Tuesday, July 3, 2007
"To what extent should rich nations help poorer nations?Discuss." Regarding this issue, firstly we must define what do we mean by 'rich' and 'poor' as it is quite a vague term. There are many ways to group countries into the category of rich and poor. The most direct way is of course through the gross domestic product(GDP) or gross national product(GNP) of the nation. However, it is still not that accurate as it only covers the economic welfare of the locals but not the social welfare. We still have to take in account the life expectancy of the nation, the population growth rate, the percentage of agriculutre, industry and services, the birth and death rates, the annual population growth rate, the infant mortality rate, how much resources are available and to what extent are they being utilised and the literacy level. All these factors contribute to defining whether a nation is rich, poor or whether it is a third world or first world nation. However, to simplify things, we assume that a richer nation will have a higher GDP.
I feel that richer nations should extent their help to the poorer nations. There are several ways in which a rich nation can help a poorer nation, in terms of political, economic, environment and social. Some social issues include fights among the races in the countries, health, education and employment problems. When fights among races broke out, the poor nation might not have enough military power or resources to be deployed to stop the rioting. Hence, the rich nation, with a stable military arm force can provide help to the poorer nation by sending their troops to stop the riots. Naturally, this must be done with approval from the other nation. In the outbreak of an epidemic in a nation, the rich countries should provide help to the poorer naitons which might not have the necessary medical equipments and knowledge to minimise the casualties. By providing the country with the necessary knowledge and steps to be taken, it prevents the epidemic from spreading more widely to other countries. Thus, it will prevent an outbreak of worldwide epidemic.
There are benefits to the nation who provided the help. When the rich nation provide help to the poorer country to curb the environmental problems, in one way, it also benefits both parties. For example, Singapore helped Indonesia regarding the issue of forest fires. It minimised the haze problems in Singapore thus solving some of the social problems that the haze had caused such as health problems. It also solved problems like pollution which caused a decline in the tourism industry which is a major sector in Singapore. Thus, it can also solved economic problems in another way. On a larger scale, Singapore lending a helping hand to Indonesia can help in protecting the environment. Thus it not only benefitted the two countries but the whole world. Thus, when help is lent to the poorer countries, solution to many problems is achieved, benefitting both parties.
When a rich nation help a poorer nation, it might be because it wanted to build up friendly relations with its neighbours. It is especially important when the country is vulnerable to attacks. For example, Singapore has provided a lot of resources to Indonesia during the tsunami. The reason might be due to the fact that Indonesia is an Islamic country and since Singapore is mostly surrounded by large numbers of muslims population, the idea of maintaing friendly ties with them is important. One way to do so is providing help to them in times of need.
Therefore, I feel that rich nations should help poorer nations.
junnn05 stepped on your garbage at