Development aid to Africa has been
flowing for decades, but the results have been paltry. Instead, recipients have
merely become dependent and initiative has been snuffed out. It is time to
reform the system.
Development aid to Africa is a blessing for all those directly
involved -- both on the giving end and on the receiving end. Functionaries on
the donor side, at least those abroad, earn good money. Many of those on the
receiving end, for their part, know how to organize things in such a way that
their own personal interests don't get short shrift.
There is no reason for these two groups to be interested in
changing the status quo. Yet even so, some within their ranks are starting to
suggest the situation as it stands cannot continue. The development aid of the
past 50 years, they say, is hardly justifiable given the disappointing results.
Even individual donors, who know little about how development aid works in
practice, increasingly sense that something might be amiss.
They're right. The aid has
failed to a large extent.
Donors have taken on too much responsibility for solving African
problems. They have essentially educated them to, when problems arise, call for
foreign aid first rather than trying to find solutions themselves.
This attitude has become deeply rooted in Africa. This
self-incapacitation is one of the most regrettable results of development
cooperation thus far. Poorly designed development aid has made people dependent
and accustomed them to a situation of perpetual assistance, preventing them
from taking the initiative themselves. It is this situation which represents
the greatest damage done, far worse than the enormous material losses
engendered by failed aid projects. And there are many. Africa is strewn with
idle tractors, ruined equipment and run-down buildings.
Deeply Rooted Misconceptions
Tthe view has taken hold that donors are primarily responsible for developing
Africa. At the 2nd Bonn Conference on International Development Policy in
August 2009, then-German President Horst Köhler, an experienced and dedicated
African development activist, spoke about an energy partnership established
between Germany and Nigeria two years previously. His conclusion:
"I cannot discern that
the amount of electricity in Nigeria has increased since then. And I find it
shameful for the industrialized countries, as well as for those responsible in
Nigeria, that this large country, rich as it is in resources essentially, can't
advance its socio-economic development because it hasn't yet managed to bring
electricity to its rural areas. I find this shameful for the entire development
cooperation that has existed for decades."
Here, the fact that Köhler mentions the industrialized countries
before Nigeria when discussing responsibility for the failure is notable. More
notable, however, is that he mentions the industrialized countries at all.
Are industrialized countries to be ashamed that one of the world's
largest oil exporters isn't capable of providing its rural areas with
electricity? Simply asking the question is enough to show how absurd the thought
is -- and how deeply rooted the misconception.
This mothering mindset, widespread in industrialized countries for
decades, is in direct violation of the subsidiarity principle. This principle
states that providers of aid, whether private or governmental, should not
assume any duties that could be carried out by the receiver country itself.
Furthermore, it mandates that aid be given such that those providing it can
cease giving as soon as possible.
Or are they all EHI-Economic Hit Men?
