Today Live8 is holding concerts across 9 time zones. As I write, the one in Japan has almost finished, the one in Johannesburg has started, the London one is about to start and the sound checks are starting in the USA. It’s laudable aims are to influence the leaders at the G8 meeting next week to focus on Africa and the world’s other poorest nations to provide a series of measures including increasing aid to the UN target figure of 0.7% of GNI (Gross National Income). I want to propose a greater challenge – to achieve an aid budget to Africa as a whole of zero, that’s right nothing.
If Live8 reinforces the perception of Africa as a impoverished disease-ridden continent whose peoples are waiting for a hand out, they are in danger of committing a greater crime than any of the old colonial powers. Africa has tremendous challenges to face of dealing with AIDS, malaria and a host of other insect borne infections. We do need to offer as much help as we can until these are solved but this is not by shipping in loads of food or giving money for drugs providing the country complies with the agenda of the “born again” Jesus junkies in the US. One of the most obscene boasts Bush made this week was the amount of food aid the USA sends. For food aid read “subsidised over production dumped on poor countries so their farmers go out of business”.
Africa is not a poor continent. It has huge natural resources which are sucked out by the G8 at the cheapest prices possible while they restrict their markets for goods from Africa or, a new development, highly subsidised finished goods from the sweat shops of China out-compete the factories in Africa. China gets cheap cotton from the USA where every $5 worth is subsidised by $8 in payments to US farmers. This is made into the t-shirts and socks in huge factories built by the Red Army and staffed by very cheap labour. China then uses its artificially under valued currency to ensure that it is the cheapest supplier. Free trade arrangements that came into force earlier this year made the situation worse. Previous quota arrangements meant that African and South Asian factories had a market. Abolishing them meant that the long term damage to the economy in Sri Lanka is worse than the effects of the tsunami.
The continent at the moment has its fair share of the world’s corrupt and evil leaders. All of the G8 can to some extent share in the blame for this. The ex colonial nations left countries in which the principles of democracy and equality were not enshrined and too often “fathers of the nation” became their country’s rapist. Geo-political rivalries in the Cold War meant that the failings of many of the client states’ leaders were ignored and even today they are excused if they keep the oil (and other basic commodities) flowing. Too often those leaders have learned the lessons of the west. The race hatred of the Nazis and the way in which propaganda was used by them was repeated from Uganda to Rwanda. Ethnic “superiority” of the Zulu was exploited by the Apartheid regime to divide the “nie blankes” and led to violence in the early days of the move to democracy. Yet all over the continent leaders are finding they cannot hide their corruption. The deputy President in South Africa has been fired and despite foot dragging from some countries like Switzerland the huge funds siphoned from Nigeria are being paid back.
Neither are the peoples of Africa indolent in the payment of debts. While many countries have historic debts with the World Bank and bi-nationally caused by bad investments, corrupt leaders taking the money and natural disasters, there are others like Lesotho who have worked hard to pay off their debts and are now to some extent being punished for doing so. Many of its problems today are caused by the reduction in demand for gold as many of its people were migrant miners in South Africa.
The West should and must admit its mistakes, both past and present, but the leaders of the continent must also be held to account. The African Union was “too busy with other more important matters” to comment on the disgusting demolitions in Zimbabwe which have left hundreds of thousands homeless and more who have lost business income from “illegal” commercial buildings. Don’t be too cynical about business people – these include the grandmother who built offices in her garden to provide income to support her grandchildren who had been orphaned by AIDS. It was easy for Mugabe to get this political cleansing of the towns ignored by the AU when several of the leaders had also used the technique to clear the inconvenient from land they wanted for one of their grand projects.
With some very honorable exceptions, the West has failed to give development aid at the UN target of 0.7%. Although a large donor in cash terms, the USA is one of the worst. While the official figure is .12%, much of this is in the form of highly conditional aid so that, for example, it must be used to buy US goods and services and that will continue with Bush’s proposals. A recent report estimated the amount of real, unencumbered development aid from the US to the third world is as low as .02%
But in addition to short term real aid, the people of Africa need justice. Justice in internation trade and justice from their leaders. The grandiose projects are not needed – far better to provide large numbers of micro loans for the women to set themselves up in business than to build fancy parliament buildings. We need to work with the people of Africa, if necessary through NGOs over the heads of their leaders and the World Bank. Examples of good practice are there, they just need to be encouraged and hugely expanded. There is no quick fix but the goals for 2015 of having the numbers in the deepest poverty should be only a start. For those who quibble about local charities in the US or Canada not being able to exploit the goodwill at Live8 for their purposes, the definition of this is an income of less than $2 a day per person. A tankful of gasoline in the US costs more than families in Africa have to feed and clothe themselves for a week. Paying a minimal carbon tax on it so that CO2 trading can truly take effect would mean more for social justice in Africa than donating to charities after Live8 because of Bob Geldof’s abuse.
People in Africa are hungry for food and water in some parts. Many more are hungry for decent (or any) basic education for their kids. In the short term we must ensure that we give enough to kick start the economies, health and education systems in Africa and promote good governance. Debt relief must go hand in hand with measures to abolish corruption so taxes can be collected to pay for schools and hospitals, not presidential palaces and executive jets. Western companies who encourage corruption must be punished and their directors jailed longer than bank robbers – they are after all stealing food from the mouths of the starving. We must pressure our leaders to abolish subsidies that take our taxes and pay farmers to dump crops on the world market.
Singapore has shown that without corruption, without military coups and with the sort of educational and entrepreneurial expertise that is suppressed by the current abject poverty, it is possible for Africa to emerge from the malaise it is currently suffering. Singapore needs no aid. Europe needed aid after the World Wars and is now giving aid to spread development east combined with demands for good governance of the sort we should be demanding in Africa. We must give aid to the poorest countries in Africa now, not because of some form of guilt, not because the poverty helps “promote terrorism” as Bush seemed to suggest, not even because it is right. We should do it from self interest because if we give now, hopefully our children will see a time when it is no longer needed.
One of the best articles on Africa I’ve read.
Agree.
less justice not more.
Given the way opportunity and wealth accumulation are being taken from Americans, who have a theoretical role in governing their economy, what can we expect to be done with populations that have almost no voice?
My take on the end-poverty movement is that it is sort of New-Deal-extra-extra-light. Maintain the system, but limit the efficiency of wealth concentration just enough to keep the bottom populations alive.
To my eyes, anything remotely resembling economic justice is out of the question until some kind of democratic political system overpowers the global economy.
I think you are largely correct. Unfortunately a lot of what passes for “democracy” is being engineered by and for the few who are benefitting the most from the “global” economy.
The wheel keeps turning. The cycle repeats.
Sorry not feeling too optimistic today.
I read with interest your diary above and I wonder if you might be interested in joining me in a project I am trying to get off the ground, to do a grass roots project in Kampalla Uganda, in concert with my Ugandan friend PastorLincoln..Just the sort of thing you seem to be in favor of, it is a co-op type project, based in a small church group…you can check my past diaries for this subject.
If you are interested email me and I will provide more details…and could also use your imput on preparing my plans.
Diane – I was thinking today about a little idea to help Africa.
To me, education is the key. There are no short cuts. Give the next generation of African children the tools and it is THEY who will make the continent better.
So my idea is that different companies, groups, forums, communities over here would each adopt a school in Africa. Each group would commit to providing ‘their’ school with paper, exercise books, pencils, chalk, maps, books – anything that is easy to post.
There are NGOs who can organize this on the ground – finding schools and what they need. I have a friend who is working in Tanzania to bring sports to the kids there. We have ‘adopted’ a boys football team and a girls team – they needed jerseys and boots and a ball etc. Not much but it makes all the difference to them. Thanks to some other big sponsors, both teams are coming over to Helsinki in a few days to take part in the Helsinki Cup. I’m sure it will be a fantastic experience for them to take back to their village.
I’d like to know if anyone here is interested in the school idea.
Sven I wish you would email me and maybe we can coordinate this with my idea….
I am wondering what shipping costs to Africa are from where you are, they are very high to ship from the states, I have been thinking it is better to send money because the cost of shipping eats up the benefits of what you are sending.
My idea is that yes education is very important but also is having a means of support which led me to the co-op business line of thinking, spun off the give them a goat or teach them to fish theory..
Many educated people in Africa can still not find gainful employement, much above the poverty level. entrepreneur spirit seems to be lacking and that is my area of focus.
Also I am still trying to find out how to set up a donation account, does anyone have any info.or hints.
I sent you a note to yahoo
I think you are arguing that we should give Africa something: respect.
I took several African History courses in college (Dr. Ken Curtis at CSU Long Beach was by far my favorite Prof.). Unlike every other instance I had been taught something about Africa, I found out the history of the people goes back way before the white man arrived. Their were great cities, great wealth, great civilizations that rivaled anything in Europe. But as with the Native Americans, the Europeans devastated the societies. We read not only text books, but books by Africans: Wole Soyinka, Nelson Mandela, Chinua Achebe, Sembene Ousmane, Buchi Emecheta. Over and over again these authors show the devastating impact of the “White man’s burden” from the other side.
And that is what we see being replayed over and over again: the White man’s burden dressed up and called something new. But we are never actually willing to meet the causes of poverty, because the truth is that we benefit greatly from the way the system currently is. We benefit from unfair trade, corruption, cheap labor and cheap resources. So, we continue to treat the symptoms, and pat ourselves on the back for being “humanitarian.”
What you are suggesting is nothing short of a new paradigm for international aid, one that I think would be much more successful than the current one in actually ending poverty. Sadly, that is exactly why I think we will never see it happen in my lifetime.
This is a very thoughtful diary. Thank you.
Check out this article I wrote a few years ago about development aid. It ties in to what you are saying.
Here’s a quote from Bono on Meet the Press June 26th:
BONO: “This is the number-one problem facing Africa, corruption; not natural calamity, not the AIDS virus. This is the number-one issue and there’s no way around it. That’s what was so clever about President Bush’s Millennium Challenge. It was start-up money for new democracies. It was giving increases of aid flows only to countries that are tackling corruption. That’s what’s so clever. It’s–the implementation of the Millennium Challenge has not happened. It is in trouble. They recognize that. President Bush is embarrassed about that. They’re trying to put it right. But the idea, the concept was a great one. Debt cancellation also has conditionalities built into it. People need to know this.
So no one is talking about aid in the old sense, the money down a rat hole thing. No one wants that. It makes matters worse, not better. This is new targeted aid. Now, there will be some countries where mercy is needed and aid has to go–certain levels of aid have to go. You can’t hold people responsible, the populace responsible for their dictators. But in those instances, you just root the aid away from the governments and through the NGOs on the ground. That’s the modern way.”
I know a few inner city neighborhoods that could use an influx of aid to help individuals in becoming self-sufficient. Let’s start in our own backyard.
I sometimes wonder what the effect of Pan-African nationalization of resources and industry would have on the “good intentions” of the West. At minimum raising the percentage return on resources, 90% local-hire clauses, and maximum 10-year ground leases would be a good start.
Problem is, with many of the governments being the way they are, a complete nationalization of resources probably wouldn’t change much on the ground except the size of the local elites’ palaces. The Nigerian government gets oil money. What happens to it?
I really don’t see why Western companies should have extensive mineral rights in foreign countries to begin with. Sure, they bring expertise, supply and distribution chains, and capital. Let them act as contractors, on competitive bid. There’s no reason why they should have long term rights of any sort. It’s just absurd.
However, countering an absurdity with a tragedy doesn’t necessarily make things any better.
OOPS, this was supposed to be a response to RBA’s comment.
People often cross-post things at Kos – like this diary. So why not cross-comment? Here goes. Troll me if you don’t like it. Go ahead. I dare you!
Development aid presents us with one of those intractable issues, the ones where it’s hard to really figure out what the right thing to do is.
There’s a growing literature, both anecdotal and scholarly, on how utterly bankrupt most development efforts are, no matter what the intention, no matter what the plan, no matter what the rhetoric. Two that I’ve read with profit are Paul Theroux’s “Dark Star Safari,” (on the anecdotal side), and James Ferguson’s “The Anti-Politics Machine,” (more on the scholarly side.)
As the poster mentions, it always boils down to politics. Those in power tolerate the NGO’s so long as most of the money they’re throwing around ends up where those in power want it to end up, and so long as it doesn’t disturb the status quo too much. The problem is, any effective development scheme, by creating economic opportunities and allowing new people to start creating wealth, is that they inherently disturb the status quo. So development programs either do nothing except feed corrupt elites, or are scuttled in one way or another once they start to bear fruit.
Capitalism is a dangerous system, because once it gets started, all kinds of people can start generating wealth through their own efforts. Traditional elites the world over did their best, historically, to strangle it in its crib. Most of the time, they were successful – Western Europe and Japan were just kind of strange. It’s not surprise that more or less traditional elites in a good number of developing countries would do the same thing. If so-and-so over there starts making some money, than people are going to start respecting him instead of me, are going to start asking him for favors instead of me, asking him for jobs instead of me. That just can’t be tolerated.
But, but, but, dang it, people are STARVING! True enough. The problem is, more often than not, that starvation, that suffering, that hunger, that sickness is built into the system. It’s a sign that it’s working the way its supposed to, the same way it was in every pre-modern political and economic system. Nobel Prize laureate Amaryta Sen described famines not as situations in which there’s just not enough food to go around, but where certain people lose their social entitlement to subsistence, and are allowed to go hungry. In times of economic stress, they’re just not important enough to keep around. That’s just the way it is.
So what do you do about it? NGO’s try as hard as they can to circumvent politics because, by golly, this is the twenty first century, and Westerners are no longer in the business of meddling in African politics. So they go in and feed hungry children. Great. It’s hard to argue with that. Except that now those in charge have even less incentive to spread the wealth in times of economic stress – especially since there are all these people who are “supposed” to be dead still hanging around. Why do something for them, why build a school for them, why insure that they are fed, why give them a job, when instead you can buy a condo in Aruba?
Dang it, though, we can’t just go around knocking off corrupt politicans in foreign countries. This isn’t the nineteenth century. But now what?
Because many of us in the West have lived with a (historically speaking) low level of corruption, we’ve sort of forgotten what real corruption can look like. Sure, sometimes it can be just “skimming a little off the top.” Other times it can be, “the entire education budget for the past three fiscal years was diverted into numerous foreign bank accounts and never seen again.” A system can work in the first case, and not in the others. This is not just an African thing. Utterly fantastic and (to modern Westerners) nearly unimaginable levels of corruption were common across Europe into the nineteenth century. It’s just what happens in political systems with low levels of accountability, low premiums on performance, and a closed circle of ruling elites.
Londonbear notes the thoroughly destructive effects of government subsidized agriculture on African economies, many of which were (past tense) largely based on small-producer agriculture. This is what we, in the West, should work to fix. We can’t really do much about corruption over there, but we can fix unfair practices here. Even if we do, though, such fixes, by themselves, would likely not be enough.
Development comes from within, from the social structures and political systems of that society, and not from without. Outsiders may be able to break them, but they can never create them. If strong enough, though, a society can move forward quite quickly even under rather harsh circumstances. Japan is a great example. In the nineteenth century it was forcibly opened to foreign trade at gunpoint, and the country was forced to sign a variety of unfair trade treaties which were not subject to negotiation or modification except at the whim of the European power. These were not trivial. At the time of opening, the price value of gold in relation to silver in the Japanese coinage was distinctly different from that prevalent abroad. They were not allowed to fix this problem with a recoinage. A torrent of silver flowed out of Japan as a result, throwing a severe wrench into the economy. Domestic silk weaving was also nearly destroyed because silk floss garnered much higher prices for export, and because Chinese silk and British cotton were so cheap. But what happened? The Japanese changed their government, adapted to the times, and turned themselves into a modern power that, by 1905, was able to beat the Russians.
Even if the West started treating Africa fairly, this fair treatment could never be more than a supporting condition to African prosperity. That can only be made by the Africans themselves.
Anything that can bring awareness to the gulf between the richest nations in the world and the poorest is a postive thing. Sadly, our leader represents our global ignorance and sense of entitlement. Too many Americans believe consumption is our birth rite.
We have far too many politically inspired divisions, when in reality we are together on a small planet. For one day across the globe, we can see people coming together. We can change the world. Without that awareness, we are back to considering only what’s good within our respective borders.
One action that would have a pronounced effect on all of Africa’s societal ills, both outwardly imposed ones and those endemic to Africa, would be to stop the widespread selling of small arms to Africa.
Africa is awash with small arms and ammo from the USA, Eastern Europe, and Israel. Weapons manufacturers from these countries are equal opportunity aiders and abettors of murder and mayhem, often times selling weapons to both despotic governments and the very rebel groups pitted against them. Great business model!!!