Aug 18, 2007: Faced with complex problems, there is a perverse human desire to seek simple solutions. Part of the simple solution usually involves blaming someone or something, and arguing that if only this person, political party, government, nation, whatever, would change its ways, the problem would disappear, or at least stop being so troublesome. The long slump in economic development in Africa, and its accompanying poverty and misery, is one such problem. And Robert Calderisi, a long-time World Bank official, knows who to blame. Africans. Not just any Africans, of course. Some of Calderisi's best friends are Africans. But he has a low opinion of African leaders, and reservations about some aspects of African culture, such as family and tribal loyalty, which he sees as being responsible for such negative phenomena as corruption and dictatorship.Well-meaning foreign friends have made the situation worse by tolerating financial and political malfeasance, and in fact have encouraged it by showering dictators with aid money without demanding anything much in the way of social improvement in return. Having constructed this simple analytical framework, Calderisi offers a 10-point plan, which boils down to encouraging democracy and transparency by cutting aid to the worst offenders – in fact, halving direct aid to most African countries. In a controversial nod to neo-colonialism, he says "international personnel" should supervise the running of schools and HIV/AIDS programs to prevent the siphoning off of funds. He also recommends merging the three main international aid bodies: the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations Development Programme.
Before outlining his approach, Calderisi rejects, often in just a few paragraphs, some of the usual explanations for Africa's development failure. The slave trade, the legacy of colonialism, globalization and debt, the Cold War, daunting geography and climate – to Calderisi, these are just "excuses." Curiously, some factors he does not mention at all, such as the arbitrary construction of most African states and the fact that traditional African societies have been completely unhinged by the process of modernization. The past bores him. The old explanations, the old excuses, he says, are "beginning to grow stale" half a century after independence. He appears to feel that 50 years has been enough time for Africa to get over its past. Perhaps that is the banker in him speaking, thinking always in terms of 10-year loans. But a historian knows that 50 years is nothing when it comes to addressing basic social structures.
This is not to say that Calderisi is all wrong. It is true that societies can paralyze themselves by becoming mired in debates over historical slights. And Africa does have to look forward; governments do have to address the issues of corruption and repression; foreign supporters do have a responsibility to see that the funds they provide are used responsibly. But to say that a few fixes to local governance and how aid is distributed will lead to a "new day" in Africa is far-fetched. The intersection of history, culture, geography and modernization is a deadly one. China, a far more cohesive socio-political entity than sub-Saharan Africa, and the current posterboy for rapid economic development, floundered around for the better part of a century and a half before finally finding a practical way forward. Friends of Africa will require patience, good will and, yes, a degree of tough love. But spare us lectures from bankers.
Fred Edwards is a member of the Toronto Star's editorial board.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Mozlink’ for any or all of the articles/images placed here. The placing of an article does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Mozlink
No comments:
Post a Comment