« A conversation with NSC’s Froman on the results of the G20 London Summit | Main | The End of Ideology: G20 from Washington to London to New York »
Bob Geldof for Africa at the London G20 Summit: Not a bad day of work — or Is Aid Dead?
By Kaufmann | April 8, 2009 No Comments »
The whole London G20 Summit affair was a Very Governmental One (VGO). Civil society organizations (CSOs) and activists were excluded. The closest some of them got was actually through blogging, such as by way of the G20 Voice initiative, where 50 bloggers were invited to share space with the traditional media covering the Summit.
Not even Bob Geldof got an invite. Remember, he is the famed Irish musician, songwriter and political activist who has worked tiredlessly to push for more western aid to Africa (recall the Band and Live Aid international concerts broadcast to the world to bring relief from starvation in Ethiopia and beyond?).
A non-invite to the G20 did not deter him from showing up to the sidelines of the Summit anyway, actively mingling with the media, who followed and photographed his every step.
I had a chance to have a conversation with Geldof…
He emphasized to me some similar points made previously to others, such as the importance of not neglecting Africa at the London Summit, and specifically advocating that the G20, in their global trillion dollar accords, ensures that US $50 billion of unconditional aid does get quickly earmarked to Africa, partly through IMF gold sales proceeds. On some issues, he went beyond repeats, however.
A review of the final commitments reached by the G20 suggests that the agreements in paper are not far from what Geldof and other activists were pushing for. Not a bad day of work for Geldof and the G20. Africa’s poor deserve more attention and actual support during the crisis, and beyond. Obviously the devil will be in the details, since it is still unclear whether the US $50 billions for poor countries will be quickly available for quick use without further indebtedness or hurdles, and also there is a question of how much ends up for the African countries (and populace) in the direst need.
Geldof also stressed view that a fundamental reason for the current crisis is ‘asymmetry’: the exclusion and poverty of half the world’s population, living on less than US $2 dollars a day. And he was also using the large media fora to push rich countries to resist trade protectionist tendencies, making the point that not only Africa but also Europe would benefit from lower barriers to trade.
He also suggested that immediate aid to Africa, and further inclusiveness of the poor, would be a stimulus for Africa, as well as for European exports (similar to a point also made by UK’s Development Minister Douglas Alexander in a conversation during the Summit). Specifically, Geldoff was saying that US $50 billion to Africa would translate into the equivalent of US $2 billion of additional European exports to Africa. ”Italian jobs will benefit”, he said.
The activist-musician very clever use of semantics in our conversation did not go unnoticed. Rich western governments must be believers in ‘aid’, he reckoned, judging by the huge domestic fiscal stimuli they are engaged in (better sounding than ‘aid’); further, instead of the developing country notion of ‘debt cancellation’ the industrialized country talk now centers around solving the ’toxic asset’ problem.
Geldof realizes that Africa cannot expect to get numerous country representation in the G-20 forum, so he suggested that regional bodies could play an important role, singling out NEPAD and the African Union, while also advocating an additional infusion of capital for the African Development Bank so that they can implement urgent projects in the continent.
A recurrent theme in his conversations was that ‘Aid Works’, citing the millions of additional children enrolled in African schools in recent years, as well as the advances against the AIDS epidemic, all thanks to aid to Africa.
While admittedly development aid has made a contribution in some countries (notably in girls’ education, primary health care), it sounded as if a number of activists had coordinated to be ‘on message’ together to counter the recently released and highly critical book ‘Dead Aid’ by the Zambian-born Dambisa Moyo.
Or perhaps such coordinated response was already afoot before her book’s release, given the publicity given to Bill Easterly more complex yet equally critical writings about aid. These had spurred heated debates with prominent advocates of more aid funding like Jeff Sachs, Bono, Geldoff and prominent NGOs like Oxfam.
‘Dead Aid’ is of course as dead wrong in its blanket indictment of aid to Africa as is the opposing simplistic and unqualified statement that ’Aid Works’. The former would prescribe no more aid to Africa, the latter often advocates massive and indiscriminate transfer of funds to developing country governments.
The reality is more complicated and less PR-sexy, I am afraid: ‘Aid Can Work’, yet it can also fail miserably, as it has done in many countries. The mediating factor for aid effectiveness is governance and corruption.
Where there is lack of governance from the donor and recipient side (which has often been the case in Africa, where many donors have had an obsessive focus on the government or high official of the moment), aid tends to be ineffective.
Where there is leadership with integrity and governance is improving and corruption declining, aid can be effective.
Unfortunately, concerns about governance and corruption are nowadays being hidden under the rug by many rich and not-so-rich governments (the urgency of the global crisis being the convenient fig leaf). No wonder there is insufficient aid selectivity – and a crisis of credibility.
To his credit, towards the end of the conversation Geldoff did acknowledge that governance issues may also matter, and that the NEPAD framework of accountability peer montoring among African states was important. That is a start.
At this critical juncture, Western rock stars and other publicity-minded notables may better help the cause of African development with a message ‘Aid Works with Governance’. Trumpeting by decree that ‘Aid Works’ in unqualified fashion is misleading and will only provide additional fodder to ’Dead Aid’ critiques, irrespective of the actual merits of aid.
Topics: Aid Effectiveness, Corruption, G-20, financial crisis | | Read and Submit Comments