to address these problems
Hypocrisy and selfish interests over global interests.
U.S. delegation rhetoric favoring sustainable development is belied by the
hypocrisy of its actions in promoting:
- unsustainable business activities and excessive consumption
- dominance of trade over environmental agreements
- despite the emphasis on "free trade", continued subsidies for
big agribusiness and fossil fuels, and restrictions on poor countries"
agricultural and textile exports
The U.S. delegation's positions are based on a short-sighted
and narrow definition of national interest that directly endangers sustainable
development for everyone, including women, trade unionists, poor, vulnerable,
and indigenous peoples, as well as the environment. The administration is focused
on homeland security and its war on terrorism. But that"s no excuse for
not recognizing that real security at home and abroad, as well as global peace
and prosperity, will only come from ameliorating poverty and the new 'global
apartheid', and protecting our environment.
On behalf of a large number of U.S. NGOs active at the WSSD
from the environmental, development, human rights, women"s, indigenous,
labor, consumer, youth, local community, religious, spiritual, economic, and
other civil society viewpoints, we disassociate ourselves from the Bush administration"s
positions and role at the Summit. We call on the American People to redouble
efforts to change those positions and support stronger actions to create a more
sustainable world.
|
Recent Endorsements...
|