African Debt Relief

[Darat]

What is "good governance"? And how do we make sure that "good governance" doesn't get mixed up with idiotic counterproductive economic measures i.e. who gets to decide what "good governance" is? If you are going to say "the country that provides the help", then I see a lot of potential conflicts of interest.

Yep of course there will be conflicts of interest, I can't see how you can avoid it, all you can do is try and minimise those conflicts by having countries work together. That may mean deciding to make the funding available via an organisation like the WorldBank.

As for exactly what the conditions would be that has to depend on the country receiving the aid and what the country (or organisation) is willing to provide in terms of aid. Good governance starts with the simplest things first, I would say the first step is to ensure that the basic rights of people (based pretty much on the UN human rights declaration) are in place. After that it gets decidedly more difficult...

(Edited for words.)

 

[Orwell]

It is not about Governments spending money on arms, that is a piffling amount of the sums involved. It is more about toler5ance of corruption, belief in socilist ideals, regimes based on holding on to power and tribal rivalries. It is about many things that can be desrcibed in single phrase - poor governance.

Ok, I exaggerated. It appeared once. The word doesn't keep "propping up". It's just that the abuse of the word socialist is one of my pet-peeves. I'm what you would call a "social-democrat", and I hate it when "socialism" becomes the lazy cover-all word for all kinds of things, good and bad.

 

[Orwell]

Yep of course there will be conflicts of interest, I can't see how you can avoid it, all you can do is try and minimise those conflicts by having countries work together. That may mean deciding to make the funding available via an organisation like the WorldBank.

As for exactly what the conditions would be that has to depend on the country receiving the aid and what the country (or organisation) is willing to provide in terms of aid. Good governance starts with the simplest things first, I would say the first step is to ensure that the basic rights of people (based pretty much on the UN human rights declaration) are in place. After that it gets decidedly more difficult...

(Edited for words.)

I agree. I think all aid should be directed to basic services: hygiene and healthcare (clean running water, disease control, etc.), education, healthcare, some basic infrastructure. Concrete things that can eventually be completely run by the people of the country themselves. Once these things are in place, these countries should be allowed to choose their own economic policies.

 

[aerocontrols]

How is it a fund raising event? Is it you are defining "fundraising" because they are lobbying for aid, which of course means money via the taxpayers?

BBC

It raised £3m - with part of the money covering the cost of staging the concerts.

And the rest of the money?

Or go to this affiliated website where you can donate money.

 

[Earthborn]

I still see no comittment to good governance, rule of law, equality of opportunity or an stand against corruption across the continent.

Why does there need to be such a commitment across the entire continent before individual countries get their debts forgiven? It does not make sense to me to punish countries with good governance because other countries have bad governance.

You only have to look at the ongoing shameful attitude towards Zimbabwe to as ample evidence of that.

What happens in Zimbabwe is completely irrelevant to what happens in other African countries. The fact that Zimbabwe has a bad government is not 'ample evidence' that other African countries also have bad government.

It is more about toler5ance of corruption, belief in socilist ideals, regimes based on holding on to power and tribal rivalries. It is about many things that can be desrcibed in single phrase - poor governance.

Which of the countries that are now elligible to debt relief do you believe have these problems?

The most eloquent example one can give is the experience of Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe has nothing with to do with the discussion, as it isn't going to get its debts forgiven.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Jon, did you see the Channel 4 doco a week or two back made by a Ugandan journalist. His message was that they needed less, not more aid and that debt relief was a complete red herring.

Unfortunately I only saw the last few minutes- pity, looked very interesting.

Am I correct in remebering that Uganda's debt was written off only to rise to unmanageble proportions a few years later?

 

[CBL4]

Originally posted by Earthborn
What happens in Zimbabwe is completely irrelevant to what happens in other African countries. The fact that Zimbabwe has a bad government is not 'ample evidence' that other African countries also have bad government.

In some sense you are right but in many others you are wrong.

The Liberian civil wars are considered the cause of wars in Sierra Leone and other countries. In this case, one tyrant, Charles Taylor, wrecked several countries. Another example is the Congo war which brought in troops from 6 other nations.

Even if there is no war as in Zimbabwe, it can cause major problems with refugees being the most obvious. Zimbabwe's refugees are causing problems in Botswana and South Africa. In other cases, incompetent government can close trade routes that are necessary for their neighbors or destroy a vibrant border region where trade has been booming.

A wave in one nation can cause ripples in others.

CBL

 

[Jon_in_london]

What happens in Zimbabwe is completely irrelevant to what happens in other African countries.

No it is not completely irrelevant to what happens in other African countries. It is most relevant indeed.

Or rather the reaction of other African countries to what happens in Zimbabwe is most relevant.

How many of the governments in sub-Saharan Africa have condemned outright the events in Zim? Lets count ermm.... none.

Doesnt the fact that other regional governments are happy to tolerate and even justify on the grounds of counter-neo-imperialism, what Mugabe has done and is doing to Zim say something about the region as a whole?

Even Mandela, the Liberal's favourite pet darkie is complicit- all that is needed is for Mandela to utter a single sentence to bring the whole nightmare in Zim to an end.

 

[Orwell]

Mandela has condemned Mugabe repeatedly. That you do not know does not mean he did not speak out. You have to remember that Mandela is not the president of S.A. anymore. What he says isn't extensively covered by western newspapers, and as an elderly private citizen, he is now less outspoken than he was. It is also possible that he avoids directly talking about things that could cast a shadow on Thabo Mbeki's presidency.

Mandela expresses anger at Mugabe

Looking for leadership, many South Africans expected Mbeki to take a firm stand against the breakdown of law and order in Zimbabwe. Instead, his signals brought more dismay and confusion. While Archbishop Desmond Tutu, never one to mince his words, described Mugabe as a "caricature" of an African leader, Mbeki was pictured holding hands with the Zimbabwean President at a regional summit in Victoria Falls last month. While Nelson Mandela, though not referring to Mugabe directly, denounced power-hungry former liberation leaders and called for the downfall of "the tyrant of the day," Mbeki was happily opening a trade show in the Zimbabwean city of Bulawayo.

http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2000/0522/viewpoint.html

Tsvangirai's critics of the president were following this week's first public statements of former South African president Nelson Mandela against Mugabe. "I would have wished that somebody would talk to him (Mugabe) to say: 'Look, you have been in office for 20 years. It's time to step down,'" Mandela said in an interview with a South African newspaper on Friday.

http://www.afrol.com/News/zim042_threats/zim042_threats.htm

That "all that is needed is for Mandela to utter a single sentence to bring the whole nightmare in Zim to an end." phrase is nonsense.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Mandela has condemned Mugabe repeatedly. That you do not know does not mean he did now speak out.

I do stand corrected.

 

[Earthborn]

In other cases, incompetent government can close trade routes that are necessary for their neighbors or destroy a vibrant border region where trade has been booming.

A wave in one nation can cause ripples in others.

That bad governments can cause problems for good governments sounds a like a good reason to make life a bit easier for the good governments.

 

[a_unique_person]

Its not my fault your article is old! If you want to prove a point, post a link that proves it- otherwise shut the hell up!

The age illustrates how long ago people were already revising their thinking on aid.

Arms spending is one area of waste by Afrcan governments- If they had the management skills of a slug, African governments would not buy arms but would rather invest in healthcase, infrastucture and education. Insisting that the arms trade is all the West's fault for keeping Africa poor is deeply patronising and frankly rascist. You are basically saying that Africans are too childish and irresponsible to be trusted with arms....

Not quite, the arms often end up with 'militant' groups who foster continued rebellion an civil war.

As to arms ownership in general, I am in favour of restricting general arms ownership in all countries, including my own.

Yes, education is a problem. Yes, AIDS is a problem. Perhaps you would like to take this up with Thabo Mbeki who believes HIV has nothing to do with sex but was invented by Martians to discredit the revolution?

Or just educate the people who could make up their own minds and ignore his ignorance.

 

[a_unique_person]

Maybe but I, like Jesse Jackson, have a way of sniffing out racism.

My interpretation follows.



This is simply an exercise in excuse generation. It is a way of deflecting responsibility by pointing to something that in the world of the paranormal would be referred to as a statistical abberation.



Come on. This is a PC way of saying that the darkies can't handle weapons. It begs the core question of what the problem is: rapacious dictators that happen to be black which gives them a pass.

Not at all, I believe in gun control for my own country too. Too many arms are in the hands of out of control criminals.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Or just educate the people who could make up their own minds and ignore his ignorance.

And find a cure for cancer at the time I assume?

 

[a_unique_person]

And find a cure for cancer at the time I assume?

Do you know any other way to overcome superstitions about AIDS other than education. It's the only reason we have better judgement on the disease.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Do you know any other way to overcome superstitions about AIDS other than education. It's the only reason we have better judgement on the disease.

Indeed, which is why its so damaging when a government take sthe line that HIV doesnt cause AIDS! Look, you are telling people to not have sex or use a condom if they do. Do you not think you have your work cut out already without being contradicted by the government?

 

[Jon_in_london]

Not at all, I believe in gun control for my own country too. Too many arms are in the hands of out of control criminals.

I think you confuse private gun ownership with government arms spending.

 

[a_unique_person]

Meanwhile

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...icas-benefactor/2005/06/21/1119321731337.html

Geldof defends Bush as Africa's benefactor

An unlikely alliance has formed between US President George Bush and the rock star Bob Geldof, tousled champion of African debt relief.

Britain's Daily Telegraph reported yesterday that the singer had instructed at least one major star participating in his Live8 concerts next month to refrain from anti-Bush rhetoric or commentary during the performance.

Geldof has spent recent weeks encouraging hundreds of thousands of Britons to besiege the G8 meeting at Gleneagles, Scotland, on July 6-8, where European leaders will attempt to soften the US President's views on debt relief for Africa.

But in a newly-published interview with Time magazine, he concedes that he has defended Mr Bush on occasion, particularly to the French.

"(The French) refuse to accept, because of their political ideology, that he has actually done more than any other American president for Africa," Geldof told the US news magazine.

 

[richardm]

BBC

And the rest of the money?

Half of the money will go to help stage the concerts. The other half will go to the Prince's Trust charity (this is a UK charity that provides training, mentoring and financial assistance to young people. It does a lot of good work, despite having Prince Charles behind it!)

Nevertheless, the primary aim of the concerts is not a fundraising one..

Or go to this affiliated website where you can donate money.

That is the Live Aid website, which was, of course, entirely about raising money.

 

[a_unique_person]

I think you confuse private gun ownership with government arms spending.

it seems like every second african nation has a 'rebel' army out there who are just thugs and bandits. Arms control would reduce their ability to cause havoc.