The Limits of Foreign Aid
Published at 08:22 on 14 July 2016
This is a tragedy, but it is almost certainly not happening simply because the international community is failing in its duty to aid the less fortunate.
Nigeria is actually quite a prosperous nation, or rather, should be. It has a huge amount of oil wealth, wealth that is monopolized by a corrupt, kleptocratic elite instead of being shared in any even remotely egalitarian fashion.
Yes, there is the legacy of colonialism to contend with. However, Nigeria achieved full independence in 1963 when it repudiated the last vestiges of its ties to the British empire and declared itself a republic. That is over 50 years ago, yet the improvement in the quality of life of the average Nigerian since then has been frankly pathetic.
Contrast that to the amount of improvement in the life of the average South Korean or Singaporean. Korea suffered particularly egregiously from imperialism (the Japanese were truly brutal there), and Singapore had no great gift of oil wealth to fall back upon (or most other natural resources, they even have to import a big chunk of their drinking water). Both have gone from the Third World to the First.
Even India, which remains a poor nation after nearly 70 years of independence, has managed to at least arrange its economy so that all-out famine has been a thing of the past there for many decades. There still is poverty, malnutrition, and hunger there, but there hasn’t been mass starvation anywhere for decades.
More dramatically, we have Kerala, one of India’s poorest states, which due to class conscious politics forcing government to act in the interests of the many, has life expectancy and literacy rates approaching that of developed Western nations despite a per capita income of under $1000 per year.
No, it’s not fair to expect Nigeria to instantly become as wealthy as, say, Switzerland. But it’s completely fair to hold the Nigerian ruling class responsible for the famine there. There is simply no valid excuse for such a thing. None.
How to correct that? Ultimately, the pressure must come from within Nigeria itself. The alternative — change in response to pressure or intervention from abroad — has a word for it: imperialism. And we all know how that one inevitably plays out.
So yes, be compassionate and provide aid to defuse the immediate crisis if at all possible. But don’t harbor any delusions about that being any real solution, and be very careful lest the aid just end up prolonging the reign of a kleptocracy by artificially defusing sort of domestic outrage which might offer the best hope for addressing the problem at its roots, by provoking change within Nigeria itself.
In fact, might that not be a covert aim of the aid? It’s well known that Western imperialists don’t like revolutions in what amount to their resource colonies. Witness what happened to Iran when Mossadegh became Prime Minister. Something to ponder.