Bush and others ought be encouraged to link debt cancellation to:
1. improved human rights and significantly reduced use of coersion (as reported by AI, Human Rights Watch, etc,)
2. democratic governance, significant reduction in corruption (as reported by Transparency International, etc)
1. improved human rights and significantly reduced use of coersion (as reported by AI, Human Rights Watch, etc,)
2. democratic governance, significant reduction in corruption (as reported by Transparency International, etc)
.
This article has disabused us of the notion that UPE had anything to do with Museveni's "patriotism".
It also shows why the west not only tolerates corruption and bad governance in Africa, but also actively encourages it.
Now that the water supply dept is on the chopping block, lets see for how long Mu7 will stave of the inevitable.
A truckload of nonsense
The G8 plan to save Africa comes with conditions that make it little more than an extortion racket
George Monbiot
Tuesday June 14, 2005
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/> The Guardian
An aura of sanctity is descending upon the world's most powerful men. On Saturday the finance ministers from seven of the G8 nations (Russia was not invited) promised to cancel the debts the poorest countries owe to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The hand that holds the sword has been stayed by angels: angels with guitars rather than harps.
Who, apart from the leader writers of the Daily Telegraph, could deny that debt relief is a good thing? Never mind that much of this debt - money lent by the World Bank and IMF to corrupt dictators - should never have been pursued in the first place. Never mind that, in terms of looted resources, stolen labour and now the damage caused by climate change, the rich owe the poor far more than the poor owe the rich. Some of the poorest countries have been paying more for debt than for health or education. Whatever the origins of the problem, that is obscene.
You are waiting for me to say but, and I will not disappoint you. The but comes in paragraph 2 of the finance ministers' statement. To qualify for debt relief, developing countries must "tackle corruption, boost private-sector development" and eliminate "impediments to private investment, both domestic and foreign".
These are called conditionalities. Conditionalities are the policies governments must follow before they receive aid and loans and debt relief. At first sight they look like a good idea. Corruption cripples poor nations, especially in Africa. The money which could have given everyone a reasonable standard of living has instead made a handful unbelievably rich. The powerful nations are justified in seeking to di scourage it.
That's the theory. In truth, corruption has seldom been a barrier to foreign aid and loans: look at the money we have given, directly and through the World Bank and IMF, to Mobutu, Suharto, Marcos, Moi and every other premier-league crook. Robert Mugabe, the west's demon king, has deservedly been frozen out by the rich nations. But he has caused less suffering and is responsible for less corruption than Rwanda's Paul Kagame or Uganda's Yoweri Museveni, both of whom are repeatedly cited by the G8 countries as practitioners of "good governance". Their armies, as the UN has shown, are largely responsible for the meltdown in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which has so far claimed 4 million lives, and have walked off with billions of dollars' worth of natural resources. Yet Britain, which is hosting the G8 summit, remains their main bilateral funder. It has so far refused to make their withdrawal from the DRC a conditionality for fore ign aid.
The difference, of course, is that Mugabe has not confined his attacks to black people; he has also dispossessed white farmers and confiscated foreign assets. Kagame, on the other hand, has eagerly supplied us with the materials we need for our mobile phones and computers: materials that his troops have stolen from the DRC. "Corrupt" is often used by our governments and newspapers to mean regimes that won't do what they're told.
Genuine corruption, on the other hand, is tolerated and even encouraged. Twenty-five countries have so far ratified the UN convention against corruption, but none is a member of the G8. Why? Because our own corporations do very nicely out of it. In the UK companies can legally bribe the governments of Africa if they operate through our (profoundly corrupt) tax haven of Jersey. Lord Falconer, the minister responsible for sorting this out, refuses to act. When you see the list of the island's clients, many of which sit in the FTSE 100 i ndex, you begin to understand.
The idea, swallowed by most commentators, that the conditions our governments impose help to prevent corruption is laughable. To qualify for World Bank funding, our model client Uganda was forced to privatise most of its state-owned companies before it had any means of regulating their sale. A sell-off that should have raised $500m for the Ugandan exchequer instead raised $2m. The rest was nicked by government officials. Unchastened, the World Bank insisted that - to qualify for the debt-relief programme the G8 has now extended - the Ugandan government sell off its water supplies, agricultural services and commercial bank, again with minimal regulation.
And here we meet the real problem with the G8's conditionalities. They do not stop at pretending to prevent corruption, but intrude into every aspect of sovereig n government. When the finance ministers say "good governance" and "eliminating impediments to private investment", what they mean is commercialisation, privatisation and the liberalisation of trade and capital flows. And what this means is new opportunities for western money.
Let's stick for a moment with Uganda. In the late 80s, the IMF and World Bank forced it to impose "user fees" for basic healthcare and primary education. The purpose appears to have been to create new markets for private capital. School attendance, especially for girls, collapsed. So did health services, particularly for the rural poor. To stave off a possible revolution, Museveni reinstated free primary education in 1997 and free basic healthcare in 2001. Enrolment in primary school leapt from 2.5 million to 6 million, and the number of outpatients almost doubled. The World Bank and the IMF -which the G8 nations control - were furious. At the donors' meeting in April 2001, the head of the bank's delegation made it clear that, as a result of the change in policy, he now saw the health ministry as a "bad investment".
There is an obvious conflict of interest in this relationship. The G8 governments claim they want to help poor countries develop and compete successfully. But they have a powerful commercial incentive to ensure that they compete unsuccessfully, and that our companies can grab their public services and obtain their commodities at rock-bottom prices. The conditionalities we impose on the poor nations keep them on a short leash.
That's not the only conflict. The G8 finance ministers' statement insists that the World Bank and IMF will monitor the indebted countries' progress, and decide whether they are fit to be relieved of their burden. The World Bank and IMF, of course, are the agencie s which have the most to lose from this redemption. They have a vested interest in ensuring that debt relief takes place as slowly as possible.
Attaching conditions like these to aid is bad enough. It amounts to saying:
"We will give you a trickle of money if you give us the crown jewels." Attaching them to debt relief is in a different moral league: "We will stop punching you in the face if you give us the crown jewels." The G8's plan for saving Africa is little better than an extortion racket.
Do you still believe our newly sanctified leaders have earned their haloes? If so, you have swallowed a truckload of nonsense. Yes, they should cancel the debt. But they should cancel it unconditionally.
� <http://www.monbiot.com/> www.monbiot.com
"Dr. Benon Kisuule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rook:
NRM has the history of staging such incidents.
This one can fall either way. ADF also has its
thugs, but I doubt whether they have the acumen
to switch to Luganda and Runyankore when staging
such operations.
I am now sick to the stomach because of seeing innocent
people forced to "eat matunda ya uhuru." It seems
eventually all Ugandans will be forced to take a bite. What
goes around comes around.
Mzee Goppe
====================================
At 03:50 PM 6/13/2005, you wrote:
>50 abducted in western Uganda
>Joseph Kasimbazi & Joseph Mugisa
>FORT PORTAL
>
>About 50 people were last Sunday abducted by unknown
>gunmen.
>They were held hostage for about 8 hours, before they
>escaped from captivity. The victims were abducted at
>around 3.00 am from villag es of Rubanga, Kakuba and
>Bisanja in Mwenge North County in Kyenjojo district,
>police says.
>
>The District Police Commander of Kyenjojo district, Mr
>James Ochaya, said that two men wielding a sub machine
>gun, a panga and axes stormed the villages and broke
>into people's houses using hammers.
>
>Ochaya said the gunmen first attacked Kakuba village
>before proceeding to other villages. "People were
>asked whether they were supporting Forum for
>Democratic Change or kisanja," Ochaya said, adding
>that they spoke Runyakore, Luganda and Kiswahili and
>ordered their captives to walk towards Muzizi forest
>at the border of Kyenjojo and Kibale district." Ochaya
>explained that the victims were tied together with
>banana fibres and sisal ropes and told to move in
>single lines.
>
>"Those who refused to walk were cut with a panga. Some
>sustained cuts on their legs and heads. Another man's
>ears were chopped off," Ochaya said. He said the group
>escaped from the assailants at about 10:am after
>auxiliary forces had pursued the captors.
>
>"When it was daybreak they managed to escape. They had
>reached Muzizi forest," he said. "It is not easy to
>determine whether they were rebels or not. They could
>have been looking for money." In July 1997, rebels of
>the Allied Democratic Front rebellion made their first
>attack in Mpondwe, Kasese and later spread to other
>parts of Western Uganda.
>
>Rook
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Take a look at donorschoose.org, an excellent charitable web site for
anyone who cares about public education!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_OLuKD/8WnJAA/cUmLAA/XgSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FedsNet/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Groups Links
- To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FedsNet/
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Ugandanet mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
