What I'm doing can potentially make the world worse; reflections from school

"We're richer and more powerful than you, so you better listen to our advice on how to not be poor"

My local volunteer buddy's English class in Tanzania

Development can be detrimental  and perpetuate all the things wrong with the world also. Everyone who were quick to compliment me on this "noble cause" might not have warranted that compliment so quickly had they known it might even further destruction...

This "Western Saviour Complex" is a struggle that development practitioners encounter. How does the Western world help a poor country without repeating colonial history?

Or more academically; how do we not appear hegemonic, neo-colonialist, and de-meaning to the people that we are there to help. Not all noble actions are without consequence and in this case, perhaps, deliberate actions to keep them poor. 

Mozambique as a world example

Take Mozambique as an example, in 1975 after they won independence from Portugal, WHO (World Health Organization; a branch of the UN) declared their health care system should be a model upon which all other are based in the developing world. By 1980's they have established 1,200 rural health posts, 8000 health workers were trained, and 11% of the government budget was committed to health care. And then the Rhodesia war broke out.

Enter the IMF and their crusade to develop the poor

By 1987, Mozambique adopted an IMF Structural Adjusted Program (SAP). For those who don't

know about the IMF, or International Monetary Fund, they promote "international monetary cooperation and exchange rate stability, facilitates the balanced growth of international trade, and provides resources to help members in balance of payments difficulties or to assist with poverty reduction." (source) To get the aid of the IMF and World Bank, Mozambique must follow the SAP model. 

The SAP model requires the country to "shock" the economy back into "health." First step is to inflate the currency, print money, and drive their dollar lower and lower (much like what the U.S is doing now); open up the to the world market; privatize everything; cut government services (like health care and education, prices increased, their exports devalued, and "free market promoted" (Free for the Western countries) 

In a decade, 2% of their budget is devoted to health care (from a previous 11%). With lack of support from the Mozambique government resulting in a failing health care system, NGO's began to descend like flies on shit. Expats from all over the world entered. 1990, over 100 agencies were working in the country with a budget of over $1 million USD compared to the domestic health services of $750,000. 

"it is noteworthy that the World Bank and IMF took no account of the war in their programme design, merely referring coyly to 'external factors',29 thus locating the impact of the war outside the programme framework" (Harrison, 542)

Each country has a very specific scenario and to blanket all the countries under this SAP program for funding ultimately destroys their economy and livelihood.

NGO's and their "Aid cowboys and aid mercenaries"

The NGO's began to build walled compounds and armed with guards, swimming pool, luxurious lifestyle and employed newly grads (much like myself) with a salary between $1,000 to $6,000 a month from a one to two year stay to implement their "aid and development" projects while throwing extravagant parties where you can hear the latest Euro beats pulse through the night.

Missing are the local Mozambican beneficiaries. 

With the IMF policies in place, one Mozambican said "during socialism we had money but nothing to buy, but now there's a lot to buy but we have no money."

The drop in salaries for the Mozambican doctors reflected the 2% support the government provided upon taking up the IMF policies. This forced the doctors to work with the NGO's who were not looking out for the good of the local people and perpetuates the situation that the NGO's are not there to develop but to keep them poor. 

Were these the intentions of the IMF policies? Maybe not, but it sure as hell didn't make the country more self-sustainable. 

Implications to the world stage

There are several ways to look at this. Perhaps this is the way the the "Global North" (Western powers) maintains control, power, and influence over other countries is to not allow them to develop. Keeping them poor and in debt is the best form of control. When you become a beggar, well, you can't be a chooser. This could be a scheme or a ploy played out under a "humanitarian" disguise.

And this disguise sometimes is blatant to see as US invading Iraq for freedom and democracy. Oh please. 

Others, such as a humanitarian crisis and aid work, seems more noble and worthy. But ultimately the policies set in place are schemes against those countries to put them into crippling debt to be controlled. 

With IMF's headquarters in Washington D.C it seems they're not going to be very neutral on certain world crisis and decisions will be made to benefit the issuers of the loan (Global North) instead of the countries in need (like Mozambique). This is another example of how the rich stay rich and exploit the poor, this time through development work.

These kind of policies are subtle and do not make the news. They slip through the attention of most people in the world. But the Occupy Movement's philosophies do speak out to issues like this. So it's not so much in the dark as it was before.

Policies and terrorism

Perhaps this is why most of the world hates the "West", because of these policies employed to cripple economies and force to them to pay back debt with interests. This generates contempt and reasons to attack. "Freedom and democracy" only exists for those who are born into it. There's no freedom and democracy for anyone else. Those "others" are meant to stay where they are while we step on their backs. This isn't the first time. Look at Germany post-WWI "Fourteen Points" by Woodrow Wilson. The 14 points were meant to humiliate and keep Germany poor. This set the world stage for WWII. This is what happens when policies grip and tear apart a country. Retaliation against those countries are warranted.

This idea can be applied to the modern day "fight against terrorism" by policies that make it humiliating and detrimental to those countries. And by force of nature, when they strike back at us, we're all shocked and horrified. However, this is a disccusion for a different topic, but it illustrates the point that policies in place can generate reasons for other countries to view the "West" as a controlling imperialist and must be fought against.

My class in Tazania trying to meet the MDP

Taking it back to development practice

Working on the world stage with these kind of institutions (ie, IMF, World Bank, UN) becomes a very big question mark in terms of who's aiding who. Genuinely, how do practitioners enact policies and and develop a community or country without looking like an absolute holier-than-thou attitude. There are success stories, however, at this time, it seems like "the world system" is winning. 

There are a lot of questions and a lot more will come. 

Sources

Pfeiffer, James. (2003). International NGOs and primary health care in Mozambique: the need for a new model of collaboration. Social Science and Medicine. 56. pg 725 - 738. 

Harrison, Graham (1999) Corruption as "Boundary Politics": The state, Democratization, and Mozambique's Unstable Liberalization. Third World Quarterly. 20 [3]. pg 537 - 550

Imf.org,. (2014). About the IMF Overview. Retrieved 29 October 2014, from http://www.imf.org/external/about/overview.htm