The West's stake in third-world aid; The view from Bonn

The reaction by the third world to Afghanistan has shown that the policy of having zones of influence is bringing the Soviet Union more and more into conflict with the states of the third world. On the other hand, if the West speaks out convincingly for self-determination and equal rights for the countries of the third world, it can be a fair partner for the third world. It would forfeit this opportunity if it tried, in direct similarity to the Soviet policy of having zones of interest, to transfer East-West differences to the third world.

It would also lose its chance if it refused to entertain the legitimate claims of the third world. That would be the case, for example, if it refused to entertain the claim of the Palestinian people to the right of self-determination within the framework of a comprehensive and fair peace solution or it if opposed the overcoming of colonialism and facism in Namibia and South Africa. Finally, the West would also be infringing the principles of fair partnership with the states of the third world if it allowed itself to be misused as protector of outmoded structures. The development in Central America will be a test case. . . .

The pursuit of a long-term policy by the West implies that we do not attempt to export our own political, social, and economic system to the third world. It calls instead for our respect and affirmation of an independent line of policy by the third world. Apart from securing and developing external independence, the determining force in the third world of today is preservation of identity or , above all in Africa, the search for identity. Strenghtening the independence of the third world also means making a contribution towards ensuring a peaceful solution of the conflicts in the third world by means of negotiations.

A future system of world peace and of cooperation based on equal rights presupposes that we see the development of third world countries as a task of concern to us. Our peace and prosperity depend on whether or not we succeed in overcoming hunger in the third world and in achieving development based on stability.

All strata of the population must be incorporated in the development process so as to overcome absolute poverty and destitution.

Similar to public aid for the poorer developing countries, it is of prime importance for the more advanced developing countries that the industrialized countries should open their markets to them. In 1979, the export of industrial goods from non-OPEC developing countries was worth almost as much as the export of commodities (i.e. excluding oil). This means that the industrialized countries' monopoly in exporting industrial goods is drawin to a close. Whether or not we welcome this development, cooperation between North and South will in the final analysis stand or fall on it. If we were to close our markets to third- world industrial exports and refuse to promote the change in the traditional structure of trade under which the developing countries supplied commodities and the industrialized countries supplied finished products, that would simply mean refusing to promote the development of the third world.

We must make sure that the economy and society in the developing countries are not divided into two sectors: a modern sector marked by economy growth, and a traditional sector in which everything stays as it always has been, i.e., a situation marked by hunger and destitution.

A central element of such a balanced development strategy in most countries will have to be priority promotion for agriculture: promotion of modern farming which produces large increases in productivity by labor-intensive methods rather than by machines. Only such decisive encouragement of farming will enable us to resolve the looming nutritional problems in many of the developing countries.

We are for overcoming North-South differences out of our moral responsibility and our responsibility for world peace, and we are against neglect or economic domination of the third world and the concomitant rejection of moral and political responsibility.

We are for creating through dialogue and negotiation a pluralistic and peaceful world order based on equal rights and partnership, and we are against ignoring or fighting each other, conserving outmoded structures of domination or creating new structures of domination.