It was last December, in a cozy Ann Arbor bookstore, that I first came across the book “The Shadow of the Sun.” I had finished all the previous books on my list (even succumbing to the chick-lit turned spiritual journey chronicle, “Eat Pray Love”) and decided to pick this one up and read it.
I was floored by its depth and detail. Written by famed Polish journalist, Ryzard Kapuscinski, “The Shadow of the Sun” outlines the tumultuous growing pains of the African continent in wrenching itself from the jaws of colonialism. In the mid-late 20th century, African leaders from Senegal to Ethiopia, from Eritrea to Mauritania, and Sudan to South Africa forged independent states through armed uprisings and bloody coups. The tragedy being that many of these liberation struggles did not result in emancipation from greed, exploitation, and poverty. Instead, colonial leaders were merely supplanted by corrupt natives.
What I found most fascinating about this book was the author’s descriptions of the someti
mes detrimental role played by foreign aid. Wars were waged over grains of rice and packets of dry milk. Hungry adolescents were easily convinced by powerful warlords to snatch aid away from the neediest to fuel their armies.
Apparently, not too much has changed. This very debate about the efficacy of aid has recently been raging through foreign policy blogs, online newspapers, and even talk shows. The ignitor of this debate is Zambian businesswoman, Dambisa Moyo, who argues in her new book,”Dead Aid,” that foreign aid has plunged Africa into a state of permanent dependency and painful inefficiency. Moyo’s primary arguement – over the past 60 years, a whopping 1 trillion dollars have graced the continent in the form of aid, ultimately, to amount to nothing.
While NGOs such as Mercy Corps and other activists have immediately countered suggestions of reducing emergency and long-term humanitarian aid, Moyo defends her point. She points to the fact that few African governments have developed sustainable policies to bring their countries out of abject poverty. Why? Because, Moyo argues, NGOs do the job for them – albeit on a relatively small scale. She faults celebrities like Bono, who’ve projected themselves as the public face for African development, for allowing African leaders to shirk their elected responsibilities.
Moyo also cites rampant inflation, debt, bureaucracy, corruption and general government indifference all as residual aftermath of unyielding foreign aid.
So how have aid advocates responded?
The ONE Campaign released a statement thanking Moyo for her efforts while making the following counterpoints:
- Since 2002, more than 2 million Africans who might have otherwise died are on life-saving anti-retroviral medication;
- Between 2005 and 2007, malaria cases and related deaths in Rwanda and Ethiopia were more than cut in half thanks to a dramatic increase in bed nets and access to anti-malaria medication.
- Since 1999, 34 million more African children are going to school for the first time.
Economist Jeffrey Sachs has backed the sentiments of the ONE Campaign, arguing that effective, grassroots, and sustainable aid should not be the victim of this debate. In a recent Huffington Post article, Sachs lambasts Moyo, attempting to expose the inefficiencies of her argument:
“The purpose of aid should indeed be to break the poverty trap through targeted investments in an African Green Revolution; disease control; children’s education; core infrastructure of roads, power, safe drinking water and sanitation, and broadband; and business development, including micro-finance and rural diversification among impoverished smallholder farmers.”
While Moyo’s stance may seem radical to some, I support her efforts in unleashing debate and interest that would otherwise not have been raised. The fact of the matter is the amount of aid dollars cluelessly being dumped into Africa has contributed to a complex political scenario, difficult to disentangle.
While the victor of this debate is yet to be seen, one thing remains clear: foreign aid must be re-evaluated to hold all parties accountable for creating more sustainable, equitable growth in Africa.

4 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 16, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Rachel
This has turned into a fascinating debate. I, too, applaud Moyo for bringing to light some overlooked problems associated with aid in Africa. Africans are ready and eager for economic and ideological independence, but I, like Sachs, worry that swiftly withdrawing all foreign aid as Moyo has called for could do much more harm than good.
The Boston Globe published an article on Sunday (“US faces global health aid dilemma” 6/14/09) discussing some of the consequences of US aid policy, particularly under the Bush administration. It argues that the emphasis on HIV/AIDS relief was misdirected in many instances, where other development issues and more general health concerns begged attention but were neglected. This jives with some of Moyo’s arguments but suggests that reforming US foreign assistance policy, rather than wholly abandoning the idea of international aid, might provide a better solution to the problem.
Recent legislation has called on the Obama administration to draft a National Strategy for Global Development and reform the US Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. The Act is old and getting older – it hasn’t been comprehensively updated since 1985. The challenges, targets, and goals of foreign assistance have changed dramatically since then, not to mention US relations with Africa. A more streamlined, coherent policy that accurately reflects the needs of today’s developing countries is of increasing importance. Foreign aid might still have something to offer Africa, if it can only be utilized in an effective manner that respects the dignity and sovereignty of African nations. Policy reform in the US is a great place to start.
June 23, 2009 at 6:36 am
ruben eberlein
Bitter-Sweet Chocolate: The Latest Kickshaw of Lazy Journalists
This is the stuff that many media in the West love to publish: Dead Aid, the book by Zambian academic Dambisa Moyo, advocates a stop of all development finances to Africa. The German monthly magazine Cicero for instance, in its July edition, exercises itself in prose dedicated to the beautiful, young exotic coming from the dark, wild continent in a heroic mission.
Read more here:
http://rubeneberlein.wordpress.com/2009/06/23/dambisa-moyo-dead-aid-cicero/
July 1, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Happy International Day of Cooperatives! July 4, 2009 « The World InSight
[...] for producers. As the US and international community question the value of foreign assistance (“Moyo Ignites Debate with ‘Dead Aid”), cooperatives empower workers to help themselves rather than rely on charity. Additionally, co-ops [...]
July 24, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Momentum Builds on the Hill for Foreign Aid Policy Reform « The World InSight
[...] Literacy rates have risen, anti-retroviral drugs are more readily available, and great strides have been made in the fight against polio and other preventable diseases, but poverty, inequality, starvation, and disease continue to plague the developing world. While it’s tempting to blame paltry investment in poverty-fighting development assistance for this (the U.S. lags far behind other industrialized countries in terms of percentage of GDP), developmental economists, humanitarian aid agencies and students alike have started to question the overall effectiveness of U.S. foreign aid (“Moyo Ignites Debate with ‘Dead Aid’”). [...]