>from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >subject: NI Africa: Impacts of angels. >Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 > > Via -New Internationalist . August 2000 (No.326) > >"Impact of angels" >By Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is the General Secretary of the Pan-African >Movement, based in Kampala, Uganda. This is an abridged version of a >longer piece. >------------------------------------ > >In an Africa plagued by conflict and poverty, international >aid organizations loom large in every quarter. > >In the last few years international non-governmental organizations >(NGOs) have become part of the landscape of Africa. They are as >present as the tropical climate of the west coast of Africa, the >biting sun and dry soils of the Sahel region, the thousand hills of >Rwanda and south-west Uganda. One can even say they are not just part >of the landscape any more; they are the landscape itself, with their >Land Cruisers, Land Rovers, Pajeros and other assorted four-wheel >drives equipped with radio phones and advertising their endless >projects. > >So pervasive is their presence that there is virtually not a single >district in most parts of Africa that does not have some sort of >contact with them. They come as private voluntary organizations, >development agencies, religious groups and so on. What unites them is >the fact that they are all controlled, financed and executively >staffed by Europeans and North Americans. Wealth and direct or >indirect backing from their governments put them above the local >community groups and NGOs in their 'host' countries. > >The continuous rise of the NGOs, their dominance and control over >civil society in Africa cannot be divorced from the crisis of the >post-colonial African state. Whereas in the immediate post- >independence period the political economy of Africa was characterized >by neo-colonialism (political sovereignty without economic >independence) the current epoch is characterized by recolonization >through the IMF, World Bank and Western NGOs. > >Today if you want to know the economic fortunes or otherwise of an >African country you are better off talking to the country >representative of the IMF or World Bank who, to all intents and >purposes, is the modern equivalent of a colonial governor. The >difference is that unlike the governor who was sent by the colonial >power (and therefore ultimately accountable to some public opinion in >the parent country), these new governors are bureaucrats, accountable >to nobody but their faceless superiors and peers in the Bretton Woods >system. They come with a ready-made solution called >structural adjustment which is supposed to be a cure-all. Governments >that have run down their countries through systematic graft, >kleptomania and state robbery have no choice but to do the bidding of >their new masters. > >However, the operation of structural-adjustment programmes has >demonstrated that economics is not just a technical matter to be >resolved by 'experts' and other eggheads sent in from Washington. Far >from delivering their promised gains, liberalization, privatization >and technocratic management have only increased the poverty of the >people and further indebted the countries concerned. The more they >have adjusted, the deeper they have sunk into the abyss of poverty, >joblessness and socio-economic crisis. > >Structural adjustment threw up new social contradictions as the >already poor condition of the people worsened. Workers were up in >arms, civil servants no longer had job security and rural farmers >encouraged to produce more got even less money for their goods >because of the slump in the global prices for commodities. > >Soon it was discovered that while structural adjustment removed the >state from all areas of the economy, cutting public expenditure on >education, social welfare and health, there was a need to police the >resulting crisis. So it was not a weak state that was needed but a >very strong one - and an uncaringly wicked one at that. It is only >such a state that can impose these draconian measures. So the police, >paramilitary and intelligence services had to be strengthened to >crush strikes, demonstrations and popular uprisings. The African >state was thus restored to its colonial role as the bodyguard of >imperialism. > >Liberal and social democratic forces in the West began to have qualms >about the social effects of adjustment. Their liberal consciences >sought a palliative to relieve the pain without curing the disease. > >The answer was a new-found religion: NGOism. The new catechists >joined the right-wing chorus about the inefficient state and declared >their newly discovered civil society (often inappropriately used to >mean NGOs) to be the new angels. Refugees, civil wars and other >calamities created an immediate need for this humanitarian industry. >And African governments were glad to co-operate by handing over >responsibility for education, water, health - whatever - to NGOs. A >myth developed that because these organizations are based 'among the >people' they are best placed to deliver services to the people. In >the right-wing climate that followed the Thatcher and Reagan years, >it all seemed to make sense. Government was bad and NGOs were good. > >What this fails to recognize is that much of the influence of foreign >NGOs in Africa derives from the power of their governments, embassies >and companies. Some of the most powerful NGOs get the vast majority >of their money from their own governments, whether for emergency >operations or for development projects. In effect these NGOs are the >civil arm of their governments' policies and the ideological cousins >of the IMF and World Bank. One slaps us in the face and the other >offers us handkerchiefs to wipe the tears. > >The first problem with NGOs is that they have become sacred cows that >cannot be touched. Anyone who wishes to criticize Western NGOs is >likely to meet accusations of ingratitude, churlishness, inhuman >cynicism or lack of sympathy for the victims of disasters. How dare >you talk ill of these selfless missionaries who have come to help >you? This sacredness has encouraged arrogance and strengthened their >feeling of superiority and we-know-best attitudes. No doubt many are >involved in the charity business out of moral and political >commitment. But it is also true that there are many who are doing it >only for career purposes. Our misery is their job. If you are a >disaster manager, what will you do if there are no more disasters? > >This is particularly true at a time when more and more NGO money is >going into emergency operations rather than long-term development >work. There is even a danger that emergencies will be converted into >permanent situations. A typical case was that of post-genocide >Rwandese refugees in former Zaire, Tanzania and Burundi. The Ngara >refugee settlement became the second-biggest city in Tanzania after >Dar-es-Salaam. Yet it was not under the control of the Government. It >was controlled by NGOs. A trip there would have shocked any liberal >conscience. Flags of different NGOs were hoisted in >different compartments, with the obvious suggestion to rival >organizations: 'Keep off my refugees and I'll keep off yours.' Many >of these NGOs did not wish the camps to be closed because their jobs >and influence would go too. The pressure to make the camps habitable >was turning them into permanent cities with amenities that the >refugees were never going to get if they went back to their hills in >Rwanda. Yet if you suggest to the NGOs that long-term development >work in Rwanda itself will actually persuade refugees to go home, >they plead that it is not their mandate. > >A second major problem arising from the mushrooming of NGO work in >Africa is the internal brain drain. The external brain drain from >Africa is a dismal phenomenon which has been exacerbated by the >economic crisis. Thousands of Africans with university degrees or >professional qualifications end up in dreary jobs in Europe or >America, from cleaning the streets to working anti-social hours that >would be refused by the natives. Meanwhile NGO employees, almost all >of them white, head back in the opposite direction. One might ask, if >the NGOs genuinely wish to help, why could they not send African >skills back to Africa with the same fantastic salaries and perks >as the European experts? > >But the internal brain drain is a less recognized problem. The few >skilled people left behind in Africa are tempted away from public >institutions by the NGOs who can afford to pay ten times what >governments can afford. Furthermore, the same NGOs that drain this >local expertise away get consultancies to train and build up 'local >capacity'. Go to any university in Africa and you will find that the >professors who are doing well are those with access to the foreign >NGO community as consultants and researchers. In effect they spend >more time chasing or performing these jobs than they do teaching >their students. > >The pervasive presence of NGOs is even changing the social geography >of African cities due to the high-spending lifestyles of the >'expats'. Wherever there is a big expatriate community there is >invariably sex tourism. One cannot blame prostitution on expatriates >but there is a particular twist that the dollar power has imposed on >the exchange. A lot of African women and men now hope to do better >for themselves by hooking an expatriate partner. They can pay much >more and if you are lucky they may even take you back to the West! > >The economic power of NGOs is precipitating a cultural crisis that is >now very acute. It is not just that the colonial mentality is back in >the shape of white expatriates being treated as 'bosses' (and many of >them are literally bosses to numerous domestic servants). But for >African countries that already suffer the debilitating effect of >inferiority complexes brought about by slavery and colonialism, these >new relations cannot do much for our collective morale, esteem and >confidence. > >As if this is not bad enough it has now become fashionable to hear >Western journalists, humanitarian 'experts' or even some Africans >advocating a return to some kind of colonialism (probably under UN >mandate) as a remedy for Africa. Actually colonialism never really >left Africa. Like the deadly aids virus, it merely mutated. > >The choice facing Africa is not between chaos and recolonization, >as propounded by so many, but between Pan-Africanism and >recolonization. The African Unity agenda remains the only basis upon >which Africans can reclaim their dignity and become equal partners >with the rest of humanity. It is not that Africa does not need help >but at the moment it is too weak to determine where this help should >be and how it should be used. > >Hope is not what somebody else bestows on you. It is what you give >to yourself. Only a union of African states can create the enabling >environment for Africa's hope to be realized. JC _______________________________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi _______________________________________________________ Kominform list for general information. Subscribe/unsubscribe messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anti-Imperialism list for anti-imperialist news. Subscribe/unsubscribe messages: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________________
