LD Nov/Dec 2017 - Development Assistance - Affirmative Position

Resolved: Wealthy nations have an obligation to provide development assistance to other nations.

Affirmative Position

If you have not already done, so, I suggest reading the Introduction first, as limited as it may be. In that post I mentioned two different approaches to establishing a framework. In my opinion, the best approach to case construction, is to begin with topic research. Collect your evidence, formulate contentions, and then think about values (V) and their associated criterion (VC). The V/VC must be intimately linked and the contentions must in turn be linked to the VC (and by extension the V). The criterion one chooses for this topic may lend itself toward a kind of cost-benefit analysis in which the judge may weigh the comparative advantages and disadvantages in terms of dollars and cents, lives saved, or other numerical measures. It is equally as possible, the criterion may lend itself to a more philosophical analysis in which the debaters are inclined to discuss the utilitarian or deontological (theories of morality) principles which mandate "right" behavior. It is also reasonable to expect that some debaters will construct a blended framework which presents a pragmatic cost/benefit analysis which links to a deontological framework. Note, there is no use of the word "ought" in this resolution. While this is not typical of LD resolutions, it should not be a problem. Ought is often defined as a substitute for duty or 'obligation' and this resolution specifies an obligation for wealthy nations.

For this analysis, I choose to concentrate on a legal and philosophical framework. Debaters may look at these ideas individually or together much like the blended Affirmative discussed above. If laws already exist which mandate wealthy nations should provide development assistance, then nations have an obligation to conform to the law, at least in principle.

This topic links to a multitude of issues and advantages, some of which will be developed in this post. Development or lack thereof, has implication on health, various aspects women's and children's rights and human rights in general, the environment, terrorism and/or nuclear proliferation, hegemony, democratization (democratic peace theory) and so much more.

It is important for the Affirmative debater to understand, the resolution you will be advocating states that wealthy nations have an obligation to provide development assistance. Providing assistance is not intended to be a voluntary action which some nations may choose not to do provided they have sufficient capacity to give assistance.

Why Development?

It is a given, that many countries face devastating disasters from time to time; both made-made such as conflict, and natural disasters. These often result in world-wide calls for humanitarian aid and most of the time the world responds. But for other nations, the needs for humanitarian relief are intractable, brought about not due to some external disaster but rather internal conditions arising more often than not from crushing poverty. It is said that poverty kills more people than all wars combined and indeed, the U.N. and other organizations have made its eradication an ongoing goal. There is an old adage, "give a person a fish and she will eat for a day; teach her to fish and she will eat for a lifetime". This illustrates the difference between humanitarian and development aid. The first is temporary, the second is sustaining. To alleviate the disaster that is poverty, we must provide those affected with the items they require for self-sustainability, otherwise we are doling out fish one at a time.

Goldin, et al

Understanding of economic growth and its causes has improved. We now understand that creating an investment climate that sustains growth requires progress in a number of areas: macroeconomic stability and trade openness; governance and institutions (including a good education system, an effective legal and judicial system, a professional bureaucracy, a strong and well-regulated financial sector, and vigorous competition); and adequate infrastructure. This improved understanding does not mean that all growth challenges have been solved. One major issue is the appropriate sequencing and selection of policy and institutional reforms. No poor country has the capacity to move forward with equal vigor on all these fronts at once, so it will be important for the country, with external support, to focus on identifying and grappling with the main obstacles to growth. A second challenge is consistency: many countries manage to achieve growth spurts of several years, but find it very difficult to achieve the two or three decades of consistent growth necessary for sustained poverty reduction. Poverty reduction depends heavily on sustained economic growth. On average across countries, income distribution does not worsen during periods of economic growth, so that on average the incomes of poor people rise at a similar rate to those of wealthier people. Countries that grew rapidly in the 1990s—such as China, India, Vietnam, and Uganda—managed to reduce the share of their people in absolute poverty by 5 to 8 percent per year.[vi-vii]

Empirical evidence shows that development is a means to reduce poverty which in turn alleviates the harms associated with a continuous state of poverty. We also see that sustainable growth is achieved through development not only of infrastructure, but institutions as well and indeed it is the latter which put in place, the political and legal structures necessary to ensure legitimate governance. In short, true development is the cure for the despot.

The Development Right

We establish first, that development is a right and there is a legal framework already in place which obliges nations to provide assistance. The United Nations (UN) over the decades has provided a platform for establishing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which focuses upon the rights of individuals. The UDHR claims individuals regardless of where they live, regardless of their condition, are entitled to basic human rights, like the right to work, to travel, and the basic necessities needed to sustain life, and so much more. A key element in the UDHR is the support for human dignity. Much of the declaration is aimed at agreement humans ought not be exploited, abused, or denied basic liberties without some form of due process. 

Fitzgerald 1997:

Traditionally, international law has been concerned with the international rights and duties of states, however ‘one of the most significant advances of international law has been the development of rules and principles governing the rights and obligations of individuals’- and in particular the rules of international law offering protection to individuals under the law of human rights. This represents a significant departure from the positivist approach to international law based on custom and treaty, and ‘in practice, the bulk of human rights law operates to prevent the state from causing ‘harm’ to its own nationals. This does not mean merely physical injury, but can encompass economic, social, legal or intellectual harassment’. The source, of course, is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948. The effectiveness of these rights depends on the existence of mechanisms for implementation, which at present is mainly limited to ‘first generation’ civil and political rights that form the core of most human rights treaty regimes. [12]

Most of the U.N. member nations agreed to the abide by the UDHR. The UDHR is not a treaty, rather it is a framework which serves a mechanism for determining binding treaties and resolutions are respectful of human rights. With that structure in place, the U.N. and its member states have agreed to a number of resolutions which have laid the obligatory groundwork for development assistance.

Marauhn & Stegmiller 2016

The UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (IESCR) prima facie is the most appropriate instrument to provide a legal framework for development action. In terms of substance, Articles 6-15 of the Covenant include specific provisions on the right to work, the right to just and fair working conditions, the right to form and join labour unions, the right to social security, recognition of family, maternal, and children’s rights, the right to an adequate standard of living (including the right to food and to water), and the rights to clothing and housing, the right to health, the right to education, and the right to participate in cultural life and enjoy the benefits of scientific progress including the protection of intellectual property. These rights are made operative by a particular set of obligations imposed upon States parties to the Covenant.[6-7]

Nations which sign-on to these resolutions are agreeing to the foundational principles which collectively establish a right to development. The signatories agree to cooperate with one another on the array of actions which will promote development assistance.

Yakubovska 2012

All the above allows to suggest that there are not only international treaty norms, but also international customary norms that oblige states to cooperate for development. The latter were established both by practice of development assistance and states« willingness to adopt resolutions (primarily within UN General Assembly), which prove and clarify the content of customary norms.
Thus, the main international legal instruments, ranging from the UN Charter to international customary law, imply the obligation of states to cooperate with each other for the achievement of development. So, the answer to the question put at the beginning of the article is positive — international development cooperation is not only moral duty, but a legal obligation of all states.[279]

Thus we establish, through instruments agreed among nations within the body of the United Nations, there is a legal obligation to provide development assistance.

The Moral Duty

The eradication of poverty and the conditions which sustain it are viewed as a rational act in support of maximizing the well-being of humankind. When we look past the politics and economic conditions which allow sustained poverty, we consider the obligations of humans to aid one another.

Morris 2005:

A simple and strictly moral construction concerning the ethics of developing country aid is advanced by Singer in his Famine, Affluence, and Morality (1972). The author bases his discussion on three basic premises. First, one must accept a definitional principle that human suffering and death from “lack of food, shelter, and medical care” is bad. Next, he considers a case in which one is able to prevent this suffering and death. Since this suffering and death is bad, according to Singer (1972), a person is thus morally obligated if able to prevent this human suffering and death. When framed in view of the moral bad outlined here, therefore, an imperative personal moral obligation becomes apparent for those in developed countries to aid those who are suffering and dying in developing countries.[2]

Some international organizations such as the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) have attempted to justify its actions on various moral constructs to limited success. The DAC moral framework has been evolving in conjunction with the ever-refining nature of the UDHR and international agreements. Nevertheless, the moral duty for action is more properly rooted within the respect of one human being to another. Organizations and governments may then serve as the moral agency for action.

Fitzgerald 1997:

The ethical or moral basis for aid, despite the apparent status of the first ‘DAC motivations’ quoted above as a ‘moral imperative’, is not unambiguous. The argument for aid on grounds of humanity derives from the obligation to relieve human suffering when this can be done at little personal cost, which is a universal obligation in relation to all humans simply by virtue of our shared humanity; it is based on the Kantian proposition that the principle of respect for persons is a minimal condition for moral relations to exist at all. This means that the moral foundations of aid are derived from the ‘obligations of humanity (that) require resources to be transferred to the poor, irrespective of state or national boundaries. These obligations rest on individuals, though they may be satisfied through the agency of the state, and they require wealthy individuals to transfer sufficient resources to provide the poor with the means of survival’. [11]

This obligation need not be driven by any particular religious or organizational ideology but rather an acknowledgement that any human may be afflicted by harms beyond their control. Philosopher John Rawls for example, describes the "original position" as a test for determining which actions or policies should be chosen by individuals and governments in fulfillment of the requirements to act justly. Rawls argued that justice is upheld by a conditional redistribution of wealth which favored the least advantaged.

Mandle 2003

In the international sphere, Rawls is not an economic egalitarian. He does not believe that an inequality in wealth between two countries is even prima facie evidence of injustice. On the other hand, he does hold that wealthy countries have a duty of assistance to assist (many) poor countries – those that he calls “burdened societies.” These are societies that “lack the political and cultural traditions, the human capital and know-how, and, often, the material and technological resources needed to be well-ordered.” Relatively wealthy and well-ordered societies should aim to “help burdened societies to be able to manage their own affairs reasonably and rationally and eventually to become members of the Society of well-ordered Peoples.” Once a burdened society reaches that threshold – what Rawls calls the “target” – further assistance to narrow remaining economic inequalities is not required by justice.

We could make claims that governments or corporations are moral agents and therefore bound to rationalize their actions within the constraints of any number of moral philosophies. Utilitarianism, the principle of the ends justify the means and there is an obligation to maximize thee greatest good for the greatest number is one such theory. Immanuel Kant and his categorical imperative was a major voice for deonotological ethics and the principle individuals must never be a mere means to an end. A philosopher like Rawls and his principle of distributive justice provides one more framework. However, there is no need to claim moral status for states. This resolution can find moral fulfillment in the simple examination of one person's duty to help their fellow human and drive that duty into political action by their respective nations. Finally, the rationale for development assistance may not require any complex moral theory; just common sense.

Barry 1980:

In order to proceed, I shall take it that justice does require international transfers from resource-rich to resource-poor countries, and from countries with high average incomes to those with low average incomes, and then address two issues that arise. The first question is this. It may be recalled that I said earlier that justice, unlike humanity, had institutional and normative presuppositions. Justice as reciprocity entails the existence of an ongoing set of normatively-controlled relationships. One does not advance the cause of justice as reciprocity by conferring benefits that are not, when the relevant time comes, reciprocated in whatever is the appropriate way. [39]

The Advantages

There are a number of advantages arising from development assistance which provide further justification for the Affirmative and these can be easily developed into supporting contentions. I think for the most part. they are self-explanatory so I have decided to simply supply a few cards which I cut while developing this Affirmative position. I will leave it as an exercise for the ambitious debater to expand upon these ideas.

The Health Outcomes Advantage

In the status quo, developing countries lack the needed resources and infrastructure to prevent the ravishes of disease.

Gostin & Archer 2008

While poor countries have by far the greatest ongoing health needs, they also have the least capacity to meet those needs. The least developed countries spend between $1 and $25 per capita per year on health whereas developed nations spend between $1,500 and $5,000. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which compares trends among 30 industrialized countries, shows that the U.S. spends more than $5,000 per capita on health care – greater than 50 percent more than any other country.
In addition to the pervasive and debilitating effects of endemic disease, developing countries are likely to suffer much more from the effects of acute health hazards, ranging from natural disasters (such as the South Asian tsunami) and dislocations (due to civil unrest, violence, and war), to emerging infectious diseases such as highly pathogenic avian Influenza (A) H5N1. The least well-off countries will suffer most in a public health emergency because they do not have the health infrastructures, vaccines, and essential medicines that are available to developed countries. Pandemic influenza plans in most developed countries, for example, rely on stockpiling vaccines and antiviral medications, which are out-of-reach to the developing world. In conditions of extreme scarcity, the countries that are most likely to gain access are those that manufacture medical countermeasures and have the resources to purchase expensive vaccines and medicines.[526]

The Child Rights Advantage

The protection of child rights provides a framework for the justification of development assistance.

Vanderhole 2007:

The CRC Committee (Convention on Rights of the Child) has nevertheless identified specific obligations for donor countries in relation to development cooperation. The recommendations to use the CRC as a framework for development cooperation and to mainstream a child rights perspective in all development programs and projects could easily be considered to flow from an obligation to respect, to protect and possibly to fulfil the rights of children in third countries. Quite remarkably, the Committee has frequently made recommendations on strengthening activities in the area of international cooperation and assistance, and on increasing the budget allocation for development cooperation, which mainly relate to the obligation to fulfil-provide. In justification and support of its recommendations on ODA and a prioritisation of social spending, the Committee has invoked States’ political commitments – such as the ODA target of 0.7 per cent of GDP; the objectives of the Copenhagen 20/20 Initiative; and the recommendations of United Nations organs and specialized agencies.[4]

The Democracy Advantage

Development assistance can be a major factor in promoting good governance based upon democratic ideals.

Finney 1983:

The proponents of Title IX wanted U.S. development assistance to focus on building the kinds of political and social institutions that would enhance economic development and effective self-government. Congressman Donald M. Frazier, who introduced the legislation, asserted that the United States should emphasize economic aid, and "go forward with a massive program of political development activities .... "I Title IX was intended to foster democratic values and to encourage the growth of political power at the local level which would hopefully result in the evolution of democratic, pluralistic societies. Title IX also provided specifically for support of "civic education and training in skills required for effective participation in governmental and political processes essential to self government."[218]

Democratic governments uphold human rights.

Finney 1983:

The United States has traditionally had a strong commitment to human rights. This commitment is embodied in the Foreign Assistance Act in a section which precludes assistance to:

[T]he government of any country which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, including torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, or other flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, and the security of person, unless such assistance will directly benefit the needy people in such country.

This provision reflects one of the fundamental philosophies of our foreign assistance program: to encourage and protect freedom and democracy." Adoption of this human rights policy also expresses Congressional sentiment that the U.S. bilateral assistance program should focus on the elimination of poverty and not support a particular regime. The application of this provision has been the subject of several law review articles and it is one of the provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act which has, at least in the past, achieved major international influence. [238]

The Terrorism Advantage

Terrorism is often inspired by the injustice of wealth disparities.

Morris 2005:

I will define terrorism in the modern world as consisting of unconventional attacks on mostly civilian populations with the aim of damaging the developed countries in which those civilians reside along with their market economy. A key theme in this terrorism is resentment of developed country wealth and a desire to reduce this wealth. This resentment stems not from the wealth itself, but from the fact that developed countries share very little of their wealth with those in need; namely, those in developing countries. These terrorist groups have developed an unshakable hatred of Western religion and ways of life as a result of this historical failure to provide adequate levels of developing country aid. This lack of aid is confirmed by the United Nations when it notes that both the United States and European Union have fallen far short of its recommended amount of developing country aid.
A serious opposition to the affluent lifestyles of the developed world has thus emerged in the form of modern terrorism as a result of this wealth gap. This opposition has manifested itself in terrorist attacks; nearly three thousand deaths have been attributed to such acts since September 11, 2001.10 These deaths can be reduced in the future, however, if a significant increase in developing country aid is realized.[4]

The Values of Development Assistance

Depending on one's approach and based solely on the evidence provided within the Affirmative position, we can isolate a number of defensible values necessary for the Lincoln Douglas framework. We can see governmental legitimacy upheld by the adherence to international law when considering the principles of the UDHR and the various international agreements made through the agency of the U.N. In addition we consider the value of human dignity upheld by minimizing suffering. These are simple, classical LD frameworks. Moreover, the various moral philosophies suggest the value of morality defined as "right or good behavior". Moral actions can be measured by the criteria of the categorical imperative or the so-called veil of ignorance described at length by John Rawls. Finally we look to justice or more precisely justice as fairness which we defend by maximizing benefits to the least advantaged. This is the stuff of classic Lincoln Douglas and thus an excellent way to begin the first part of the season.

For more on this topic or other LD articles select the Lincoln Douglas page tab.


Sources:


Barry, B, The obligation of rich countries and world poverty, accessed 10/12/2017 at: http://www.um.edu.mt/europeanstudies/books/CD_CSP4/pdf/bbarry.pdf

Barry, B (1980), Do Countries Have Moral Obligations?, The Case of World Poverty, THE TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES, Delivered at Harvard University, October 27, 1980, accessed 10/12/2017 at: https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/b/barry81.pdf

Finney, LD (1983), Development Assistance--A Tool of Foreign Policy, 15 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 213 (1983)
Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol15/iss2/3

FitzGerald, EVK (1997) Rethinking development assistance: the implications of social citizenship in a global
economy Working Papers Series QEHWPS01 Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford. Accessed 10/12/2017 at: http://www3.qeh.ox.ac.uk/pdf/qehwp/qehwps01.pdf

Goldin, I ; Rogers, H & Stern, N, 2002. `The Role and Effectiveness of Development Assistance: Lessons from World Bank Experience'. Washington, DC: World Bank, Development Economics Vice Presidency (June). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.13.9695&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Gostin, Lo & Archer, R (2008) The Duty of States to Assist Other States in Need: Ethics, Human Rights, and International Law, accessed 10/12/2017 at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.463.9168&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Marauhn, T & Stegmiller, I (2016), The Obligation to Provide, and the Right to Receive, Development assistance in
Occupied Territories, including in Situations of Prolonged Occupation, 6 November 2016, accessed 10/12/2016 at: https://www.diakonia.se/globalassets/documents/ihl/ihl-resources-center/expert-opinions/the-obligation-to-provide-and-the-right-to-receive-development-assistance-in-occupied-territories-including-in-situations-of-prolonged-occupation.pdf

Morris, GS, (2005), Philosophical Arguments for Increased Aid to Developing Countries, College of Arts & Science, 2005. Accessed 10/12/2017 at: ejournals.library.vanderbilt.edu/index.php/vurj/article/download/2719/1149

Vandenhole, W (2007), Legal Obligation to Cooperate Internationally for Development? Is There a Legal Obligation to Cooperate Internationally for Development?, UNICEF Chair in Children’s Rights, University of Antwerp (Belgium); Center for Transboundary Legal Development, Tilburg University (The Netherlands), 2007, accessed 10/12/2017 at: http://www.crin.org/en/docs/Vandenhole%20International%20Cooperation.pdf

Yakubovska, NO (2012), INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION — MORAL DUTY OR LEGAL OBLIGATION? 2012 LAP Lambert Academic Publishing. Accessed 10/12/2017 at: http://www.naukovipraci.nuoua.od.ua/arhiv/tom12/28.pdf