Famine in Africa - Again.

H

horusd

Registered User
Messages
1,830
There is famine again in the horn of Africa and a burgeoning tragedy that seems to repeat itself there over and over.

Ethiopia and northern Kenya are particularly affected. I know the rains have failed, but the real problem seems to be chronic and unsustainable population growth. The Ethiopian population has grown from somewhere around 65 million in 2000 to around 90 million in 2011. See here. Kenya's growth is less dramatic but still very large. See here.

We of course will see the usual appeals for help and support, and Ireland will probably lead the field in donations, but I really am beginning to question the whole issue of whether aid works at all or are we just salving our consciences with it?

Coupled with exploding population growth is endemic corruption and what I more and more believe, is an "aid culture & economy". Is there any point in giving aid? Would it be better to do the unthinkable, and leave Africa to solve it's own problems?
 
horusd said:
Would it be better to do the unthinkable, and leave Africa to solve it's own problems?
Click to expand...

As so many Western Countries were involved in causing Africa's problems it doesn't seem unreasonable that they help to solve them. It will take trillions and decades to solve Africa's problems (it took Europe numerous wars and 400 years).
I agree that we should stop throwing money at them and I agree that population growth is a major problem.
Despite all the harm they are doing the Chinese are probably the best friend sub-Saharan Africa had right now (not because they are nice people but because they are aligning their own interests with those of the locals).
Africa doesn’t need our aid it needs our capitalism and it needs us to leave them alone to select their own leaders. That and 50-100 years and they’ll be sorted.
 
Very interesting question and one I have asked myself many times. My personal conclusion is pretty similar to what you have suggested, but I do not believe that population growth is the problem.
The way I see it is that due to lack of protection of personal property rights in developing countries, extreme corruption at all levels of society and in many cases constant warfare, there is no chance for any kind of market economy to come into existence. These would be the internal influences.
Externally, the biggest problem is subsidies given to food producers in the developed world, which artificially reduces the price a food producer in the developing world can hope to achieve. This means that less economic capital flows into the countries, which reduces the amount of money that can be invested in machinery, irrigation, transportation and even genetically modified more robust crops, all of which would alleviate the possibility of future food shortages.
Additionally, aid is used to buy food that was often grown in the developing world by subsidised food producers, again resulting in no capital flow into these countries. With foreigners picking up the tab to feed a starving population, the governments can continue to run their corrupt practices and buy more military machinery.
These are endless vicious circles resulting from situations where western well intentioned intervention are making things progressively worse. I wouldn't go as far as saying that we should leave them solve their own problems, but I don't think that constant unconditional aid is going to solve anything.
 
I can see the points made below (though I admit I'm not too knowledgeable on the area), but even take Ireland, maybe the EU should let us off to solve our own problems, how would we like that?

Now consider you and your family are starving, all very well for someone a few thousand miles away saying its for your better good that ye all die (which is probably how it would pan out).

Maybe aid should be conditional on improvements in democracy, anti-corruption measures etc, but blockades or boycotts etc only ever hit the ordinary people - its tough medicine.
 
Betsy Og said:
I can see the points made below (though I admit I'm not too knowledgeable on the area), but even take Ireland, maybe the EU should let us off to solve our own problems, how would we like that?

Now consider you and your family are starving, all very well for someone a few thousand miles away saying its for your better good that ye all die (which is probably how it would pan out).

Maybe aid should be conditional on improvements in democracy, anti-corruption measures etc, but blockades or boycotts etc only ever hit the ordinary people - its tough medicine.
Click to expand...

But it would be only the same if Ireland popped up every 10 years with insolvent banks and massive budget deficits.

It's irrational in the long run but I agree completely with your sentiment, given the situation at this precise moment in time you can't stand by let people starve.
 
I agree that capitalism in some shape or form is neccessary, and equitable terms to trade their goods too. But aid has been given to Africa for decades without real impact. Except of course, more people and more corruption. It seems unsustainable. It seems that more aid leads to bigger population growth that is destroying the enviornment needed to sustain any population. Aid itself now seems like the only growth industry.

I think also there is a difference with aid to Ireland inasmuch as it will lead to Ireland relatively quickly regaining self- sustainability. This, to date, hasn't been the case in Africa.

I'm also not sure we "owe" Africa as such Purple. European involvement in Africa was relatively short-lived. Less than 100 yrs. I think the mindset that Europe owes reparations is overplayed. Most of Africa's problems are self-caused. Zimbabwe for example. I suspect that, left somewhat to solve their own problems, Africa would be foreced to confront them instead of reaching out the begging bowl.
 
I don't have a problem with aid been given to meet a humanitarian crisis like this. Even developed countries need help sometimes. (US after Hurricane Katriona)

I do however have a problem with the way international aid has devloped into an industry with it's own self interests. I was in Asia during the Tsunami and I saw aid agencies fighting between themselves to help people because it made for good marketing. The same thing happened in Haiti. At the same time, there are projects that are not covered by the world media that go underfunded.
 
DerKaiser/Betsy I understand the dilemma. But when Ethiopia's population reaches 120 million, 140 million, 200 million, what then?
 
horusd said:
II'm also not sure we "owe" Africa as such Purple. European involvement in Africa was relatively short-lived. Less than 100 yrs. I think the mindset that Europe owes reparations is overplayed.
Click to expand...

Europe controlled trade from West Africa for 500 years and from the whole of Africa for the last 200+. Direct colonisation lasted less than 100 years in most cases but indirect colonisation was widespread up t the end of the cold war and still goes on in some areas, particularly in the former French colonies. The Arab countries of the Middle East have a role to play here as well; their slave trade with East Africa pre-dates the European/American one and is still going strong today.
Chris is 100% correct with regards to property rights. I have made the point here before that without property rights you will not have proper entrepreneurial advancement as individuals cannot access capital.
 
I agree with Horusd to a certain extent. Surely, there are parts of the world that aren't sutable enviroments for large populations.
I don't know what the answer is, but is Ethiopa ever going to be able to to support 100 million people without aid. Surely there should be some long term plan to reduce their reliance on aid.
 
The argument against giving Africa aid is the same as the one against supporting “Fair Trade” products. Both allow unacceptable scenarios to continue, trapping people at a level of human misery just below the level of suffering at which they will agitate to change their circumstances.
 
Fair enough Purple, indirect involvement in Africa is longer, altho one of the legacy issues of particular relevance, was the arbitary drawing of borders by the colonisers. Vastly differing groups of people were left in "countries" that probably should never have been formed, and directly led to current instabilities. But are you suggesting that fairly massive aid continue because of European past involvement ?
 
Last edited:
horusd said:
But are you suggesting that fairly massive aid continue because of European past involvement ?
Click to expand...
There was another thread on this topic recently. My view is that fair trade, not aid, is what Africa needs. Our trade barriers dwarf our aid contributions.
 
I don't think that even fair trade will solve the problem of expotential population growth. And it doesn't address the problem of an aid culture, or corruption.
 
Wealth, consumerism, capitalism and the move away from subsistence living curtails high population growth rates. None of the above is possible without fair trade, i.e. free market capitalism.
 
Purple said:
Wealth, consumerism, capitalism and the move away from subsistence living curtails high population growth rates. None of the above is possible without fair trade, i.e. free market capitalism.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But it can be argued that the current aid structure, coupled with corruption and chronic over-population prevent free-market capitalism.

Perhaps what is needed to bring about this change is a dramatic shift in failed western policies. A slashiing of aid by X% or staged withdrawal, coupled with a an opening of trade-barriers.

Perhaps killing the aid industry will force the very political and social actions required to solve Africa's problems in the long-term.
 
horusd said:
Agreed. But it can be argued that the current aid structure, coupled with corruption and chronic over-population prevent free-market capitalism.

Perhaps what is needed to bring about this change is a dramatic shift in failed western policies. A slashiing of aid by X% or staged withdrawal, coupled with a an opening of trade-barriers.

Perhaps killing the aid industry will force the very political and social actions required to solve Africa's problems in the long-term.
Click to expand...

+ 1

Africas problems are not population growth. They are systemic corruption, the aid industry and lack of fair trade.
 
At a high level, I agree, corruption should be rooted out and fair international trade be established. In the short term though, there are children starving that need aid. They shouldn't have to suffer (as anyone with a child knows, the sound of children crying/in pain is the worst thing in the world) or wait for these reforms. We gotta put our hands in our pockets for this one before it becomes another Live Aid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top