Foreign Relations of the United States, 1977–1980, Volume II, Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs

335. Memorandum Prepared in the Policy Planning Staff¹

Washington, April 1, 1980

MEMORANDUM ON THE UN WATER DECADE FOLLOW-UP

This memorandum

—reports what went on at the Water Decade follow-up meeting convened by Mr. Nimetz on 1 April 1980,

—and is to serve as a background report for the N/S Task Force.

An interagency agreement to aim for bilateral U.S. support of the UN Decade on Drinking Water and Sanitation to the extent of $2.5 billion over the 1980’s, subject to certain conditions, has been held in abeyance for more than a year. The funding target was never publicly announced because, after it was agreed to by AID and T and the program content blocked out, the time never seemed ripe to go to OMB for approval of a long-term commitment involving some new money.² Since the budget situation has grown worse, the current question is what emphasis the U.S. should give to the Decade and how that emphasis should be expressed.

Mr. Nimetz called a meeting of the High-Level Group on Follow-Up to the UN Water Decade to review problems, prospects, and positions in light of the complete change of people involved and the current budget situation. Those who attended are listed in Tab A. The agenda is given in Tab B.³

John McDonald, Coordinator for the U.S. follow-up activity, reviewed developments with particular attention to the activities in the UN.

The proposal for a Decade devoted to Drinking Water and Sanitation was the outcome of a UN Water Conference held in Mar del Plata in March of 1977. Planning for fulfilling the U.S. commitment resulted in setting the funding target proposal in 1978 (mentioned above) for which approval has not been sought.

In March 1979, the UN held its first follow-up at which the U.S. proposed:⁴

—A UNGA Special Session in November 1980;

—National plans be developed by member states;

—In-country coordination be handled by the UNDP Resident Representatives;

—A UN Steering Committee be established composed of seven UN agencies who are in some way involved with water (UNDP, IBRD, WHO, UNICEF, UN, ILO, FAO).

These recommendations were agreed to by member states and were later confirmed by ECOSOC, WHO, UNDP, and the UN General Assembly.

The UN agency activities having to do with water, which are not inconsiderable, are given in Tab C.⁵

The 1978 agreement on a $2.5 billion bilateral target by AID over the Decade for rural clean water had four conditions:

—LDCs must contribute their share;

—Other donor countries must put up their share (e.g. 75 percent);

—Good projects must be developed; and

—The expansion of AID funding must be done without crippling other key AID efforts which, in practical terms, meant dependence on new money.

Since the latter condition is unrealistic in today’s financial environment, most of the discussion by the Group centered on:

—What are we doing?—Is it more than the figures show?

—How important is “water” when compared with other priority emphases such as energy, food, health, and population?

—How does the “rural” bias of AID’s efforts affect the shape of the program?

On current support: The discussion made it clear that AID budget figures on water, per se, in the health sector, understate the actual contribution by the United States through other means such as components in AID housing, food, and health programs, or through the World Bank, etc. While rejuggling labels won’t change the fiscal picture into a rosy one, the Group felt that adjustments in program management and coordination could make some difference. AID agreed to the desirability of looking into this. Moreover, it should be possible to demonstrate at the UN and elsewhere that our support was institutional. Mr. Bennet estimated water/sanitation share of AID housing program brought total bilateral AID (including SSA) to some $230 million a year.

On priority: There was agreement that “water” did not rank with energy, food, health, and population as top ranking priorities but that the Decade was a serious enterprise that deserved support. Two elements of previous strategy were questioned (which led to the change of approach from attention to budget to attention to program management):

—The realism of reaching for an unattainable target such as fixed dollar commitments for a decade, or for health for all by 2000, was questioned.

—An approach in which clean water competes with health for funds when the relationship is interactive rather than serial seemed to make no sense.

On rural bias: The group felt that the stipulation in the original agreement was overdone. However urban areas are receiving a disproportionate share of water funds. A few large urban SSA projects account for over half our bilateral aid, and the World Bank in the past lent mainly to urban water and sanitation projects.

The discussion can be summed up as follows: While no one supported announcement of a fixed dollar target, consensus did develop on managing the water programs already under way, which are considerable in extent, in a way which is more directly supportive of the Decade and LDC national interest as it unfolds and which would give evidence of the contribution of the United States. Mr. Bennet indicated he would examine the effectiveness of current AID water activities and their desirable priorities. There was agreement that reaffirmation of support for U.S. participation in the goals of the Decade was necessary and desirable but that the support not be ranked as a top priority issue with Energy, Food, Health, and Population (thus diluting emphasis on these topics), but as a component with important social and economic aspects.

In conclusion, Mr. Nimetz’ call for a memo to be written to Henry Owen and others directly involved to suggest inclusion of the issue in the Summit talks this June (Tab D),⁶ and for the meeting’s deliberations to be written up for Mr. Cooper’s use in the N/S discussions. With respect to the latter McDonald had a number of specific recommendations which were not discussed at this HLG Meeting but which are given as Tab E⁷ as grist for that N/S discussion.

1. Source: National Archives, RG 59, Policy and Planning Staff—Office of the Director, Records of Anthony Lake, 1977–1981, Lot 82D298, Box 7, TL Papers on Specific Mtgs./Appoint. 1980. No classification marking. Drafted by Katcher on April 10. Notations on the first page of the memorandum read: “4/1/80 Draft report of mtg.” In an April 10 memorandum to multiple addressees, attached but not printed, Katcher reiterated that he prepared the memorandum to serve the dual purpose of recording the meeting and providing background for Cooper’s North–South Task Force discussions. (Ibid.)
2. See Document 319.
3. Tabs A and B are attached but not printed. Attendees included Nimetz, Angarola, Bennet, John Bryant, Eckholm, Guy Erb, Katcher, Lake, McDonald, Pickering, Sartorius, and John Sommer (AID).
4. See footnote 3, Document 330.
5. Attached but not printed is an undated paper entitled “What are the key UN Agencies Doing?”
6. Attached but not printed is an April 8 memorandum from Nimetz to Owen, Cooper, and Hormats regarding a possible Venice Summit statement on the UN Water Decade.
7. Attached but not printed is an undated paper containing McDonald’s suggestions.