Who are the real beneficiaries of development aid?
Is it the donors or the recipients or both? The Trump administration decision to pause issuance of new development aid projects have reignited an old debate of who are the real movers, shakers and casualties of development aid. In this article, I will attempt to nibble in this complex subject of development aid.
In order to fully comprehend what is going on with development aid an analogy is needed. An able person may become invalid if he is deprived to cater for himself.
I will dilate further on that. An able person without a disability but if he is forced or enticed to sleep in a bed over months he becomes invalidated.
The affected muscles will become weak and unable to carry body weight and adjust body movements.
Basically this is what is called “induced disability” and development aid works in a similar manner.
Development aid tend to carry the same malaise to the recipient countries.
There is a tendency of overlooking internal capacity to problem solving and become overdependent to development aid.
Budgetary allocations tend to treat development aid as if it is an internal revenue collection.
Over time, the recipient nation feels entitled to it, and when it is withheld he grumbles and frets over what the future portends without dipping on it.
The history of development aid in an African context has not been all that rosy.
It has supported anti democratic regimes and foster abuses of human rights.
Moreover, development aid has become a stumbling block to public accountability, the rule of law and good governance.
Recipient countries have been profligate, refusing to live according to their means.
Budgetary allocations rarely cogitate about future needs, and end up being hand to mouth.
In specific terms, let us consider the implications of the Trump administration withholding development aid to Tanzania.
The first thoughts go to malaria, HIV and aids and T.B. In a manner Tanzania behaves it will never extricate herself from a begging bowl.
Tanzania government does not plan or consider those programs can be locally funded and run.
The money which was supposed to cater for those three areas are reallocated to buy presidential planes, SUVs for well connected politicians and principal civil servants.
If you look at allocation of funds brought by donors in areas of poverty alleviation under TASAF or wiping out hiv and aids under TACAIDS you can see the movers are those who work in those organizations more than the targeted individuals.
TASAF is infamous for dishing out funds to those who least need them but depriving those who really need them.
TACAIDS pays her employees much better while beyond retroviral prescriptions no food is provided to support the patients to lead a better life.
While clarity is still lacking and many a political punditry perceives the development aid pause for revaluation is a mere posturing and arm twisting but has no meat in it even if the influx of illegal immigrants into their countries will change the politics of development aid forever.
Every time development aid donors strengthen the hand of an abuser of human rights and an election thief will be punished at the donors’ own border where he will have to spend more to insulate himself from the illegal intruders who accept nothing but a share of their national cake.
We all pay one way or the other but we can choose how to limit those consequences of neglect by acting prudently.
Really true. Politician should change the mind set