On 1/30/11, Ingrid Srinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>> the regime, yes -- its a matter of survival. but, i dont think there
>> is even a single protestor who
>> is out there in indignant anger because the americans reduced funding
>> for some civil society groups....
>>
>
> Absolutely, but choking off the channels that press for democratic reform,
> social justice etc. leaves people with no avenue but insurrection.  And the
> signal the regime received was that the new US administration cared less
> about democratic reform than the Bush administration did.
>

I am not disagreeing with you on the above -- what I am trying to say
is that these channels did not begin-to-exist / cease-to-exist because
of the US cutting funds for civil society groups.

All such funds are channeled via USAID ...which does not fund anything
remotely smelling of dissidence or having an incendiary agenda.  They
typically support the powder-puff change-the-world seminar /
conference kind of project revolving around themes like : urban
poverty, upliftment of women, infant mortality etc [In my part of the
world the favorite is : youth empowerment, and FGM ]. They are there
not just in Egypt, but in every "strategically" important 3rd world
outpost. No one cares about these programs ...neither a regime worried
about policy shift ...or the US government.


This sentence is from a USAID audit of their own democracy projects in
Egypt in 2008 :

"the impact of USAid/Egypt's democracy and governance programmes was
unnoticeable in indexes describing the country's democratic
environment" (page 2, link below -- also has a description of a
typical "seminar" run by USAID)

<http://www.thenational.ae/news/worldwide/africa/egypts-democracy-groups-fear-shift-in-us-policy-will-harm-their-work>

So, the obama administration decided to do the smart thing : save
money and shut down some of these programs. The only ones i think,
willing to come and throw stones for this indignation are American
commentators on huffington post.

More interesting is this foreign policy report -- which i believe
appeared in the economist sometime back --- but is available un-gated
here :

<http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2010/10_middle_east_hamid.aspx>
quote:
".... the hype surrounding the Bush “freedom agenda” – which included
the creation of the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) and a
doubling of National Endowment for Democracy funding – obscured the
fundamental reality that American, as well as European, financial
assistance has been just as limited as the NGOs and political groups
it has tried to support...."

quote:
"As for political groups or movements, they generally have not
received US assistance. Such groups are obviously more controversial
as their goals extend well beyond the mandate of NGOs, which are
relatively small and focused on more limited objectives. In Egypt,
this includes groups such as Kifaya, April 6, the National Association
for Change, and the Muslim Brotherhood. None have received U.S.
funding. "

Reply via email to