STATEMENT BY THE MINSTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY

OF THE STATE OF ERITREA

MR. HAILE WELDENSAE

UNCLDC-111
BRUSSELS
14-20 MAY 2001

(Check Against Delivery)

Mr. CHAIRMAN
DISTINGUISHED DELEGATES
LADIES & GENTLEMEN

It gives me distinct pleasure to speak on behalf of my country, Eritrea, which, though very poor, did not have the opportunity to benefit from the two previous Paris conferences for the LDCs. To begin with, my delegation would like to thank the UN General Assembly and various of the other UN agencies who have been concerned enough to take initiative to promote and coordinate international action in support of efforts by the LDCs to enhance their socio-economic growth. In particular, we would like to express our heart-felt gratitude for the admirable work of the Secretary-General of UNCTAD and the Conference Secretariat for their efficient organization of all the preparatory meetings and this final Conference. Let me also thank the European Union (EU) and the other development partners whose financial contributions was instrumental for the effective participation of our country in this historic Conference. Our thanks and appreciation also extend to the resident representatives in our country of both the UNDP and the EU for the invaluable financial and logistical assistance they provided in the preparation of our Program of Action. The people and the Government of Belgium also have our thanks and appreciation for the warm hospitality they have extended to us since our arrival here.

Mr. Chairman

As a country that commenced its nation-hood in mid -1991, Eritrea is new to the UN initiatives for supporting the development efforts of the LDCs. As it has, nevertheless, gone through a decade of efforts to combat underdevelopment and poverty in all their forms, it is in a position to be able to share its experiences.

The beginning was not easy for Eritrea. It had to contend with the task of alleviating poverty from a very unenviable position. It did not have a functioning government institutions, shortage of qualified manpower was very critical, necessary infrastructures were either unavailable or in a deplorable state of despair, and the Government did not have the financial resources to deal with all these problems. While the beginning was difficult, it was, nevertheless, possible to formulate and implement economic and social development policies that enabled fairly encouraging initial recovery. The emergency economic rehabilitation program the country embarked upon in 1993 enabled to jump-start some productive activities. These were followed by policy measures that promoted trade and investment, fiscal and monetary policies that aimed at maintaining macro-economic stability and the mobilization of government revenue. The emergency rehabilitation program also enabled to implement some improvement in physical infrastructures, such as roads, ports and airports, communications, power and water supply facilities.

These measures enabled the economy to pick up and grow at reasonable rates. The average annual rate of economic growth for the period 1992-1997 was 7-8%. Other indicators also registered encouraging improvements. The Human Development Index, for instance, rose from a very low level in 1994 to close to the average for sub-Sahara Africa in 1998.

Despite some improvements made during the last development decade, Eritrea's social indicators continue to portray an unsatisfactory profile of the living condition of its population. The proportion of the population that has no access to basic social services remains high. More than 75% of the population has no access to safe drinking water, access to health services, and sanitation is still below standard, while the illiteracy rate (at 75%) still remains high. Communicable diseases like malaria and TB are still identified as major causes of morbidity and HIV-AIDS is becoming a formidable threat. Infant mortality, although indicating improvement, still remains high.

Other constraints that continue to slow down development include shortage of skilled manpower, inadequate infrastructure, a weak private sector, absence of adequately developed export revenue generating sectors and a narrow domestic revenue base.

Mr. Chairman

Distinguished Delegates

The foregoing poverty sustaining difficulties were compounded in May, 1998 by the sudden and unnecessary border conflict with Ethiopia. The conflict has proved to be a major shock to the economy of the country, causing the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people and the destruction of health, education and communications infrastructures.

Eritrea has now developed a five-year Program of Action that it will try to implement with the help of its development partners. The Program of Action attempts to deal with not only the inherent problems of poverty, but also with the ravages of a recent vicious war that has been unleashed upon it. Part of Eritrea's immediate efforts will focus on resettling and rehabilitating thousands of displaced persons, demobilizing the army and rehabilitating social and economic infrastructures. The Program of Action will also include the following:

• Increase investment in agriculture, mining, manufacturing and small scale industries.
• Ensure community involvement in undertaking rural self-help projects.
• Expand education to reduce adult illiteracy and develop demand driven technical education.
• Improve and expand primary health care programs to reach most of the population.
• Improve institutional, human resource development and economic management capacities.
• Ensure the environmental sustainability and gender sensitivity of all development projects.

There will also be policy initiatives aimed at facilitating the diversification of the economy and liberalizing economic activities. Tax and non-tax measures that support investments and exports will also be in place.

It is, therefore, with great interest and anticipation that Eritrea is embarking on its poverty eradication efforts in the next decade. It is indeed a source of great moral support to know that Eritrea will not be alone in its struggle to eliminate poverty and human degradation. My delegation has been very impressed by the statements of support and commitments expressed by the development partners and the international community. I am very certain that my country will have no difficulty to work harmoniously with the development partners. My delegation fully sympathizes with and accepts the underlying sentiments behind the assertions made in the theme statements for this Conference. But I believe that it is important that no misunderstanding be allowed to develop on interpreting the challenges facing the LDCs.

One of the issues that might be liable to misunderstanding on interpretation is the issue of Governance. Allow me, Mr. Chairman, to provide our perspective on this issue.

Governance, in the last analysis, is having the right economic, social and political policies that ensure accountability, transparency, rule of law, participation and anticorruption measures, and the necessity to build up national consensus on issues of interest to the public. We believe this is a goal that all LDCs should be committed to without reservation and exception. We also believe that mechanisms should be put in place that allow civil societies greater role in monitoring the implementation of policies. For people to participate in the decision-making processes, which affect their lives, good governance is imperative.

We believe the issue of governance in the LDCs must be seen in their own context and be measured as a steady movement from one of obscurity and haziness to one of gradually increasing brightness, transparency and accountability. The criteria cannot and should not be one of black or white or this and that only. Considering the multitude of differing histories, traditions, cultures, political and socio-economic circumstances in the LDCs, stereotyping must be avoided. Even in the developed countries the issue of governance can only correctly be described and portrayed on a continuum scale heading, in the majority of cases, towards the desired norm.

Having said that, I would hasten to add that there should indeed be a common denominator of behavior on human rights and the rule of law to which all LDCs must uphold.

The second theme that might be liable to misinterpretation is the Challenge of "Gaining Ownership over Policy". All the right things have already been said on this issue by both representatives of the LDCs and the development partners. Both have agreed and affirmed that the LDCs should be the rightful owners of their respective policies and programs. Both also have agreed that there should be sufficient consultation and cooperation between the LDCs and the development partners in the formulation of the policies and programs.

But, in spite of the LDCs having painstakingly prepared and submitted their respective national Programs of Action, the development partners are now talking in terms of "deliverables" that has been prepared by them. Do this deliverables really have any relation to the Programs of Action of the LDCs? Should this not be so, the LDCs will not be owners of the policies.

In our view, the attempt to lump the country Programs of Action from all the LDCs into one general category and trying to fashion a uniform poverty eradication development assistance might be self-defeating. Such an attempt would lead to the LDCs implementing programs that do not have direct relevance to their specific situation. Under these circumstances, the assistance from the development partners could be not only peripheral but also superfluous to their specific needs.

It is, therefore, important that the development partners ensure that the support that they provide would really complement the budgetary resources of the LDCs. The support should be able to easily fit into the development plans of the LDCs. Should this not be the case, I am afraid it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to achieve the goals we are setting for ourselves in this August Conference.

Thank you Mr. Chairman

*******