Beitrag vom 13.11.2009

Helmut Danner, Nairobi
The African Response to "Dead Aid” - Or: Who Feels Responsible for Africa's Development?

Dambisa Moyo's book "Dead Aid. Why Aid is not Working and how there is another Way for Africa” has stirred up the development fraternity in the North. She makes a compelling case for a new approach in Africa, says Kofi Annan. The book became the New York Times best-seller on 3 April 2009. The Time Magazine declared Moyo "one of the one hundred most influential people in the world”. Interviews all over the world, TV discussions in the CNN, BBC... Applause and condemnation. This is the picture in the North, in America, in Europe. But what do Africans say about her radical theses? Aid increases poverty in Africa! Stop it! Use the financial market instead!

A brief look at Moyo's website (www.dambisamoyo.com) gives a first hint to the African reaction. End of October 2009, under ‘news' we find about 160 entries; eight refer to Moyo's own contributions; about twelve entries are related to African authors who do not necessarily live in Africa. The remaining approximately 140 reactions to "Dead Aid” are of Northern origin. This, of course, is a very rough estimate and it is not complete as Moyo is neglecting certain African responses as we will see later. But it already makes us question the African interest in the development discussion that Moyo has incited. It appears to be much less than the interest from all over the world.

Moyo gets support from the Rwandan President, Paul Kagame: "Dead Aid has given us an accurate evaluation of the aid culture today.” Ending all aid within five years may be an aggressive proposal. But this is the discussion we should be having: "when to end aid and how best to end it.” A Zimbabwean journalist, Innocent Madawo, who lives in Toronto considers Moyo as the "arrowhead” of a growing movement of African intellectuals and leaders who are seeking to correct the image of Africa as the Dark Continent. Africa should no longer be seen as an object of pity. The rich world should not only have a heart for the poor, but also a mind for the poor. Africa's potential is ignored; "what it needs more than aid is capacity-building”. Another Zimbabwean, Tinashe Murapata, is perturbed by Moyo's "China is our friend” message. The dramatic headline of the book in the end does not live up to expectations. In rural areas aid has transformed societies. In his view, new solutions for Africa lie in entrepreneurship.

In a similar way, Magatte Wade, a Senegalese business woman, misses realistic solutions in "Dead Aid” as Moyo does not focus adequately on African entrepreneurship. For, poverty in Africa will be eliminated not by aid, but by entrepreneurial job creation. Without mentioning Moyo, Stephen Yeboah, asks how Ghana can be weaned off of foreign aid and points to the example of East Asian countries. Like Wade he is pleading to identify local income generating opportunities, for, as he argues, Ghana has a lot of prospects to make the economy viable for increased export. With only a short reference to Moyo, Okello Oculi mostly criticizes African leaders as well as big donors like the World Bank: The latter "keep themselves in employment by making Africa's debts boom, while sustaining rulers in power who do not care for aid reaching their oppressed people”.

Not appearing in Moyo's website is a critical remark by Daniel Bradlow, a South African, saying that it is foolhardy to make categorical judgements about aid; it is necessary to evaluate each specific aid transaction on its merits. For, there are positive examples where aid has been successful like in Korea, Taiwan and Botswana. Bradlow calls Moyo's book misleading; but it could encourage receiving governments to analyse offers for aid carefully and to use it effectively. The South African institute "idasa” boils Moyo's message down to empower Africans to take back the control that has either been stolen or relinquished to others. A reader of "idasa” remarks that aid is not the problem, but it is the "pathogenic political elites”. It is not a question of aid that creates dependency but of "political elites robbing their own people”.

It seems that in Ghana and neighbouring franco-phone countries Moyo and her book are hardly known, even among educated persons who are involved in the development of their country, although Moyo has been in Accra. A similar information stems from DR Congo: positive or negative reactions are scarce.

In East Africa, Nairobi's sister papers "Nation” and "The East African” have so far published four articles on "Dead Aid”. Based on his own negative experience, Mo Ibrahim rejects Moyo's proposal that African governments could easily raise money through issuing bonds. Debt markets are not open to the African countries; the cost of government bonds is materially higher than that of World Bank and others; financial institutions are not interested in investing in sub-Saharan Africa as financial markets do not understand Africa. According to this objection by Mo Ibrahim to bonds as an African solution, Moyo's proposal has to be taken with caution - which is even truer in the financial and economic crisis the world is in at present. Ibrahim argues for "a holistic approach to development in Africa that is centred on good governance. This must encompass African governments, civil society, the private sector and donors”.

Rasna Warah strongly emphasizes Moyo's theses by giving her article in the "Nation” the title "Aid has not, does not, and will never help Africa”. In a different article, she critically adds that given Moyo's "unflinching faith in free markets as the ultimate solution, and her silence on social and historical injustices, she has not managed to take the debate far enough”. My own article "Dead Aid or Wrong Approach” argues against the faith that the Chinese are or will be the saviours of Africa. (Interestingly, this argument has been taken out by the editor of The East African.) Most astonishing is Moyo's optimistic belief that stopping aid would prompt African governments to switch to self-financing and this would push economic growth and reduce poverty. Moyo's one-sided approach is due to her pure perspective of economics, neglecting the human factor. Talking about aid cannot ignore the African disposition and condition for development - with or without aid.

In a similar way, John Harbeson is recently arguing in the "Nation” that aid has been about people helping people, not just cash transfers, and that economic growth per se has never been the only goal. Moyo overlooks the complexities of aid purposes, forms and venues. Harbeson also stresses the interdependency of democracy and development as well as of aid and democracy. "Dead Aid or Wrong Approach” was also posted in the website of "The African Executive”. One reader, Justin Laku, responded by supporting Moyo. He refers to Hancock's "Lords of Poverty” and quotes American statements during the Cold War to demonstrate America's self-interest in aid. The readers of "The East African” did not react, neither approvingly nor critically. This demonstrates quite a different interest of the East African people compared to those in Zambia. However, the bookshops in Nairobi display piles of copies of "Dead Aid”. They are sold, but the readers remain silent. One specific person also does not comment on Moyo, at least not publicly, although he represents the opinion that aid should be terminated: James Shikwati.

Coming back to Moyo's website, it has to be noted that certain controversial articles, for instance Mo Ibrahim's or mine, are not mentioned. This is even more astonishing with respect to serious, but critical articles by fellow countrymen of Moyo. Also they are ignored by her. This does not express her wish for thorough discussion in order to find the best ways out of Africa's calamities. There is an excellent review by Cho in the Zambian Economist (6 March 2009). Though Zambians should be filled with pride and admiration about their fellow country woman speaking out on development, Cho comes to the conclusion: "I am afraid to say, and with deep sorrow, that the Dead Aid proposal falls far short in many areas, with at least four worth highlighting”: (1) general lack of clear analytical rigour; (2) treatment of aid in a homogeneous and aggregate way is particularly problematic; (3) a plethora of inconsistent arguments; (4) the solutions proposed are ineffective. Cho refers to Zambia, Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania to show that an improvement of economic performance is possible - if not because of aid, but at least in the presence of aid. The challenge is how to make aid smarter, better und ultimately beneficial to the poor. Cho's review has stimulated 56 comments, seriously discussing development issues and overwhelmingly critical against Moyo. One reader even says that this book is reckless and dangerous and ultimately will do more harm than good. Koluki is impressed by Cho's review and more or less copies it for the Angolan "K Faktor”.

A report on a debate with Moyo in Canada by the "Lusaka Times” (14 June 2009) stimulated fifty comments. These are not always very close to the topic and compared to the comments in the "Zambian Economist” less relevant. However, they show a great interest of the public in the development discussion. In addition, there are a few more Zambian articles on the Moyo book: Humphrey Mulemba counters that the answer is not to cut aid, but to ensure it is used effectively. Fr. Pete Henriot reports on a debate with Moyo in Zambia and concludes that a simplistic one-way approach is neither correct nor helpful; obviously the participants of the debate have been stressing the failures of their political leaders. There is also a very supportive article by Kelvin Kachingwe, also a Zambian. He is convinced that Moyo suggests the best way forward: Africa has to be weaned off aid.

In summary, this is a rough sketch of the reaction to "Dead Aid” in Africa, rather an impression than a scientific study. It cannot be fully accurate because of the widespread information in the internet with hundreds of thousands of entries. Some personal information has added to the exemplary picture; for example, Pete Ondeng, author of "Africa's Moment”, characterizes "Dead Aid” as "simplistic and removed from reality”. Definitely the reception of and the attention to Dambisa Moyo's book is much more heated up in the North than in Africa itself. In general, the discussion in Africa burns on a low fire. An exception is Zambia, Moyo's home country, which is not astonishing, but rather an expression of African relationships. One supports and pays attention to the one who belongs to ‘us'; she is "our girl”. No German author would get much attention by his countrymen just because he is German.

Although Dambisa is "ours”, she has to face strong African voices who do not or not fully agree with her. Critics demand a more subtle approach to the African development problem, also a more thorough analysis. They want to come down to reality where development really can happen. Therefore, they are talking of local business and entrepreneurship. Those who support "Dead Aid” often have a negative image of the donors, of the North in general, they feel suppressed, treated unequally; they expect and demand respect for Africans. They say, the attitudes have to change. Only this would give them a perspective for development. But many are pointing their finger to their own leaders, to their corrupt and inefficient governments. Besides in Zambia, it does not look like that Dambisa Moyo has really stimulated the discussion on development in Africa. The question arises: Who feels responsible for Africa's development? The Northerners or the Africans?