The Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative is the largest multilateral effort aimed at providing debt relief. In this essay, we address the question of whether this program is consistent with a view of justice commonly known as liberal egalitarianism. We argue that the HIPC initiative violates two basic liberal egalitarian principles. More generally, we show why the debate on debt relief must move beyond a discussion of whether or not countries should be held responsible for their sovereign debt. We urge a more careful and broader classification of which of the factors affecting a country's situation it should be held responsible for and which it should not. While there are good arguments for sometimes not holding poor countries responsible for their sovereign debt, it is hard to see why the same arguments should not also apply to many other factors that affect a country's net disposable income.
To read or purchase the full text of this article, click here.
More in this issue
Spring 2007 (21.1) • Feature
Introduction: The Players and the Game of Sovereign Debt
This essay characterizes the main actors and how they operate during a buildup of government foreign debt.
Spring 2007 (21.1) • Feature
The Due Diligence Model: A New Approach to the Problem of Odious Debts
Odious debts are debts incurred by a government without either popular consent or a legitimate public purpose. There is a debate within academic circles as ...
Spring 2007 (21.1) • Feature
Argentina, the Church, and the Debt
The Argentine debt crisis of 2001–2002 and its aftermath are examined in the light of the moral framework of Catholic social teaching on the debt problems ...