If you are not in the mood for cynicism, read no further.
But if, like me, you share not only exasperation about the failure of the Congo
to pull itself from poverty, warfare, corruption and chaos, but also a sense of
helplessness, read on.
What is one to do with a country where the General leading a
campaign to defeat an armed rebellion chooses to sell arms to the enemy? What
is one to do with a country that is so dependent on international aid that it
has basically surrendered all responsibility for its own services?
This thought was triggered by a realisation that
international donors are so desperate to claim results that they clutch at the
tiniest response from the recipients of their aid as “a success”.
We have a nice example. As part of the gender sensitive
principles of our donor, we thought it would be a good idea to help a group of
women in the public service to become advocates for equality and
non-discrimination. This in a country where women members of parliament are a
rarity, and those in high public office can be counted on one hand. So it’s
pretty obvious there’s work to be done.
The initiative went down well: a group of women from five
provinces decided there’s definitely need for something of this sort. After a
three day workshop, broken at regular intervals for refreshments, they adopted
hopeful resolutions and elected a committee to draft a constitution and
finalise the planning of the first year’s activities.
Hold your breath – this is a big one: the committee met more
than once WITHOUT asking us to pay for their transport or refreshments. Now
that is what we call SUCCESS. Not what they did, but the fact that they didn’t
ask us for money.
Like all good donors, ours looks over its shoulder at the
electorate back home. There is a big PR job to be done to demonstrate that the
millions being spent are making a difference, and anything that can be called a
success must be written up and made available to the general public.
So, without any ado we get down to writing a one page
summary of how this remarkable event occurred and without any shame classify it
as a SUCCESS STORY, one of a regular stream of similar flimsy claims. The donor
loves it.
Looking at the whole situation from the point of view of the
Congo and its peoples, one cannot help asking whether their heavy reliance on
donor funding is not a product of the well-intentioned efforts of the
international aid community. For example, we fall over ourselves to support the
health and education systems, to the extent that if anything is wrong with them
we feel that it is our fault, and more money must be spent to rectify it.
Naturally enough, the Congolese soon pick this up and if they encounter any
social or economic problem their first thought is to ask themselves which donor they can ask to fix it.
A Congolese friend recently was asking herself the same
question. Is this international aid creating a nation of helpless beggars, a
client state that has neither the will nor the means to stand on its own feet?
Is aid, in fact, truly helping? Did the United States get aid to develop?
The Congo is widely recognised as having massive wealth in
terms of its minerals, forests and agricultural potential; not to mention its
potential to supply electricity to the whole of Africa if a planned
hydro-electric power station goes ahead. So why can’t it, like the USA of old,
use those resources to stand on its own feet and develop itself without
depending on other people for its development?
Good question.
