"Africa's rulers often complain, with justice, that the West's perceptions of the continent are disproportionately shaped by buffoons and tyrants rather than by the increasing number of democratically elected presidents presiding over 6 percent growth rates. But as long as African presidents mollycoddle Mugabe, they are branding Africa with his image."
Showing posts with label Africa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Africa. Show all posts
If Only Mugabe Were White...
Sad! It's so hard to understand this type of political inaction in a region that is so intricately connected. At some level I am simply trying NOT to understand it.
Black Hopes and White Fears
Neither has been fulfilled, according to Dan Rather in this 1994 report on Zimbabwe in advance of voting in South Africa to approve a majority rule form of government.
I wonder what Dan would say about the situation today in Zimbabwe?
I wonder what Dan would say about the situation today in Zimbabwe?
"HARARE, Zimbabwe — Raids on opposition party offices and the rounding up of foreign journalists are threatening to push Zimbabwe further toward confrontation between current President Robert Mugabe and the apparent winner of national elections.
Police raided the Meikles hotel, which is used by the opposition, Movement for Democratic Change, and ransacked some of the rooms. Riot police also surrounded another hotel housing foreign journalists, York Lodge, and took away several of them, according to a man who answered the phone there.
"Mugabe has started a crackdown," Movement for Democratic Change secretary-general Tendai Biti told The Associated Press. "It is quite clear he has unleashed a war.""
Bush on Africa
Here is a great article about President Bush's recent trip to Africa and what he has been doing/initiating throughout his presidency. Sad that most people don't know about it. I'm glad someone is writing about it. But, even more importantly, I'm glad someone is doing something about it.
Zimbabwe Farm Land
Ever since the massive changes in land ownership were enacted to correct the "oppressive" advantages that white farmers had in Zimbabwe starting in 2000, the economy has collapsed and the agricultural industry has dried up. Craig J. Richardson from the Center for Global Development has a great article discussing the resulting devastation and the pictures that illustrate it in vivid contrast. Be clear, however, this is not a black/white issue. It's a land rights issue that was played as a race equity solution. Ultimately, the advocates for voiding the property rights of the 4500 white farmers in order to turn the land over to the "community" (i.e. 840,000 black farmers), cried foul by pointing to the stark difference in soil quality, irrigation, crop yields, etc; all indicators that the white farmers had better resources than the black farmers. So their land was taken from them and now the black farmers have control. And now the lush pasture lands are deserts. "How did this happen?" asks Richardson.
"The underlying wealth of the commercial farmland derived from the protection of private property, an institutional centerpiece that has now been abandoned. Likewise, the ongoing desertification of the communal farmland is in large part explained by the lack of property rights. The long-term impact of communal farming resulted in widespread deforestation, erosion and poor crop yields - a classic case of "tragedy of the commons." Since the post-2000 land reforms, commercial agricultural production has dropped up to 75 percent, as individuals have lost initiative to work, collateral no longer exists, and banks have collapsed. Cotton and tobacco once served as important sources of foreign exchange for the farmers as well as the government, which used it to pay for imports such as gasoline, spare parts, and technology. Farmers formerly used collateral from privately-owned land to obtain equity lines from banks, which were used to purchase seeds in advance, farm equipment and other capital improvements. Consequently, an entire economic sub-sector that served the commercial farmers has now virtually disappeared. Ironically, this has spilled over to the original communal farmers, as they once sourced seeds, fertilizer and other resources from local commercial farmers. In many cases, commercial farmers plowed their land as well. As a result, communal production is also down. One can see this in the photos- the communal lands are browner than ever before.
...
"The underlying wealth of the commercial farmland derived from the protection of private property, an institutional centerpiece that has now been abandoned. Likewise, the ongoing desertification of the communal farmland is in large part explained by the lack of property rights. The long-term impact of communal farming resulted in widespread deforestation, erosion and poor crop yields - a classic case of "tragedy of the commons." Since the post-2000 land reforms, commercial agricultural production has dropped up to 75 percent, as individuals have lost initiative to work, collateral no longer exists, and banks have collapsed. Cotton and tobacco once served as important sources of foreign exchange for the farmers as well as the government, which used it to pay for imports such as gasoline, spare parts, and technology. Farmers formerly used collateral from privately-owned land to obtain equity lines from banks, which were used to purchase seeds in advance, farm equipment and other capital improvements. Consequently, an entire economic sub-sector that served the commercial farmers has now virtually disappeared. Ironically, this has spilled over to the original communal farmers, as they once sourced seeds, fertilizer and other resources from local commercial farmers. In many cases, commercial farmers plowed their land as well. As a result, communal production is also down. One can see this in the photos- the communal lands are browner than ever before.
...
The underlying story these photos tell is that the commercial farmland was often not innately different than communal lands. Rather, it was developed through the institution of property rights, a strong banking sector, and knowledge of intricate farming practices, all of which created incentives to think longer term about investing and managing the land. These unseen attributes ended up being far more important than the quality of land itself. This knowledge could have allayed some of the "land hunger," as the communal lands covered an area 90 percent as large as Great Britain with only one-fifth the amount of people.[3] In addition, government policies in place that prevented commercial farmers from easily selling off unused land to other interested buyers aggravated the situation.
Future land reform policies must focus on allowing all citizens to gain access to secure property rights, with freedom to buy and sell land without restrictions. By doing so, the land will be properly managed and taken care of, and can serve as collateral for future improvements. Otherwise, Zimbabwe will end up a country subject to droughts, famine and other ills - a fate it once avoided successfully when property rights were secure.
AIDS in Context
Here is a great article by Jennifer Roback Morse on African Common Sense to Solving the AIDS Crisis that illustrates how good intentions with a lot of money does not necessarily solve anything, and my even advance the problem. In our rush to "help Africa" we forget to truly understand the problem. This has been my biggest issue with Bono and the (RED) campaign. An excerpt from the article explains:
Many western AIDS researchers believe that promoting condoms among high risk groups, such as prostitutes and their clients, is the best way to slow the spread of HIV. But HIV continued to spread throughout eastern and southern Africa, even when condom use soared. Epstein argues that some of the condom campaigns backfired. “By associating AIDS with beer drinking, premarital sex, prostitution … womanizing and rape, the lusty condom ads\... clashed disastrously with local sensibility concerning decency and self-respect,” Epstein writes. One of her African sources stated bluntly, “The campaigns were totally wrong. The message was you had to be a prostitute or truck driver to get AIDS.”
A Ugandan prevention campaign focused specifically on issues of concurrent relationships. It developed the slogans “Love Carefully” and “Zero Grazing” – meaning, in the words of the head of Uganda’s AIDS Control Program, “avoid indiscriminate and free-ranging sexual relations.” These slogans were posted on public buildings, broadcast on radio, and bellowed in speeches by government officials. The Ugandan Association of Co-Wives and Concubines -- hardly something any Western aid organization would have instituted -- got involved, too. These women policed the behavior of polygamous men, encouraging them to avoid the casual affairs that could endanger all their wives and future children. One of their messages was: “If your husband is unfaithful and is going to kill you with AIDS, you divorce him.”
The result of all this was a steep decline in the number of sexual partners, a basic step in controlling any sexually transmitted disease.
Many western AIDS researchers believe that promoting condoms among high risk groups, such as prostitutes and their clients, is the best way to slow the spread of HIV. But HIV continued to spread throughout eastern and southern Africa, even when condom use soared. Epstein argues that some of the condom campaigns backfired. “By associating AIDS with beer drinking, premarital sex, prostitution … womanizing and rape, the lusty condom ads\... clashed disastrously with local sensibility concerning decency and self-respect,” Epstein writes. One of her African sources stated bluntly, “The campaigns were totally wrong. The message was you had to be a prostitute or truck driver to get AIDS.”
A Ugandan prevention campaign focused specifically on issues of concurrent relationships. It developed the slogans “Love Carefully” and “Zero Grazing” – meaning, in the words of the head of Uganda’s AIDS Control Program, “avoid indiscriminate and free-ranging sexual relations.” These slogans were posted on public buildings, broadcast on radio, and bellowed in speeches by government officials. The Ugandan Association of Co-Wives and Concubines -- hardly something any Western aid organization would have instituted -- got involved, too. These women policed the behavior of polygamous men, encouraging them to avoid the casual affairs that could endanger all their wives and future children. One of their messages was: “If your husband is unfaithful and is going to kill you with AIDS, you divorce him.”
The result of all this was a steep decline in the number of sexual partners, a basic step in controlling any sexually transmitted disease.
Congo Rape Crisis
The NY Times is reporting an incredible rape crisis in Congo over the last couple of years from presumed fringe members of the same men who participated in the Rwandan genocide of '94 and have been in exile from Rwanda ever since. The atrocities are horrible and the article does describe some graphic details.
All of this with the largest UN Peacekeeping force anywhere on the planet (17,000). Again, the UN is impotent even at it's mightiest. God be merciful.
"Eastern Congo is going through another one of its convulsions of violence, and this time it seems that women are being systematically attacked on a scale never before seen here. According to the United Nations, 27,000 sexual assaults were reported in 2006 in South Kivu Province alone, and that may be just a fraction of the total number across the country. “The sexual violence in Congo is the worst in the world,” said John Holmes, the United Nations under secretary general for humanitarian affairs. “The sheer numbers, the wholesale brutality, the culture of impunity — it’s appalling.”
All of this with the largest UN Peacekeeping force anywhere on the planet (17,000). Again, the UN is impotent even at it's mightiest. God be merciful.
African Nation Turns Down Aid
Here is an article regarding Eritrea, the first known African nation to turn down international aid "in a bold quest for self-reliance." It's an amazing approach. I'm not sure we would have the courage to try it on any level if we were in a similar position. (Imagine Katrina victims saying to the Federal and State government agencies "Get out! We need to take care of ourselves so we don't become dependant on others for our livelihood." That certainly would be revolutionary.) I say God bless Eritrea.
StAR wars in Africa
This week the UN and the World Bank launched their Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (StAR) in an effort to regain the 1 - 1.6 TRILLION dollars stolen by corrupt African leaders. Now this is an effort worth attention. As mentioned in a previous post, almost one quarter of Africa's GDP is lost annually to corruption. Hopefully the corruption-free institutions like the UN and the World Bank will be able to recapture these funds! (OK, sorry for the tongue-in-cheek) I do hope countries will agree to actively assist with this initiative!
CARE Refuses AID for Africa
One of the first major shots across the bow in an ever-increasing debate about the actual impact that aid has on the poor in Africa was fired by CARE this week. The NY Times reports on CARE'S refusal of almost $45 million worth of food. See commentary also found on the Center for Global Development Site. CARE is following the reasoning of others who are advocating for aid to Africa to stop because it is doing more harm than good.
Helping the Poor by Listening
Another great video presentation from the folks at TED (See link in margin). This one is regarding listening to Africans before/above giving to them. Empowering them with the dignity of choice to help them overcome poverty. This is very much in line with Olasky's views on compassion (See previous posts/"Compassion" Label). Video is about 18 min.
afrigadget.com
After surfing around the site I found discussed on my last post, I came across www.afrigadget.com/ This is a site for all my missionary friends or those who just think life is too difficult when you can't access a microwave or your cell charger. The description of the site is "Gadgets for Africa: Solving everyday problems with African ingenuity." I'll link this on the side for those who want to check back regularly. Necessity truly is the father of invention.
New Data about AIDS, Africa and the World
I came across another blog called Stupid American that had a link to TED, a site I had never heard of before. TED is a "symposium" of people from various expertize and influence who get together and discuss new ideas, technology, trends, etc. Most of the ideas deal with a global issue, like AIDS, Africa, development, economics, and even the arts. There is also a TEDblog, with links to many other resources. Anyway, there were two videos that I found particularly insightful and worth passing along.
The following session by economist Emily Oster presents the data about AIDS in Africa in such a way as to show everything we thought we knew is wrong. Very provocative. It's about 16 minutes, but well worth the viewing to consider one's self informed.
Here is another video from the same conference. This is a session by Hans Rosling using the vast data we have available in revolutionary ways to show global issues. Very impressive!
The following session by economist Emily Oster presents the data about AIDS in Africa in such a way as to show everything we thought we knew is wrong. Very provocative. It's about 16 minutes, but well worth the viewing to consider one's self informed.
Here is another video from the same conference. This is a session by Hans Rosling using the vast data we have available in revolutionary ways to show global issues. Very impressive!
John Piper Responds to H&W "Gospel"
Here's a video I found on Keith Plummer's website (seel link in margin) to the rampant spread of the Health and Wealth Gospel in Africa (discussed on a previous post) by John Piper. Go John Piper! I didn't realize it until I went to Youtube for the code, that Piper has quite a bit of footage there. You might want to check out more of this.
Stop the Aid to Africa, part 2
I have referred to this approach in an earlier post, but it seems it is now getting even more popular. The idea that aid to Africa is hurting more than it is helping is starting to ruffle the feathers of even ... (wait for it) ... Bono! He doesn't get it when Africans tell him directly to stop. An article by Jennifer Brea at American.com explains some of the recent events and Bono's response:
Arusha, Tanzania–Africa is a continent of despair and desperation. Here, eight year-olds toting AK-47s massacre whole villages and eccentric dictators feast on the organs of the opposition, believing it'll boost their mojo. Tsetse flies nibble on the eyelids of starving children who sport distended bellies like it's their birthright, not to mention the fact that by the time you finish reading this article, another six Africans will die from malaria, five from AIDS, and seventeen from poverty and hunger. Also, the wildlife is beautiful and the people like to dance and sing. That's Africa, and it's in desperate need of our help. Luckily, a few enlightened megastars from America and Europe have come to save it. Curiously, not all the natives are grateful....
Eleni Gabre-Madhin, a World Bank economist, returned to her native Ethiopia to start a commodities exchange to prevent future famines. Daniel Annerose invented software in Senegal that allows farmers to track market prices via SMS text messaging. Alieu Conteh built the first cellular network in the Congo, Florence Seriki, Nigeria's first computer manufacturing company. Then there's William Kamkwamba, the undisputed showstopper, a teenager from rural Malawi who, at age fourteen, built a windmill from plastic scrap and an old bicycle frame that generates enough electricity to light his family's house.
These speakers were selected to support a thesis, painfully obvious but somehow radical in this age: Africa won't be "saved" by aid, but by the ingenuity and determination of its own people. Andrew Mwenda, an outspoken Ugandan journalist who was jailed last year for criticizing President Museveni, lambasted the Western world's "international cocktail of good intentions" for robbing Africa of its future.
After all, what country has ever gotten rich from aid? What Africa needs is investment.
Near the front of the darkened auditorium a white man with orange sunglasses stood to object. It was Bono! The audience (myself included), exuberant in the presence of celebrity, craned their necks to catch a glimpse. Aid saved Ireland from the potato famine, Bono declared. George Ayittey, author of Africa Unchained, a wildly popular book which argues Africa's problems should be solved by Africans, was bumped from his scheduled spot so that Bono could play a prerecorded greeting from German chancellor Angela Merkel on the importance of honoring aid commitments to Africa. "Try telling Chancellor Merkel that the Marshall Plan was a load of crap." Bono then took the stage to defend what has become his life's avocation: opening the pockets of rich governments to give to the kleptocratic governments of Africa. What Africa needs is its own Marshall Plan.
Comparing post-war Germany or Ireland during the Great Famine to Africa is a bit like comparing post-war Japan to Iraq. Aid might be able to restore normalcy in a country devastated by war or disaster, but can it really push a whole continent of largely pre-industrial societies into the next phase of history?
Africa has never loomed as large in the popular imagination of the West as it does today, thanks to the Jeffrey Sachs-Bono ambition to Make Poverty History, and of course to Angelina Jolie and Madonna's commitment to adopting African babies.
Their message of hope is one that seems to deny Africans a role as agents of their own transformation. We can save Darfur. We can save Africans from disease. We can even save Africans from themselves. Africa can be saved if we just try hard enough.
It is true that from the villages of Darfur to the slums of Soweto, thousands of people on this continent die unnecessary deaths each day, but Africa is home to 900 million. Tragedy is a small part of a much larger and more complex story.
Of the 47 countries that make up sub-Saharan Africa, only five-Sudan, Chad, Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Somalia-are home to active conflicts. Last year, Africa saw its highest growth in GDP in two decades. Sixteen African countries have favorable sovereign credit ratings. Botswana's is higher than Japan, yet it still struggles to attract investment. For the thousands of foreign-educated lawyers, businessmen, and architects from the Diaspora who are leaving cushy corporate jobs to return home with their skills and their dynamism to open businesses, it's about creating wealth, not reducing poverty. Africa is not a victim in need of saving: it's a land of opportunity.
Kenyan economist James Shikwati, who in advance of the 2005 G8 summit in Gleneagles famously asked rich nations, "for God's sake, please just stop" giving Africa aid, thinks even misery is an opportunity. The Chinese see Africans the way many would like to see themselves. We can fight malaria by distributing free mosquito nets, which may cost $10-$60 each by the time you get them down often impassable dirt roads. Or, as Shikwati suggests, we can train locals how to operate a business spraying homes with an insecticide that will keep them mosquito-free for six months at about $2 a family. We can spend billions importing medication, or you can invest in local farms that grow the Artemisinin, a Chinese herb with potent anti-malarial properties, and the factories that process it. We can continue the endless cycle of need and dependency, or you can create jobs, develop indigenous capacity, and build a sustainable future.
African Revival or Deception?
I came across a great article in Christianity Today that discusses the wild spreading of the "health and wealth" teaching in Africa. It truly is a sad story. Interestingly, later in the article it explains that American Christian TV is a major reason for this explosive growth. God be merciful to us!
Navigating Foreign Aid
I don't know much about the World Bank (to my own detriment, I'm sure). However, I recently came across this site that I believe would be a valuable resource. With the G8 conference just ending and President Bush pledging now $30 billion for Africa, I think it would be wise to consider where that money goes. And consdering my previous posts pleading to STOP aid to Africa and focusing on corruption-free governance, the World Bank's "Governance Indicators" is a starting point to help us laymen stay abreast of where money can better be spent and offered.
Another great resource is a working paper titled "A Primer on Foreign Aid" by Steven Radelet from The Center for Global Development that can be found here. Following is a summary of its intention:
Another great resource is a working paper titled "A Primer on Foreign Aid" by Steven Radelet from The Center for Global Development that can be found here. Following is a summary of its intention:
This new working paper by senior fellow Steve Radelet explores trends in aid, the motivations for aid, its impacts, and debates about reforming aid. It begins by examining aid magnitudes and who gives and receives aid. It discusses the multiple motivations and objectives of aid, some of which conflict with each other. It then explores the empirical evidence on the relationship between aid and growth, which is divided between research that finds no relationship and research that finds a positive relationship (at least under certain circumstances). It also examines some of the key challenges in making aid more effective, including the principal-agent problem and the related issue of conditionality, and concludes by examining some of the main proposals for improving aid effectiveness.
Shake Hands With the Devil - Romeo Dallaire
I just finished reading an amazing, sobering account of the 1994 Rwandan genocide from the perspective of the UN General in charge of "peacekeeping" during the atrocity. It took Gen. Dallaire 10 years to get to the place where he could even articulate what he experienced and has written his account from an insider's perspective unlike any other's. He was in contact with all the major players on the world stage while these events unfolded and is able to speak about matters on which others can only speculate. He describes himself as "a simple pilgrim seeking forgiveness and pardon. But as I slowly begin to piece my life back together, I know the time has come for me to make a more difficult pilgrimage: to travel back through all those terrible memories and retrieve my soul" (5). And I for one am so glad he was willing to revisit those memories.
The question will be for political leaders, especially those at the UN, and all of us, if we can/have learned anything from "the failure of humanity in Rwanda", as Dallaire's subtitle states. He explains, "Engraved still in my brain is the judgment of a small group of bureaucrats who came to 'assess' the situation in the first weeks of the genocide: 'We will recommend to our government not to intervene as the risks are high and all that is here are humans'" (6).
With this mindset, Dallaire summarized, "...while most nations seemed to agree that something had to be done, every nation seemed to have a reason why some other nation should do it" (374). Some of the more "comic" roadblocks to assistance are as follows (keeping in mind that all of this is happening on the international stage while thousands are dying daily):
1) After 10 Belgian "peace-keeping" soldiers were killed within the first few days of the genocide, Belgium withdrew all of it's over 500 soldiers. Belgium was actually the former colonial power of Rwanda and they abandoned the country "because they lost some of their professional soldiers to soldierly duties" (318). Dallaire explained that 2000 Rwandans died as a direct result of the Belgian withdrawal since the Rwandans had found safe haven with the soldiers and then were slaughtered as they left.
2) The UN did not have the means to stop the [radio] broadcasts [calling for the murders, including reading off lists of names of those to be found and killed], either through jamming, a direct air strike on the transmitter, or covert operations, but it made a formal request of the US, which had the means to try all three. The issue was studied by the Pentagon, which in due course recommeded against conducting the operation because of the cost--$8,500 an hour for a jamming aircraft over the country--and the legal dilemma.... The Pentagon judged that the lives of the estimated 8,000 - 10,000 Rwandans being killed each day in the genocide were not worth the cost of the fuel or the violation of Rwandan airwaves (375).
3) Half a million Rwandans had already flowed into Tanzania...; I thought we could expect four to five times that number to move into the Kivu province of Zaire. I needed up-to-date information on the movements of large numbers of internally displaced persons in the western part of the country in order to help them... and prevent this massive human exodus. Repeated requests to Western nations for aerial photographs and satellite pictures fell on deaf ears. (Later, the Russians were prepared to sell me satellite images, but I had no budget for such an expenditure and could persuade no one to give me one.) (395).
4) The US, with its vast unused Cold War stocks of armord personnel carriers (APCs), eventually supplied fifty.... And then the stalling began: staff with the Pentagon were reluctant to put their vehicles into central Africa and seemed content instead to let them rust in German depots.... Then the US decided that the APCs could not be given to the mission but would have to be leased and that the lease would have to be negotiated. Eventually they came up with the price of $4 million, which they insisted had to be prepaid. When the issue was raised of transporting the carriers to [Rwanda]..., the US insisted upon another $6 million to cover the cost of air transport. After the funding was secure--another time-consuming exercise--the APC's were airlifted...; after much negotiation with Uganda, they arrived stripped of machine guns, radios, tools, spare parts, training manuals and so on. The US, in effect, delivered tons of rusting metal.... Not to be outdone by the Americans, the British offered fifty Bedford trucks--again for a sizable amount to be paid up front.... When I was told of this 'most generous' offer, I sarcastically asked, 'They do work, don't they?' I was answered first with silence and then: 'I'll check and get back to you.' The British later quietly withdrew their request for payment and provided some of the vehicles, which broke down one at a time until there were none left. There were many more transactions like these, and they were not isolated to the great powers.
Helping in times of crisis is necessary. But helping wisely is even more critical. One of the many examples from Dallaire's account was very alarming: "[One of the elders told me] since they arrived [at a Red Cross refugee camp], they had received aid in the form of maize, and he held out a bit to show me. It was cattle corn, recognizable by its large, hard, jagged kernels. he said that they did not have the tools they needed to grind the kernels. They did not have the pots to cook the corn in to make it softer. They didn't have the water to put into the pot or the wood to build a fire to heat it. The uncooked maize was not edible, yet some fo the children were so hungry they ate it. The jagged kernels ripped their digestive tracts and caused internal bleeding. The children were dying of it, bleeding through their bowels. With an ineffably sad face, this man asked me what I could do. I couldn't find an answer. In shame, I went back to my vehicle and [drove away]" (402).
Outside of the actual perpatrators, Dallaire puts the blame squarely on the shoulders of France and the US stating, "There is no doubt that those two countries possessed the solution to the Rwandan crisis" (514). And as for the rest of the world, "How do we pick and choose where to get involved? Canada and other peacekeeping nations have become accustomed to action if, and only if, international public opinion will support them-- a dangerous path that leads to a moral relativism in which a country risks losing sight of the difference between good and evil. Others define 'good' as the pursuit of human rights and will opt to employ force when human rights are violated.... As Michael Ignatieff has warned us, 'riskless warfare in pursuit of human rights is a moral contradiction. The concept of human rights assumes that all human life is of equal value. Risk-free warfare presumes that our lives matter more than those we are intervening to save'" (517).
On the final page of his book, Dallaire concludes, "An American officer felt no shame as he informed me that the lives of 800,000 Rwandans (the actual amount of those who died in 100 days) were only worth risking the lives of ten American troops; the Belgians, after losing ten soldiers, insisted that the lives of Rwandans were not worth risking another single Belgian soldier. The only conclusion I can reach is that we are in a desparate need of a transfusion of humanity. If we believe that all humans are human, then how are we going to prove it?" (522).
Excellent read. Excellent behind-the-scene details. Excellent question.
The question will be for political leaders, especially those at the UN, and all of us, if we can/have learned anything from "the failure of humanity in Rwanda", as Dallaire's subtitle states. He explains, "Engraved still in my brain is the judgment of a small group of bureaucrats who came to 'assess' the situation in the first weeks of the genocide: 'We will recommend to our government not to intervene as the risks are high and all that is here are humans'" (6).
With this mindset, Dallaire summarized, "...while most nations seemed to agree that something had to be done, every nation seemed to have a reason why some other nation should do it" (374). Some of the more "comic" roadblocks to assistance are as follows (keeping in mind that all of this is happening on the international stage while thousands are dying daily):
1) After 10 Belgian "peace-keeping" soldiers were killed within the first few days of the genocide, Belgium withdrew all of it's over 500 soldiers. Belgium was actually the former colonial power of Rwanda and they abandoned the country "because they lost some of their professional soldiers to soldierly duties" (318). Dallaire explained that 2000 Rwandans died as a direct result of the Belgian withdrawal since the Rwandans had found safe haven with the soldiers and then were slaughtered as they left.
2) The UN did not have the means to stop the [radio] broadcasts [calling for the murders, including reading off lists of names of those to be found and killed], either through jamming, a direct air strike on the transmitter, or covert operations, but it made a formal request of the US, which had the means to try all three. The issue was studied by the Pentagon, which in due course recommeded against conducting the operation because of the cost--$8,500 an hour for a jamming aircraft over the country--and the legal dilemma.... The Pentagon judged that the lives of the estimated 8,000 - 10,000 Rwandans being killed each day in the genocide were not worth the cost of the fuel or the violation of Rwandan airwaves (375).
3) Half a million Rwandans had already flowed into Tanzania...; I thought we could expect four to five times that number to move into the Kivu province of Zaire. I needed up-to-date information on the movements of large numbers of internally displaced persons in the western part of the country in order to help them... and prevent this massive human exodus. Repeated requests to Western nations for aerial photographs and satellite pictures fell on deaf ears. (Later, the Russians were prepared to sell me satellite images, but I had no budget for such an expenditure and could persuade no one to give me one.) (395).
4) The US, with its vast unused Cold War stocks of armord personnel carriers (APCs), eventually supplied fifty.... And then the stalling began: staff with the Pentagon were reluctant to put their vehicles into central Africa and seemed content instead to let them rust in German depots.... Then the US decided that the APCs could not be given to the mission but would have to be leased and that the lease would have to be negotiated. Eventually they came up with the price of $4 million, which they insisted had to be prepaid. When the issue was raised of transporting the carriers to [Rwanda]..., the US insisted upon another $6 million to cover the cost of air transport. After the funding was secure--another time-consuming exercise--the APC's were airlifted...; after much negotiation with Uganda, they arrived stripped of machine guns, radios, tools, spare parts, training manuals and so on. The US, in effect, delivered tons of rusting metal.... Not to be outdone by the Americans, the British offered fifty Bedford trucks--again for a sizable amount to be paid up front.... When I was told of this 'most generous' offer, I sarcastically asked, 'They do work, don't they?' I was answered first with silence and then: 'I'll check and get back to you.' The British later quietly withdrew their request for payment and provided some of the vehicles, which broke down one at a time until there were none left. There were many more transactions like these, and they were not isolated to the great powers.
Helping in times of crisis is necessary. But helping wisely is even more critical. One of the many examples from Dallaire's account was very alarming: "[One of the elders told me] since they arrived [at a Red Cross refugee camp], they had received aid in the form of maize, and he held out a bit to show me. It was cattle corn, recognizable by its large, hard, jagged kernels. he said that they did not have the tools they needed to grind the kernels. They did not have the pots to cook the corn in to make it softer. They didn't have the water to put into the pot or the wood to build a fire to heat it. The uncooked maize was not edible, yet some fo the children were so hungry they ate it. The jagged kernels ripped their digestive tracts and caused internal bleeding. The children were dying of it, bleeding through their bowels. With an ineffably sad face, this man asked me what I could do. I couldn't find an answer. In shame, I went back to my vehicle and [drove away]" (402).
Outside of the actual perpatrators, Dallaire puts the blame squarely on the shoulders of France and the US stating, "There is no doubt that those two countries possessed the solution to the Rwandan crisis" (514). And as for the rest of the world, "How do we pick and choose where to get involved? Canada and other peacekeeping nations have become accustomed to action if, and only if, international public opinion will support them-- a dangerous path that leads to a moral relativism in which a country risks losing sight of the difference between good and evil. Others define 'good' as the pursuit of human rights and will opt to employ force when human rights are violated.... As Michael Ignatieff has warned us, 'riskless warfare in pursuit of human rights is a moral contradiction. The concept of human rights assumes that all human life is of equal value. Risk-free warfare presumes that our lives matter more than those we are intervening to save'" (517).
On the final page of his book, Dallaire concludes, "An American officer felt no shame as he informed me that the lives of 800,000 Rwandans (the actual amount of those who died in 100 days) were only worth risking the lives of ten American troops; the Belgians, after losing ten soldiers, insisted that the lives of Rwandans were not worth risking another single Belgian soldier. The only conclusion I can reach is that we are in a desparate need of a transfusion of humanity. If we believe that all humans are human, then how are we going to prove it?" (522).
Excellent read. Excellent behind-the-scene details. Excellent question.
STOP AID TO AFRICA!
I found a great article at First Things that echoes exactly what I stated in my previous posts (both the "American Idol...Africa" and "Tragedy of American Compassion"). The article titled "Bono Still Hasn't Found What He's Looking For" critiques the Red and One Campaigns and even goes on to reference an interview with the Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati pleading for the Aid for Africa to STOP! Shikwati, 35, says that aid to Africa does more harm than good. The avid proponent of globalization spoke with SPIEGEL about the disastrous effects of Western development policy in Africa, corrupt rulers, and the tendency to overstate the AIDS problem. In many ways this echoes the plight of today's American poor from "Tragedy..." post, where political leaders promise and provide government aid for all facets of life that end up crippling whole segments of the lower class with dependency.
Quoting Shikwate, "Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa's problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn't even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid."
"In Germany's case, only the destroyed infrastructure had to be repaired. Despite the economic crisis of the Weimar Republic, Germany was a highly- industrialized country before the war. The damages created by the tsunami in Thailand can also be fixed with a little money and some reconstruction aid. Africa, however, must take the first steps into modernity on its own. There must be a change in mentality. We have to stop perceiving ourselves as beggars."
"If they really want to fight poverty, they should completely halt development aid and give Africa the opportunity to ensure its own survival. Currently, Africa is like a child that immediately cries for its babysitter when something goes wrong. Africa should stand on its own two feet."
These are only excerpts. This is a must read for all those who feel the pangs of compassion, but want to help responsibly. Please read both articles.
Quoting Shikwate, "Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa's problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn't even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid."
"In Germany's case, only the destroyed infrastructure had to be repaired. Despite the economic crisis of the Weimar Republic, Germany was a highly- industrialized country before the war. The damages created by the tsunami in Thailand can also be fixed with a little money and some reconstruction aid. Africa, however, must take the first steps into modernity on its own. There must be a change in mentality. We have to stop perceiving ourselves as beggars."
"If they really want to fight poverty, they should completely halt development aid and give Africa the opportunity to ensure its own survival. Currently, Africa is like a child that immediately cries for its babysitter when something goes wrong. Africa should stand on its own two feet."
These are only excerpts. This is a must read for all those who feel the pangs of compassion, but want to help responsibly. Please read both articles.
American Idol, Red, One and Africa
Last night I watched the American Idol Aid Fundraiser. I am always an advocate for Africa Awareness. Additionally, there were some excellent musical performances and some great cameo appearances by celebrities. (I was particularly intrigued by Elvis Presley's duet with Celine Dion). I was also happy that the show highlighted some very impoverished areas of the US.
Unfortunately, I was disappointed by the show for it's presentation of the problem in Africa. I have often thought that many AIDS awareness efforts seem to go for the "cheap shot" by showing crying children and emaciated bodies on their death bed. Americans respond to this - and they give money to feel good about saving "those poor Africans". It seems that there are a slough of recent endeavors to eliminate poverty and stop the plague of AIDS in Africa, as well as other diseases. One that I find particularly disturbing is the Red Campaign (See particularly the link "Caught Red Handed" at the bottom of the Wikipedia article), which is clearly a marketing tool that feigns interest in AIDS, but in the end just makes more money for the companies that participate since they donate only "a portion of the proceeds" of the merchandise they sell at extra marked-up prices for being "Red" items (For example Apple donates $10 for every $200 ipod). I guess some would say this helps with the "awareness" factor, not necessarily the "solution" factor. And maybe that's good. But I just wonder why the companies can't give all the proceeds from these select items if they are really concerned about helping AIDS victims.
And just like last nights show, maybe it was good to just show people real pictures/video of real people in very real need, and hope that we comfortable Americans will get involved. I don't want to minimize that.
My main problem with what was presented last night (and in other promotions), is twofold. First, there seems to be such a lack of cultural sensitivity. Because there is a white person with a TV camera, gracious Africans will be hospitable and children will run toward the curiosity. But our quest to show the need generally crosses cultural boundaries for the purpose of exploitation/entertainment under the guise of information. Simon walked into the room of a dying woman and had to leave, expressing how he could not stand those conditions, and the dying woman should not have to either. As I looked at the room they were in, it probably was the best room in the house and seemed lavishly furnished by African standards. It seemed insulting to express his discomfort so openly. They actually got some footage of Simon and Ryan visiting another dying woman, but leaving almost immediately because they were waiting to take her to the hospital because her illness was so severe. There seemed to be no sacredness, no privacy for such a serious matter - especially when in many places AIDS is never mentioned as the reason someone is sick. Culturally, it seemed comparable to the Jerry Springer show - Africa style (bringing peoples dirty laundry out to view for all to watch and inspect).
Secondly, I don't like how, for example, they simply explained that $2 will give kids the Malaria medicine they need to prevent death by Malaria. So simple. So easy. I agree. But beyond the $2 is the education that is required to help the patients keep taking the drugs for the full 10 days and not stop after 2 or 3 when they start feeling better (which happens most often). What this does is help the virus build up resistance to the drugs and drug companies have to continue to create newer drugs to combat the resistance. This is why the doctor tells you to take all 10 days of any antibiotic even if you start feeling better. Knowledge is power and education is priceless. But just buying drugs and making them available (although distributed through very credible and responsible NGOs) is not the whole picture. AIDS drugs are the same. Yes, drugs are needed. But a proper understanding of the drugs and the importance of how to take them and for how long is critical. To misuse the drugs creates bigger problems.
On a more immediate and sweeping scale, mosquito nets, clean water, waste management, infrastructure (like roads to give people access to medical facilities and schools), and other such essentials are great assets to ease disease and oppression. These are easy and cheap (relatively speaking) and should be donated, distributed, and built as much as possible. These are also things that cannot be easily siphoned off for quick profit. I would love to hear about prevention in some of these AIDS awareness programs. What about highlighting and promoting efforts such as abstinence (which is having shockingly positive results in Uganda) and other cultural barriers such as AIDS education for Africans, STDs, and cleanliness in food preparation and hygiene.
As for the overall problems in Africa, I recently saw in Time Magazine (10/06/06) that 25% of the African continent's GDP, approximately $148 Billion annually, is consumed by corruption. So that means that 25 cents of every dollar introduced into the economy of the entire continent is used to line the pockets of corrupt dictators, military officials, or others in power. AIDS is a huge problem, but this statistic is stunning, especially since most AIDS programs propose giving money to solve the problem. I actually just found a specific example of this in the St. Paul Pioneer Press today. In an article titled "Profit motive underlies unrest in Somalia" written by Jeffrey Gettleman, a contributor from the New York Times, the picture is described this way:
"A whole class of opportunists have been feeding off the anarchy in Somalia for so long that they refuse to let go. These include squatter landlords, gunmen for hire and vendors of out-of-date baby formula. They don't pay taxes, their businesses are totally unregulated, and they have skills that aren't compatible with a peaceful society.... And it is [America's pledge of $100 million to rebuild the country] that is fueling the resistance's urgency, because opportunists sense this transitional government poses the biggest threat yet to the gravy days of anarchy."
Truly, the masses under an evil ruler/anarchy suffer greatly. As Kofi Annan has said, “Good governance is the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development.” To advance this effort, one Sudanese-born tycoon created the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership. This is a $5 million prize to honor African leaders for corruption-free rule. It is awarded annually.
On my last visit to Africa, I spoke with several NGO workers, some very high-level staff, who explained that even the most "noble humanitarian" has a corruptible appetite when it comes to lobbying in the aftermath of tragedy to "service only the refugee camp with the most refugees, because the smaller camps don't pay." The politicking and manipulation by even the well-known NGOs is disillusioning. But tragedy is lucrative! And sympathy is its currency.
I call pictures of crying children "cheap shots" because it gets us to open our wallets, but not our minds toward a better understanding of the situation. Let us be informed and not swayed by the "popular" appeals of celebrities and others who pose quick solutions to complex issues. Awareness is great. But uninformed charity is not commendable. Blind charity may even be contributing to the problem. I challenge us to think long and hard and get involved in smart ways. I would love to hear your recommendations for action and agencies that have been tried and proven valuable where the serious needs of Africa are concerned.
www.voiceoftheorphan.org
The United Nations counts 143 million kids around the world as orphans, 143 million children waiting for love and support. Recognizing that the severity of today’s orphan crisis is bigger than any one organization, FamilyLife, Focus on the Family and Shaohannah's Hope joined together to launch a long term, nationwide campaign called Voice of the Orphan.This campaign seeks to raise awareness of the orphan crisis and spur fellow Christians to action. God cares deeply about orphans. Now is your chance to help those who have waited so long. Why wait? Together we can all make a difference.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
