Focus 580; The Need To Focus On Drinking Water And Sanitation

This morning in this hour of the show we will be talking about what it is that we can do to meet one of the most basic human needs and that is the need for clean water. It's been estimated that something like 1.2 billion people around the world live without access to safe drinking water and something like twice that don't have access to adequate sanitation. And of course that has very important links to either disease or to wellness depending on how it is you want to frame them. This morning we'll try to talk a little bit about the efforts that are being made both by governments and non-governmental organizations to make clean water more available. And our guest for the program is Ambassador John McDonald. He is a lawyer a diplomat a former international civil servant. He spent 20 years of his career in Western Europe and the Middle East. He worked for 16 years on United Nations Economic and social affairs and currently he is the chairman the co-founder of the Institute for multitrack diplomacy which is based in Washington and focuses on national and international

ethnic conflicts. He's here visiting the campus to talk about water and water issues and he is one of the individuals who have come here to take part in a conference going on over several days called Troubled Waters in a globalizing world. Looking at various kinds of water issues and it is jointly sponsored by the various centers on the campus that concentrate on particular parts of the world. Asian studies Latin American studies. Caribbean studies African studies and so forth. And he's been good enough to come and spend a little time with us here this morning and talk and of course as we talk to people who are listening are welcome to join the conversation. The number to call 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. That's the number to use if you're here in Champaign-Urbana where we are. We do also have a toll free line that means it would be a long distance call. Use that number. That is 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5 3 3 3 WRAL and toll free 800 2 2 2.

W1. And in addition to those elements of his biography that I listed briefly because to go on at length would take far too much time. I do I want to mention that Ambassador McDonald is a graduate of the University of Illinois here in Urbana-Champaign has his bachelor's degree and his law degree here from the unified. Well thank you very much for being here. My pleasure David. To begin I think that we should talk about the scope of the of the need or the problem depending on how it is that you define that and indeed that this figure and I know that I came up with it from a publication from your institute that's a staggering number. It's big enough when you talk about over a billion people not having access to clean water but you know when you ask about sanitation and you double that figure that's oh that's we're talking about an awful lot of people. Well that's certainly true but through the United Nations they world has made dramatic progress over the last 20 years in this whole field.

Actually the UN got started in 1900 77 and our first ever World Conference on just water itself which has a very broad based issue of course one of the recommendations that came out of that world conference one of the paragraphs out of the hundred recommendations was to. Launch or create a decade a 10 year period just focusing on drinking water and sanitation. One piece of the rodder global issue but an important piece as you've just indicated. I was at the State Department at that time and I knew that working on United Nations affairs at the U.N. was pretty slow sometimes and so what I was able to do was to pluck out that one paragraph way back in in one hundred seventy eight to see if we couldn't launch that decade which had been agreed upon by the world but it had to be acted upon. And so I spent the next year and a half. With working through various U.N. agencies to

finally get that issue on the global agenda at the United Nations General Assembly in the fall of one thousand eighty I drafted a resolution which would launch the decade and actually was able to achieve that by having the world body adopt this idea by consensus and launch the first U.N. water decade on January the first one hundred eighty one which went on for 10 years. And a fascinating figure at the end of that 10 years which the World Health Organization came up with was that as result of an effort of on the part of hundreds of thousands of people around the world with with a focus on that issue that 1.1 billion people in the world and that 10 year period got access to safe water for the first time in their lives and seven hundred sixty nine million people got access to Senator facilities for the first time in their lives. Well when you think back upon that those are staggering figures of success. And the United Nations is able to

take that issue and really make something of it on a global scale which was very exciting. But then in 1090 at the end of the decade it dropped off the agenda of governments nobody was pushing. And South. So they sort of forgot about it. Now various non-governmental organizations came into being. But it wasn't the same as having governments do it. So as a private citizen and all instead of my little non-governmental organization two years ago I started pressing for a second decade to build on the success of the first decade. There were two world conferences one in New York the millennium conference and one in Johannesburg in 2002 which had specific recommendations for drinking water sanitation to reduce by half the figure that you just said by the year 2015. But having worked on United Nations affairs for many years and knowing that that was not enough I thought maybe we could launch as a private citizen I could launch a second decade.

And that was a very ambitious idea. Again I wrote a resolution to make this happen and then I went to various agencies in the United States government because you need a government to take a leadership role at the U.N. and to put a resolution through. And they said well this is an interesting idea but we're really not that enthusiastic. So they turned it down as an idea and then I went to the Dutch and I went to the British and the French and the Germans Norwegians the Swedes Canadians Japanese all donor governments and they all said Oh that's an interesting idea. But no leadership. So time was running out and so on the 1st of August of last year I thought out of the box and I said I'm going to go to that you can stand. Now my guess is that ninety nine point nine percent of the people in this country don't know where to stand is there anything about it. But it is in Central Asia part of the former Soviet empire and they

have gotten their act together at the United Nations a couple years before and they had pushed through a very fine resolution creating the year 2003 last year as the International Year of fresh water. And that put them on the on the world map. So I went to the ambassador New York and I said You're doing a great job for this year. How would you like to be on the world scene for the next 10 years. Let's take your idea and make it into a second U.N. water decade on drinking water sanitation. What he saw immediately the benefit to his country and to the world and implement those resolutions with the goal of 2015. So he said Great. But then he said you'll have to convince my president. Well I did not know the president of the GQ Stan and I said well I need your help. So I wrote a letter in my resolution and then he forwarded with his approval to the president to GQ

Stan. Well luck was on our side because three weeks later the president opened a regional conference on water issues in his capital into somebody to take a stand. And in his opening speech he proposed a second decade. And the conferees thought it was a great idea and approved that concept but they were not united nations of course. But then he told his ambassador to get to work in the U.N. system you normally have to go through as I had earlier a whole series of meetings and conferences but this one had to be parachuted in at the time because the time was so short because we wanted to move the year into a decade at the end of the year because the momentum was there and he had to continue it. So I said what you should do is put this on the General Committee agenda and have your chief of state make a speech at the United Nations launching the idea and then the head of state has priority and the single

will actually work. So he did that and it worked. And so I said you have to get a hundred and twenty saying injures on your draft resolution before the West will come along if you can get the developing world on board then these countries that I went to. And didn't succeed and by the way don't go near him until you have those hundred twenty signatures and so we work together and I was able through friends and connections to get all of the Latin American voters to sign up and for the by the early mid November he had a hundred twenty signatures. And sure enough the Canadians were the first to sign a hold of the developed nation and the Japanese and then the European Union broke ranks. And so by on December the 23rd of last year 193 nations of the General Assembly unanimously adopted the second resolution. Launching the second UN order decade. So we really is going to start on March 22nd which is World Water Day next year. And I do believe that those figures that you

mentioned will not only be achieved but I think that they will be go beyond that. Well you talked earlier about the just how much was accomplished in these this first right water attack and how much was spent what did it cost to do there. Far less than the World Bank and others expected. And that's a very good very good question. Historically the bank and others project by the tens of billions of dollars went something like this would one actually take. What happened was that we began to think outside of the box again and actually implementation. And my focus has always been on community development and getting particularly the rural poor to buy into these concepts and then to get the political leadership of the country to realize that this is politically to their advantage because of the anger of their people and saying we're providing safe water for you they'll get the votes or they'll get elected or reappointed or whatever. And a lot of political leaders recognize that. But then

you have the practical problem because the West historically has gone into third world countries and said we know what's best for you we're going to put a pump right here without even consulting the village elders about it. And then they do that and then in six months the pump breaks down and the villagers look around for money for spare parts and they can only buy spare parts for foreign exchange for dollars. Well they didn't have any dollars so the well remains nonworking and the thousands of wells around the world who don't which don't work because of lack of foreign exchange. So the new idea was to develop local industry to produce simple pumps cheaply with inexpensive production with local steel local parts and so forth. And this happened in a great way in India for example. Over the 10 year period one and a half million simple problems were developed with local steel local industry and

sold for rupees so that when the pump broke down the villagers could buy those for parts in local currency. In this case in rupees. And in that first decade three hundred and sixty million Indians got access to safe water. Because of that simple pump locally made. So this is what I'm talking about you can be innovative you don't get get stuck on the amount of dollars. What you do is get people involved and concerned and they'll make a difference. You know when you look at where it is that the money came from for the first decade of water where you think that it's going to come from from the next what proportion would come. Do you expect from governments or bodies like the World Bank and how much might come from non-governmental organizations that I would expect would substantially be privately supported. I don't think anybody's put a dollar sign on the on the second decade.

But I do believe the private sector will become much more involved in this upcoming decade than they were in the first decade. You're right that the government and the bank and others did put in money a lot of money in the first decade but also that it was basically within nation states. They put in the most money and local committees put in money. A lot of it in terms of labor to help to do these things that we're talking about. The other thing that we were able to do in the first decade which I hope will continue in the second decade is to involve women in the whole process. As you know though women are the water carriers of the world. You see picture as postcards with a woman carrying a pot on her head of water. Well that's a pretty picture but it's a very hard work. And young kids get involved as well in a very tender age because the men expect the water to be there when they needed and they don't care how it gets there. And it's the women who carry the water. So by involving women first of all

in the decision making process where to put the poem's. And then getting him involved in maintaining a point teaching them how to repair the pump so that is their task. They are the women in these villages with whom pumps are responsible for those pumps and for the water that comes out of them and so they are very proud of their role and they play a major role. And then in their spare time they were already carrying water. People in agencies and others have helped them with new skills how to read how to write how to take care of chickens how to build. But in a small farm so their time is spent constructively. And then there's interest and usually there is. You teach women how to use soap and how to prevent diarrhea from reappearing every day by using soap and having clean water you can reduce health issues dramatically. And at the village level. So it's of multi faceted

project we're talking about which is really very sophisticated when you consider all the things that can be done with a proper will. So involving the community is critical and it's hard to put a dollar sign on that. When you think back to what you told the story of going to trying to go to people at the United Nations. And people who are representing large countries that were in a position to make significant contributions to dealing with the problem. You said to them Well you know we had this decade before of of water. It was very successful. Let's do that again. And you said their reaction was Well you know this is this doesn't excite us very much. And I guess I wonder whether you think that was because either they felt that there were other things that were more important that were preoccupying them or that something as simple and low tech as providing clean water just

doesn't grab people's attention and unfortunately I think in international development often that's been the story the the most basic the simplest things. People seem to want to bypass that for things that are actually far more complicated and perhaps far more expensive. No I actually I think you're right on both counts. I think there was the negativism on both of those issues and that which is a very a very good point. I tried. I created my own non-governmental organization in 1980 to go global water in the global war orgy is as our Web page. And we've I'm still chairman of the board we it's a small scale operation we try to help people in rural areas in various parts of the world we have the funds for it. I lobbied for several years in the US Congress to try to get them interested in the mid-eighties in water as an issue. I could not get anybody to get interested not even hold a hearing.

Now they were interested in bread and bread for the world became a very popular thing. But they couldn't get around the water and I keep telling them you know you can live longer with water than you can with bread. I couldn't make that shift and now just now. Actually I'm in touch with several congressman who have made speeches on the floor of the House on these various issues. And I do believe that the time is changing. I believe that the US Congress is going to get even more involved in the next few years and they have been in the past because this is as you say a fundamental issue that has to be focused on by. The number one superpower in the world. We have to acknowledge the need to see if we can be helpful. Perhaps I should introduce Again our guest for this hour as we're getting close to our midpoint. Ambassador John McDonald he is a lawyer a diplomat a former international civil servant. He spent 20 years in Western Europe in the Middle East and

worked for 16 years on United Nations Economic and social affairs and currently he is the chairman and co-founder of the Institute for multitrack diplomacy in Washington where they focus on national and international ethnic conflicts and this particular issue that he has water and access to clean water as you have heard is something that he's been interested in and working on for quite a while. He's here on the campus to take part in a conference over several days looking at global water issues. Questions are welcome. 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 toll free 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5. Perhaps I might ask perhaps again maybe the answer here is obvious but why it is that of the many things that you might have chosen yourself to focus on in your efforts both in government and non-government organizations. Why water was the thing that you chose. I guess it's because i'm people oriented and I believe that you have to

start with development there and here was an opportunity with this 977 resolution which was being ignored. I thought well why not see if we can make a difference. And it seems to work. Interesting note on a conference that them attending right now it's called Troubled Waters. And my comments earlier today at the meeting I suggested at the end. That they should train change the word troubled waters to peaceful waters because I believe that that conflict is happening now. But then we want to ensure that violent conflict does not ensue. And so I would like to make those peaceful were actually co-sponsoring a meeting in ACC at Columbia University next April on water and peace which I think is something that one has to consider. I believe that the people who are working in water issues today across the board all all are always working in the conflict

areas. Someone is already always disagreeing with them. The key is to keep it nonviolent. And I believe that this can be done in the field of water and sanitation because the professional base around the world of skilled people is enormous. Every country has to face this problem and they are doing it basically quite well. But they are also whether they realize it or not our informal negotiators dealing with with conflict on a daily basis. And so I'm optimistic that wars will not break out over scarcity of war issues because the people who are managing the water won't be able to negotiate at a professional level to ensure this does not happen. Well there you point to any issue that has been raised. Certainly we know that wars have always been fought over control of natural resources. But there are some people who have said they they think in the future that conflict over water access to water and control of water that there will be

significant that you seem to be saying that. Your take on it a little bit different in the sense that you think that there are enough there enough people who understand how important it is who are willing to work together so that you don't think that that's going to hell I say there will be conflict. But I say they will not be violent conflicts. There will be disagreements where dialogue and interaction negotiation mediation will take place and must take place but that it can be done peacefully. And that's my goal. For example in a few years ago Turkey decided to build a dam on the Tigris River Haiti's River which went through Syria. And the Syrians got very upset about this and they almost went to war over that issue. But professionals both engineers and diplomats got together and were able to negotiate an agreement. This is what I'm saying that there certainly is great potential for conflict and there will be conflicts but I don't think they'll be violent. You can look at the Nile River Basin which is four or five countries have

negotiated many years over disagreements on this where they've never gone to war the same as with the Nile and in the Danube. And Mekong and the. And the Far East. And over the Indus waters and in Egypt and they've always been able to bring about a peaceful solution. So I mean as you can tell by this time I'm an optimist. I think that you have to look to look at that from an optimistic point of view. You talked earlier in the earlier example about something as simple as having working pumps to supply wells in small villages and then that is a relatively low tech kind of thing. That's correct. Do you. Are you at all interested in industrial pollution of water sources and and how that may well be an issue is an issue particularly in the developing world. Well it certainly is an issue we have not tackled that ourselves but the

whole problem of cleaning up the lakes and rivers. Even though I live in Washington D.C. and the Chesapeake Bay as a as a major bone of contention because it crosses many states and environmentalists and government people are always at odds with each other about what has to be done and how much money should be spent. But that's because pesticides and industrial waste flow into the Chesapeake and are not controlled at the source officially in the eyes of the environmentalists So there's a constant give and take there's constant tension. But there's never been actually overt conflict and that's where I draw the line but you raise a very important point because this is happening all over the world and it's a constant struggle between those who want to keep the wars clean or cleaner. And they are and those who are helping to pollute. We have I think someone who want to join the conversation here others welcome the number in Champaign-Urbana on 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 we do also have a

toll free line that's good anywhere that you can hear us. Eight hundred to 2 2 9 4 5 5 the caller is in Charleston. Not too far away. Line number four. Hello. Hello. Yes I'm good. Shifting topic this morning I guess I don't feel as optimistic as your guest about the United States and willing to cooperate with any international effort to maintain clean water clean air clean environment. And as someone who has long time international experience I wonder if you could speak to where you think our current administration that is in the take these type of efforts. I agree I have a baby that's occurring in the background. I'll have to hang up at her. I just would like to hear your comments on where you think things are really going to go in the next four years I mean our administration has shown no willingness to cooperate with the United Nations and has withdrawn from you know the Kyoto Accord and for example so I'm going to hang up and I'd like you to speak to to those issues.

Right. All right well thank you for the call. Well as you heard me say earlier I am an optimist on the Kyoto accords for example just the other day the Russians signed the accords and they are now going into effect and for some years and nobody thought that would happen so change can come about. I have actually met with two assistant secretaries of state about the idea of a second to war decade starting next March. And both of them are enthusiastic supporters of the idea and acknowledge that the present structure of the U.N. is not adequate and so we're trying to work out a way to strengthen that structure so that it will be come more effective. But as far as I am concerned there has been important interest on the part of some key figures in the president's ration in making this second U.N. water decade a major success.

We have someone else this caller is in Gibson sitting on a line number one. Hello. Yes hello. Yeah I'm very interested in this because I been August-September I spent the month of the West Bank and with a peace group and we also work with Israeli peace groups and one of the things we did in the West Bank was. We went out to the cells Hebron hills to help the farmers there get water because they could not get it for fear of being beaten up and chased away by settlers or even this rift really began for so I guess it's just really old much of my life to what's going on and I guess I wonder if you have any suggestions we a citizen thing United States. Well I guess I'm some sort of Israel because I know about it I know there's other places but you know how do we go about educating people in our and our government and our world that you know we need

everybody needs water. You know that the basic need I just wonder if you have any ideas you know how we go about doing this. Thank you very much that all hang up and listen. Well thank you for the question. I am familiar with the issue that you just raised in Israel Palestine. Actually if you remember the Oslo Accords a few years ago which were operating for three years and then there were a series of committees and subcommittees coming out of Oslo which were working at the time to this at the moment. The only committee that's really working is the one on water because both all parties realize the very importance of water as you just stated. And so they are cooperating today on a daily basis with regard to water issues. And our U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is one of the people on that committee that they're trying to help in that particular regard. The broader issue

we're trying as you may have heard in my earlier presentation the United Nations has now agreed to a second world decade on water and sanitation which will go into effect in March of next year. And I believe the main focus for that is the very issue you're talking about getting people involved at the grassroots level. This is going to be a major effort. And I do believe it will be a successful one by the year 2015. Once again questions are welcome. Well the number here in Champaign-Urbana 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 toll free 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5. Our guest Ambassador John McDonald. He is the founder Currently chairman co-founder of the Institute for multitrack diplomacy in Washington D.C.. I wonder if I might give you the opportunity to talk a little bit about the idea of multi-track diplomacy. There's something I know you you have written on and what what

is it exactly. Well in 1985 I wrote the first book on what we call track two diplomacy crack one is government to government which is instructed and formal and not very risk taking and interaction between nation states. Track 2 is only non-government as non-governmental organizations everything outside of government. It's more risk taking is more open. It's not instructed and it's designed is to help crack one in particular a difficult conflict situations. My colleague Dr. Louise Lyman and I then wrote a book and one thousand eight hundred ninety nine one called multi-track diplomacy. We expanded this two track idea to 9 tracks track 3 is the business community track for US cultural exchanges like a Fulbright program. Track 5 is what we do education and training. Track 6 is peace activism track 7 is religion. Track 8 is money trying to raise funds because we don't charge for our

services overseas. And then there's an inner circle called Track 9 which is communication which I believe is the heart of what we do because we take what we call a systems approach to peace. We say the No.1 track including track one or government has all the answers and they cannot build a peace process by themselves. The only way to build a peace process at a work is to bring all of these communities together. Have them work together to bring about change. So that's basically what we're about. I think it's a very very interesting idea and something that I think people perhaps don't often understand is how the contribution that can be made particularly by non-governmental organizations and any opportunity that people have for some people person to person contact that you can do things with those kinds of contacts that governments simply cannot do. And I think that we don't often enough

acknowledge just how important non-governmental organizations and contacts are out in the world and how much work how much good work. Conflict Prevention peace work development work so forth are done by organizations like that. Well I found a long time ago that the only way to solve a conflict and this is at any level of society with your kids or your family or all the way up to globally is to sit down face to face and talk about it. You can't do that first step. You're not going to get anywhere. We started working in divided Cyprus of the Muslims in the north the Christians in the south. Back in 1900 too it took us 15 months working separately with the Muslims in the north and the Christians of the South to bring six people together from each side face to face just to talk about their problems. And they bonded with an hour because they trusted us which is critical. And they had the skills to understand the problems

and we made them our steering committee and they've been working with us for many years. So it's that face to face interaction that is critical to success in this regard. My most recent example of this just took place last month and it took place in cotland do Nepal. It only took four years to put this together and to build trust. But we brought 10 people from Kashmir and blighted province 10 people from Pakistan Kashmir together with 10 people from India in Kashmir. The first meeting in fifty seven years before. Till when they were divided and it was incredible No either side thought the other side would show up. They were so suspicious of the other. We were fortunate to have eight women out of the 20 people and for me the women are the peace builders. There was a lot of tension and animosity stereotyping them they first met. But we were in

a nice lodge about an hour outside of Kabul and doing me. You couldn't go anywhere. So they had to work and eat meals together. At the end of that first evening after dinner just one little story to tell you one of the men from Pakistan Kashmir was very angry and with his counterparts and because his sister was living in a town of Jammu which is in Indian Pakistan and he had been able to connect with her a contact over there for decades. One of the women in the Indian group lived in Jehmu And so she said Oh tell me about where your sister lives. And he gave her the address. She said well I live only 10 minutes from there. Let me take a letter from you and some pictures of us together and I will give them to your sister when I get back. Well that kind of dramatic interpersonal breakthrough happen every day and that's what you're trying to do you're trying to break down barriers by people interacting with each other.

That's what our goal is something else that I think is is very striking is it seems that some of the places where non-governmental organizations are most needed and most useful are also some of the most dangerous places there are. And I think that we have seen examples of in fact people who were from non-governmental organizations working in places where they were trying to do relief and development work to assist people there deliberately targeted by by combatants in those places we've certainly seen it in Iraq and I'm sure that it has happened other places and the sad ultimate result is that then the leaders of these organizations decided simply too dangerous to have their people there and that they and they pull them out. Right. Well I tell you we have a fundamental. Concept of the Bigart of that issue and we only go where we are

invited by the people in the conflict not by governments. We're not going imposed by governments on situations but when we are invited by people it means that they have now decided that they would like to come together and learn some new skills and make a first step in a peace building process. So we don't go to Burma for example because we don't get invited there by the people in the conflict because they know that they invite us that we might be targeted and they might be targeted. So that's our basic premise. When we're invited by people and we'll go wherever we are invited we've been in Liberia in the middle of the civil war there in the mid 90s because people asked us to come and they protected us. Is it. Is it useful then too. Perhaps this is the the essence of diplomacy. To have someone involved in a conflict in trying to mediate a conflict who has no stake in the ultimate outcome or at least is perceived. Your I suppose your job as a

diplomat is to be seen as not having any stake in the outcome and therefore not having any sort of bias to one side. Recht Now we try to try to be neutral in every sense of the word. There's something else we should realize is that we don't negotiate agreements because that's what governments are supposed to do. What we do is work with key people community leaders provide them with skills with new ideas new approaches and then they in their own language in their own time frame can bring these ideas to the attention of the track one negotiators and that. So we step back we never cross the line between track two and track one. If we did we'd be kicked out of the country by Drac one. So it's a very interesting process and it's a slow process. You have to be patient. It takes time and energy and a little money of course. Well are there. Can you point to other examples where the track where contacts are made on track to

have. Pushed governments to then work track one where they otherwise would not have a sort of a bottom up kind of night diplomacy. Yes I believe we can we have several examples we could say that about Cyprus where we worked for some eight years. We've done that in Liberia and the present Government four of the private citizens that we work with in the mid 90s are now members of the cabinet and we are in still in touch with each other so they can bring the skills that they have learned in the past into the future. Sometimes over a long period of time but they don't forget them and they become more effective as a result of that. We have about 10 minutes left and perhaps I should introduce Again our guest for anyone who might have just tuned in. Investor John McDonald is a lawyer a diplomat a former international civil servant. He spent 20 years of his career working in Western

Europe and the Middle East also worked for 16 years on United Nations Economic and social affairs and currently is the chairman the co-founder of the Institute for multitrack diplomacy in Washington D.C. which among other things is interested in national and international ethnic conflicts and working on those sorts of things. He's here visiting the campus to take part in a symposium looking at global water issues. It's titled troubled waters in a globalizing world that's now going on and the beginning of the program we started to talk about water which is one of the issues that he is particularly interested in and has been working on for some time. We do have some callers here to bring into the conversation. Again 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 4 Champaign-Urbana toll free 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5 and we do have a caller here in Urbana. The line number one. Well you know I was wondering. About the third track how that impinges on the first track

business how that pins is government to government interaction. I understand that all right. I think I understand that the top three conglomerates that are involved in the water are French defend the Suez. And I think it's to get a shower or something like that. And and that's they control 70 percent of the existing world of our world water market. And I'm just curious is that is that affecting our relations with France to your knowledge. And then number two I was wondering about the NAF and if that is going to make Canada sell its water to watch whether they like it or not.

Well can you respond. Well this is several questions actually. I would like to say that the track 3 which is the role of business and conflict is a very important arena because up until quite recently major businesses have not realized the relationship between their involvement and the whole concept of peace building. My discussion with them is that for example in the in Kashmir and I may give you an example in India in Pakistan or in 1908 there were a hundred thousand tourists going to Kashmir a few months later it was Iraq and it continued to be zero in for for many years. You can imagine the impact on the economics of that community. We were able to bring business leaders together. Within India and then within Pakistan. To focus on the role that they can play behind the scenes informally and

helping governments the search for solutions in the some continent in three power bases there is government as military and as business and historically business didn't really interact with the other two. But now they are and they're beginning to realize that if they could reduce fear in Kashmir for example so the tourist would go back there they could have a major impact on their own business for investment or reinvestment. So they have a role to play but they're not that focused on this yet because it's a learning curve for them. With regard to the major water bottled water producers I think have a very good point and that's one of the issues that's being discussed at this very conference. They have a key role to play or they are playing it in a multibillion dollar business. But then my own philosophy I believe that water is a is a human right and that the water should be accessible to everyone. This bottled water issue I think has grown dramatically in the last decade because

of general fear that the tap water is is not good as in many parts of the world. So what we're trying to do on the global scale through this second one water decade is to get people to buy into the concept of safe water which would come. So we say from the skies and not from a bottle. So that's our goal at the moment. Well do you do you think though that there might in the future be increasing tension between people who are interested in a water for commercial use. And to those people who are simply interested in and the access to water for example yesterday we had a guest here from India who was here to take part in this conference and she said you know one of the ironies in India is that increasingly. Big users of water happen to be the people who produce Pepsi and Coke and she said you know there are villages where people don't have access to clean water but they can go out and buy a Coke. It's great and that you know there's there may always be some tension between

commercial interests and those people who say access to clean water is a basic human right and that that's something that we need to preserve and work toward. Well I totally agree and it is an example of concern that are are a question to raise in the country of Bolivia recently one of the major corporations in effect took over the provision of water for a whole city. And you can only get bottled water. And finally the people rose up in anger and the peacefully demonstrated and got the the city to change the rules in the country to change the rules so it is a it's a very important issue. I believe in one we have to look at it very carefully. It could get out of hand is what I'm saying. We were getting pretty short on time here. There is one more caller I'd like to try to get to I hope the last caller will forgive me if I go on to Oakwood and color here on our line for Hello.

Yes wonderful program. I just wonder you said it was a multi-day track diplomacy isn't what the term was. That's correct as the Institute for multitrack diplomacy you might check our web pages. I m t d not o r n g and we have some documentation there on the second water decade that might be of interest and we also talk about our ethnic conflict programs. Okeydokey whom I will check it out just to kind of the last question here. Given what seems to be a trend any more disturbing kind of towards. I don't know maybe isolation are harder. Unilateral action that we want to take around the world. How much of an impediment in a concern is it to to that mode I track business. I'm just a factory worker we sit around a bridge table as of course any topics open for discussion and so many times you hear the one guy Stern they've been fighting for thousands of years let him fight. You know

that kind of attitude and I'm just wondering how how do you combat that trend that seems to be going on today. And and what steps you know you take to combat that and what you're doing. Well thank you that's a very excellent question and a very serious one. You're absolutely right I've heard that phrase many times in today's world. There are thirty seven ethnic conflicts in the world which more than a thousand people will be killed this year. Thirty seven. They are all within national boundaries they're all within nation states and the whole concept of national sovereignty. It says if you can go in and help a state without their permission gets involved. So it's a very key issue. And this ethnic conflict has really exploded since the collapse of the Soviet empire. And so we have to deal with this on a regular basis and we do it through

a willingness to go where we are invited to go to try to help people. We were over the last 12 years. In some 15 countries in Israel in Palestine in Bosnia and Cyprus and seven or eight countries in Africa. In Israel policy in India Pakistan and Nepal Kashmir treelike and in the Caucasus in the country of Georgia we have been invited in each of those conflicts to try to bring about not a resolution but starting a first step toward recognition of the enemy were that enemy is is also a human being and has the same hopes for the future that you have. And once you can establish that then you can start communicating and build a peace process. There is a recent trend and how it might be perceived around the world. Does that become greater.

What you're trying to do is I would say yes because what we're finding realistically is it is hard to raise money today than it was before 9/11 to do these kinds of things. So it is difficult. Thank you very much. Thanks thank you. I think the criticism has been made that if the United States and its a lack of involvement particularly when it comes to things like international development and how little we provide in terms of aid for that effort at Having said that though I think that criticism has been dismissed long as I can remember and I'm not sure do you. Is it in fact any if if one thinks that that is a problem. Is it any big is it any bigger problem now than it has ever been. Well let me put that into some perspective. In money terms I was involved in the post war Europe in the Marshall Plan. We lived in Europe for eight years and was in Paris for two and a half years in the early days of the Marshall Plan in 1950 to the United States people provided three point to five percent of our

gross national product three point to five percent of our GNP to rebuild Western Europe and Japan. And that's a staggering figure. We were at the top of the list for the world. Today we're at the bottom of the list of the developed world. We are at point 1 5 percent. Point 1 5 percent of our GNP to development assistance. To me that's that's very sad because we were the world leader for many years. We're not today. Well there we must stop as we are at the end of the time. Our guest John Ambassador John McDonald. He is chairman co-founder of the Institute for multitrack diplomacy and as he said if you have internet access and if you're interested in finding out more about the institute and what they are about you can visit their website. W w w dot I m t d dot o r g and and read about them. Thank you very much for my pleasure.