Somalia, food distribution recipients |
I was back home in the summer. My 8 year old niece was very concerned about the images
she was seeing coming out from the horn on Africa on TV, so my sister asked me -the
aid expert that had lived in Africa and worked in Somalia- to explain to her
about the famine. It went something like this:
"well,
it's really about power and politics. There’s a lot of different clans, clans
are like families, and they all want the power, and so the people, mostly women
and children, get crushed in the middle of it"
I’m not
sure either of them understood or believed me, but that’s my version of the
affair. And you can see how –from my
perspective- no amount of food distribution is going to solve the problem.
***
Sometimes
we (the aid community) just need to get the f*ck out. Sometimes not only are we not
helping, but we are actually making things worse, maintaining a status quo that
should be unsustainable. Making the powerful stronger. The rich richer.
When
I say something like this out loud people often argue that it would be
unethical to walk away. That it would mean penalising the poor not the rich. That
hundreds might die before anything actually changes, and they are right,
actually, they often use Somalia as an example that no matter how bad a situation gets, it IS sustainable, and they've got a point.
So
maybe it comes down to aid with accountability.
We
hate the idea of enforcing our values because a) we've been wrong so many times
and b) it feels like colonialism all over again. But lets face it, aid without
accountability is not only unethical but simply irresponsible. The donors and
aid agencies need to bite the bullet and
ensure that certain values are enforced, that the vulnerable benefit, like really
benefit, and no, number of women that attended a workshop or received a bag of
food does not count as a gender strategy, (for example). Especially if those
same women have no control over what happens to that food once it gets home, or
have no way of earning an income because it is deemed unacceptable for
women to take a job outside the home. If you don’t address the root causes you
are not helping, you are just putting a band aid over an infected wound. Maybe
it’s time to learn how to walk away when
we see there is no change, but more importantly, when we know there is no will
to change. Why? Because for the most part they know that no matter how
unaccountable they are to the money that has been distributed, how little
things change, the money will keep flowing in. And for the most part, they are
right. We need to start making them accountable in order to be accountable ourselves.
Maybe
its time to look at laws and national budgets, see where the country’s money is
going, making them participate (economically) whenever they want us to donate. If
they think it is important enough for us (the development community) to invest
in it… then they should too.
Because in a civil war situation, and Somalia is a type of civil war, handing out food is not any more neutral than handing out guns. We have a responsibility to know what we are doing, where it is going, and who’s really benefitting.
Because in a civil war situation, and Somalia is a type of civil war, handing out food is not any more neutral than handing out guns. We have a responsibility to know what we are doing, where it is going, and who’s really benefitting.
food distribution center |
NOTE: This post was originally a reply to a post on Tales From the Hood: simple it got so long I decided best to keep on ranting over here.
3 comments:
Well written. Great addition to #BAD11!
You shed some light on the complexities of the situation that many of us never understand. Thanks for adding this to the #BAD11 conversation today.
It makes more sense to give them the fishing net and teach them to fish than to give them the fish already cooked.
And you are absolutely right, the local authorities have to be willing to participate and the donors have the duty to make sure the money is used properly.
Post a Comment