"Former rebel leaders told the BBC that they posed as merchants in meetings with charity workers to get aid money. They used the cash to fund attempts to overthrow the government of the time. One rebel leader estimated $95m (£63m) - from Western governments and charities including Band Aid - was channeled into the rebel fight." For the whole story check the BBC webpage.
While the numbers may be wrong the fact is likely to be true. The question about the usefulness of aid keeps reemerging: I think there are but two options: Either drop it altogether or tighten the conditionalities.
While the first is morally difficult (even though several aid projects have done more harm than good this is certainly not true for the entirety of them) the second option is likely to remain as flawed as the current situation.
4 comments:
ah! my favourite topic! tighter conditionalities would be the worse reform...like kicking MAgdagascar out of AGOA...thats was brilliant!
I still agree with Dambisa, drop it all togther except humanitarian aid...
development aid shd be profit driven business loans...as for infrasrtucture, the chinese model of building instaed of giving money works better...
as for education, kids will stay in school once it will be the ticket for jobs...not the other way around...
This is not a new thing. Using aid founds to support rebels is a very old topic, and it was at maximum during cold war. For example, Kennedy's Alliance for Progress has been usually mentioned as an example of "anti-commies aid".
Related to Sebastian's solutions, I disagree 100%. Drop aid is not an option, and conditionalities are even worst, as demonstrated with all the loans from the WB, IMF and multilaterals in the 70s and 80s. The solution is somewhere (and everywhere) in between, and related with local participation, accountability, anti-elite capturing, etc, etc...
Your solutions is nothing else than conditionalities...just that the condition is on who gets the money and not what macro policy should be attained.
I am perfectly fine with this interpretation. In fact I was thinking of this kind of condition. But I am not sure how good these schemes perform....enlighten me in the BBL !
So let me summarize: you agree with my solution proposal #2 100% while PL agrees with #1 100%.
I am looking forward to the discussion...
I think the fist fight between Jeff "smileface" Sachs and "Watchdog" Easterly is already powerful enough to stimulate another one between us.
I think we all agree that aid is not enough, and that other ways must be found. Microfinance should be one of the ways, but the case of Ebony and Rigotnomics Development Bank is a clear example of how adverse selection is still the problem...
Post a Comment