Is the Responsibility of the International Community to Help Countries Suffering from the Resource Curse?

The resource curse and its international implications are always shocking to me since from an outsider's viewpoint, it is logical that highly profitable resources would benefit a country rather than deter their development. However, as we have discussed in class, a country's possession of oil or another valuable resource tends to have a negative effect on their economy. This can create governmental corruption if the profits tend to go solely to the elites, an unaccountable government since most of their revenue is not based on taxes so they do not have to be responsible to their people, and weak government systems. One of the suggestions in the Ross article is for countries in the international community to become more involved in encouraging resource dependent countries to diversify their trade and to hold their governments accountable. Ideally if a country's trade prospects on the international stage were compromised by a domestically corrupt government, a country would be highly incentivized to manage their resource industries. This, however, is not the case. This proposition calls my attention to the role of the international community in regards to resource industries. Is it the responsibility of the international community to hold these governments accountable?

            One argument for greater international responsibility is the direct or indirect impact of conflict or increased poverty as a result of weakened governments. Governments that are less accountable to their citizens tend to provide few social services and infrastructure which decreases the citizen’s trust in the government. Less trust among the people makes conflict more likely since many will be left in extreme poverty and do not feel they can rely on their government for basic services. As we have discussed in class, this may also be a tactic of corrupt governments since it is easier to distract citizens from the problems of the government if they are fighting one another.

While it can be argued that these conflicts do not affect the international stage, but they can have major implications on international aid efforts, refugee populations fleeing to surrounding countries, and the potential for larger conflicts to arise between nations. Conflicts can also have major implications on international trade. As we are seeing in the Ukraine conflict, Russia’s power over major energy sources is affecting not only Ukraine but also many European countries. Just as the current conflict is creating huge effects, conflicts in resource rich areas like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and others can have impacts on the international markets.

There are many reasons why countries are not interfering with corrupt governments or that there has not been the creation of international standards regarding trade from corrupt nations. The most obvious and widely used is the need to respect a country’s sovereignty and ability to run their government the way they see fit. While this is both reasonable and necessary to avoid conflict, it is used often to justify a country’s actions when the ultimate goal is to obtain greater economic gains. In my opinion, the most common reason for noninterference is that other countries, particularly developed countries, want to reap the benefits of the resource being on the global market without worrying about how it is affecting the people of the country or taking human rights issues into account. This can be seen in the current crisis in Ukraine. Due to Russia’s control over energy sources, many countries in Europe are being affected by the current issue and fear conflict with Russia.

Ultimately, the international system is ruled by trade and economic gains and is usually driven by the needs of developed countries. The internal effects of resource rich countries are rarely taken into account, though with depleting energy sources and many internal conflict creating effects on the international stage, perhaps international organizations will be pushed to create higher human rights and governmental standards from countries high on resources and low on development.