specific circumstances of the country and groups concerned, I would submit that six general considerations and conditions apply. First, while positive measures to include the excluded may be unpopular with the wider population, States should bear in mind that investment in long-term stability is a pre-condition for economic development of the State as a whole. Investors want a stable environment as a guarantee for their interests. Harmonious inter-ethnic relations contribute to making a country more attractive to domestic and foreign investment. This will open up further employment and wealth-creation opportunities, making for more peaceful and stable societies. Aside from moral and legal arguments based on equality and respect, from a pragmatic point of view it is in nobody's interests that whole sectors of the population are economically marginalised. High levels of unemployment mean high levels of non-contribution to the economic viability of the State – and often, as a flip side, high dependency on social security (This in turn can lead to further vilification of already marginalised groups). Second, special measures require the investment of human, political and financial capital to reduce inequality. Such investments will reduce the risks of instability within States and will promote shared economic development. These win-win effects can build confidence and bring increased inter-community understanding. However, these investments cannot come from Governments alone. Partnerships with the private sector are indispensable. The challenge is to find ways to ensure that the allocation of the vast sums of money available from the private sector take account of minority issues. Since companies are primarily focused on profit-making, their support for conflict prevention can probably be best