<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
En inglés, sobre la deuda en Pakistan ... interesante ...<br>
<br>
besos iolanda<br>
<br>
-------- Missatge original --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">Assumpte:
</th>
<td>[IllegitimateDebt-Campaign-News] Pakistan media back
CADTM-Pakistan position on debt</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">Data: </th>
<td>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 04:08:28 -0400 (EDT)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">De: </th>
<td><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:cadtm.pakistan@gmail.com">cadtm.pakistan@gmail.com</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap">A: </th>
<td><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:illegitimatedebt-campaign-news@lists.democracyinaction.org">illegitimatedebt-campaign-news@lists.democracyinaction.org</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<p class="ecxtitle3"><font face="georgia,serif">Dear All</font></p>
<p class="ecxtitle3"><font face="georgia,serif">CADTM-Pakistan's
last couple of years work has started showing results. Refusal
to foreign debt repayments of Pakistan is emerging as mainstream
issue in Pakistani media. The report below acknowledges CADTM
Pakistan position. The debate is also gaining ground
among political and intellectual circles. Below is detail story,
published in <em>daily Times</em>-a respected English daily,
supporting CADTM-Pakistan's consistant position on debt.</font></p>
<p class="ecxtitle3"><font face="georgia,serif">comradely,</font></p>
<div class="ecxtitle3"><font face="georgia,serif">Abdul Khaliq</font></div>
<div class="ecxtitle3"><font face="georgia,serif">CADTM-Pakistan</font></div>
<div class="ecxtitle3"><span class="ecxf"><cite></cite></span> </div>
<div class="ecxtitle3"><span class="ecxf"><cite><font
color="#0e774a"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/">www.<b>dailytimes</b>.com.pk</a></font></cite></span></div>
<div class="ecxtitle3"><span class="ecxf"><cite></cite></span> </div>
<div class="ecxtitle3">Daily Times </div>
<div class="ecxtitle3">21 August 2010 </div>
<p class="ecxtitle3"><font size="3"><strong>Pakistan ‘deserves’ $53
billion foreign debt write-off</strong></font></p>
<div class="ecxtext"> <i>By Raja Riaz</i><br>
<br>
LAHORE: At a time when Pakistan faces challenges such as terrorism
and devastating floods, international financial institutions and
donor countries should step forward and write off the country’s
massive $53 billion debt to guarantee the Pakistani people the
‘right to life’.<br>
<br>
International laws, the UN charter, ethics and morality all
support Pakistan’s case for getting a write-off.<br>
<br>
Pakistan can refuse to pay its all external debts on the basis of
international laws: ‘the state of necessity’ and ‘the law of
illegitimate borrowings’, besides emphasising ‘the right of
providing basic necessities’ to its population.<br>
<br>
Various countries have invoked these laws at different times to
get relief for their people from the international financial
institutions and states.<br>
<br>
The first principle that can be invoked for the purpose is the law
of ‘the state of necessity.’ <br>
<br>
The state of necessity defence is enshrined in Article 25 of the
International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility.
Under international law, this term is used to describe: “A
situation in the presence of which a state is excused for not
performing an international obligation. Such a situation is
generally believed to be an actual threat or a prospective peril
to a state’s essential interests. From an operational point of
view, a ‘state of necessity’ has the ability to change into a
legitimate action a conduct that would otherwise be considered
wrongful.”<br>
<br>
<strong>The focal person of the Committee for Abolition of Third
World Debt (CADTM), Pakistan chapter, Abdul Khaliq Shah, has
supported this argument. “Pakistan must refuse debt servicing on
external loans. In view of the devastation caused by floods,
Pakistan has a legal right to repudiate debt as there are
several arguments in internal laws that can be invoked as legal
justification to refuse external debt servicing. One of these
justifications is called ‘state of necessity’. By this we mean a
situation that jeopardises the existence of a state or its
economic/political survival,” he said.</strong></div>
<div class="ecxtext"><br>
The provision of health, education, food, water and housing is the
basic function of a state. The recent calamity in Pakistan has
rendered hundreds of thousands of people homeless. International
donor agencies waived off the loans of Haiti in January this year
due to the same reason. <br>
<br>
The IMF waived a debt of $268 million given to Haiti. Following
the decision of the IMF, the World Bank also eased the life of
Haitians by deferring repayment of its debt for five years. The
World Bank announced that “it, too, supports debt relief, and will
waive payments on the $38 million lent to Haiti for at least five
years.”<br>
<br>
The IMF also sanctioned a fresh loan worth $60 million to Haiti
stating, “The new loan will not have any interest throughout
2011.” The IMF and the World Bank had cancelled Haiti’s $1.2
billion debt in 2009 as well.<br>
<br>
The international community pledged $5.3 billion to fund the
initial phase of Haiti’s reconstruction over the next 18 months,
including a contribution of $479 million by the World Bank. This
includes $151 million in grants, $39 million write-offs through
cancelling Haiti’s remaining debt to the World Bank and $60
million in investments from the bank’s private sector arm, the
International Finance Corporation (IFC).<br>
<br>
All these steps were taken citing the fact that the earthquake had
ruined the infrastructure of the country, making the state unable
to provide the basic necessities to its people.<br>
<br>
The Haitian government reported to the international community
that an estimated 230,000 people had died, 300,000 had been
injured and one million made homeless. They also estimated that
250,000 and 30,000 had collapsed or were severely damaged. Amongst
the widespread devastation and damage, vital necessary to respond
to the disaster was severely damaged or destroyed. This included
all hospitals in the capital; air, sea, and land transport
facilities; and communication systems. Roads were blocked with or
were broken.<br>
<br>
The world community fully supported the government of Haiti in
rescue operations: 20 countries sent military personnel to the
country, with Canada, the United States and the Dominican Republic
providing the largest contingents. The arrived with 600,000
emergency food rations, 100,000 ten-litre water containers, and an
enhanced wing of 19 helicopters; 130,000 litres of were
transferred to shore on the first day. The helicopter carrier
sailed with three large and two survey/salvage vessels, to create
a ‘sea base’ for the rescue effort. They were joined by the French
vessel . The Canadians joined Colombian rescue workers, Chilean
doctors, a French mobile clinic, and Sri Lankan relief workers who
had already responded to calls for aid. The US Navy listed its in
the area as “17 ships, 48 helicopters and 12 fixed-wing aircraft”
in addition to 10,000 sailors and Marines. The navy conducted 336
air deliveries, delivered 32,400 gallons of water, 532,440 bottles
of water, 111,082 meals and 4,100 kilogrammes of medical supplies.<br>
<br>
Foreign countries raised funds for Haitians and the European Union
promised $474 million for emergency and long-term aid. Brazil
announced $210 million for long-term recovery aid, $15 million of
which were in immediate funds. The UK committed $32.7 million in
aid, while France promised $14.4 million. The US government
announced it would give $100 million to the aid effort.<br>
<br>
Now compare all this with the situation in Pakistan: the total
number of people affected by the floods (20 million) exceeds the
combined total in three recent mega disasters —the Haiti
earthquake, the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the 2005 Kashmir
earthquake.<br>
<br>
The unprecedented rains have triggered a massive humanitarian
crisis that has threatened the lives of millions of people
including women and children. These people do not belong to a
specific age group, but include infants to 80-year-olds. The old
women and very young children are most vulnerable. The death toll
from the floods is close to 1,100 right now. <br>
<br>
According to the flood data from the last 62 years, the country
has suffered cumulative financial losses of more than Rs 385
billion ($6 billion) on account of 15 major floods. However, the
damage done by the 2010 floods is far more than that figure.<br>
<br>
The communication infrastructure has been totally ruined, roads,
bridges and railway tracks have been destroyed, while government
buildings have collapsed.<br>
<br>
Apart from the human toll, 111 bridges have been destroyed, and
more than 3,700 houses have been swept away.<br>
<br>
It is very difficult for the government to meet the basic
requirements of its millions of displaced people as the
international response to Pakistan is far less than the Tsunami
and Haiti disasters — the world community has only provided $229
million to Pakistan so far. This translates into $16.16 for each
affected Pakistani person as compared to $1,087 every affected
person in Haiti and $1,249 per affected person in the Indian Ocean
tsunami. <br>
<br>
The UN Human Rights Commission has adopted a number of resolutions
on the issue of debt and structural adjustment. One such
resolution, adopted in 1999, asserts that “The exercise of the
basic rights of the people of the debtor countries to food,
housing, clothing, employment, education, health services and a
healthy environment cannot be subordinated to the implementation
of the structural adjustment policies, growth programs and
economic reforms”.<br>
<br>
At the moment, the government of Pakistan is unable to fulfill
these requirements, as it has to spend $3 billion per year on debt
servicing alone.<br>
<br>
All these circumstances prove that Pakistan is passing through its
worst times and the state has the just right to deny repaying its
debts, owed to international financial institutions and donor
countries under the ‘the state of necessity’ clause. <br>
<br>
Odious Debt and Illegitimate Debt: The second defence for Pakistan
for not paying back its debt is the ‘Odious Debt’ doctrine.<br>
<br>
The doctrine was formalised in a 1927 treatise by legal theorist ,
based upon the 19th Century precedents such as ’s repudiation of
debts incurred by the regime, and the denial by the of liability
for debts incurred by the .<br>
<br>
According to Sack, “Odious debt is an established legal principle.
Legally, odious debt is debt that resulted from loans to an
illegitimate or dictatorial government that used the money to
oppress the people or for personal purposes. Moreover, in cases
where borrowed money was used in ways contrary to the people’s
interest, with the knowledge of the creditors, the creditors may
be said to have committed a hostile act against the people. They
cannot legitimately expect repayment of such debts.” <br>
<br>
He further states, “When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not
for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to
strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this
debt is odious for the people of the entire state. This debt does
not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt
contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise
of the regime. The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to
the territory of the state is that they do not fulfill one of the
conditions determining the lawfulness of state debts, namely that
state debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs
and in the interests of the state. Odious debts, contracted and
utilised for purposes, which, to the lenders’ knowledge, are
contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not
binding on the nation – when it succeeds in overthrowing the
government that contracted them – unless the debt is within the
limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded.
The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people, they
cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime
to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the
ruler.” <br>
<br>
The history of Pakistani debts reveals that the maximum loans were
obtained during the dictatorial regimes—the martial law regimes of
General Ayub Khan, General Yahya Khan and General Ziaul Haq. <br>
<br>
The people of Pakistan did not benefit from the foreign loans
provided to General Ziaul Haq and which were provided by Western
countries only after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.<br>
<br>
The loans were spent on building the ‘infrastructure’ for running
the Afghan Jehad.<br>
<br>
In Pakistan, the debt was spent against the wishes of the people
and benefited only a specific segment of society. The study
reveals that some corrupt generals were the biggest beneficiaries
of the aid, whose sons are now billionaires.<br>
<br>
This debt is not binding on the nation and government should
refuse to pay back these loans.<br>
<br>
‘Illegitimate debt’ is another valid reason that can strengthen
Pakistan’s case for refusing to pay back the loans. Such loans are
got for development projects that are not beneficial for the
masses at large.<br>
<br>
The Norwegian government canceled “illegitimate debt” of five
countries in 2006.<br>
<br>
The Norwegian government proposed to cancel $80 million in debt
owed by five developing countries in acknowledgement that the debt
was “extended irresponsibly and without due regard for the
developmental needs of the recipient countries”. The countries
include Egypt, Ecuador, Peru, Jamaica and Sierra Leone.<br>
<br>
Pakistan’s arguments for getting its loans written off is more
moral than legal: Pakistan has been in a constant state of war
since 1979. It fought for more than ten years against the USSR
directly or indirectly. Pakistan was the closest ally to America
in all those years. This war directly affected the country not
only within its boundaries but also at international forums.<br>
<br>
Since of 9/11, Pakistan is once again in turmoil and has now
become the frontline state in the war against terrorism. We are
now fighting a battle not only on our borders, but also within our
territory. The Pakistan Army is fighting a deadly war not only in
the Tribal Areas but also out on the streets and the forces have
to keep the collateral damage to the minimum level.<br>
<br>
The economy has faced major set backs as the exports and foreign
investment both have decreased to the minimum level in the last
five years.<br>
<br>
The government is spending a lot of money on the war and faced
internal migration of thousands of people.<br>
<br>
Keeping this situation in mind, it is justified for the
calamity-hit Pakistan to get all its loans written off not only by
the international financial institutions, but also from the comity
of nations</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Abdul Khaliq<br>
focal person<br>
CADTM-Pakistan<br>
cell: +92 42 3219402325<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>