G8: More recommitments and less action

The Flip Side with Kuthula Matshazi

Once again the 2007 G8 summit held at Heilingendamm, Germany has produced more recommitments than significant action.
The G8 countries claim, in their communiqué, that Africa has been on top of their agenda since the 1990s and yet we see that commitments are not being fulfilled and therefore the development assistance provided has not made any significant impact. Instead, Sub-Saharan Africa has experienced deteriorating human conditions. According to the United Nations Development Programme’s 2005 Human Development Report titled International Cooperation at a Crossroads: Aid, Trade and Security in an Unequal World Sub-Saharan Africa has been the only continent not to experience the reduction of poverty. Interestingly, the G8 countries (United States, Japan, Germany, Britain, France, Canada, Russia and Italy) and the International Monetary Fund note that Africa has experienced economic growth averaging approximately six percent in recent years.
The G8 further claims that the economic growth has seen the reduction of poverty in “several countries”. It would have helped had those countries that reduced poverty were mentioned since it is difficult for us to know exactly which countries they are referring to taking into cognisance the UNDP Human Development Report findings.
Statistics on various elements of poverty cited by the G8 also show that Africa experiences the worst calamities worldwide. For instance, 63 percent of all people living with HIV and AIDS are in Africa and 72 percent of those requiring antiretroviral treatment do not have access to the life saving drugs. Of the approximately one million people who die of malaria every year, 90 percent of those are in Africa. UNDP on its part reports that trade terms of African countries have continued to decline generally. It is against such a grim situation that development assistance is urgently required.
But does the West bear any responsibility to help Africa? Yes, it does because of basically two reasons. First, the act of colonialism completely wrecked our lives since the colonisers took away our resources, wealth and opportunities. The violent suppression stifled and even destroyed our abilities to sustain and enhance our development. The socio-economic system that was introduced caused profound marginalisation and underdevelopment. The system has since endured in different forms. Secondly, the current international economic system has further marginalised Africans from benefiting from their resources. The wealth and resources belonging to Africa are being taken out to benefit other countries.
The economics of extraction enables the West to continue exploiting vast amounts of our resources. So while Africa has abundant resources, we do not own and benefit from them. Most of the resources are owned by foreign businesses and of course a few local individuals, who many times, can also act as guardians of the wealth of those foreign businesses. Therefore, a significant share of the money that accrues from resource exploitation is repatriated to foreign businesses, mainly in the West. A significant share of our revenues goes towards debt repayments, which leaves us with limited resources to address the deep problems of poverty. This explains the claims of the G8 and IMF of Africa recording average economic growth of six percent and yet our socio-economic conditions continue deteriorating.
The 2005 Gleneagles summit in Scotland was touted as significant because so many pledges were made, which were supposedly groundbreaking. For instance, development assistance to Africa would be set at US$50 billion per year by 2010. However, about two years before 2010, there are indications that the G8 countries would not be able to reach that target. Oxfam says that G8 would only be able to deliver US$23 billion of the US$50 billion pledged, leaving a deficit of US$27 billion. On the US$60 billion announced in Germany last week without any timelines, Oxfam further says this would constitute at most an increase of only US$3 billion in 2010.
We have heard so many excuses for failing to live up to expectations by the G8. Opponents of Africa and apologists for G8 failings have solely blamed corruption and mismanagement of development assistance funds for the demise of Africa. They point out that a huge amount of money has been given to Africa and yet there is nothing to show for it. The argument is fundamentally flawed although at another level it has some truth. Yes, there have been corrupt leaders who have mismanaged the development assistance funds. However, to suggest that the principal reason development assistance is not working effectively is solely because of corruption and mismanagement is to be disingenuous or simply ignorant.
The fundamental problem is that development assistance is inadequate and the manner it is delivered, which is haphazard and full of mind-boggling conditionalities. If the money was adequate, it is doubtful whether developed countries would continue pouring in money so that it can be stolen. Not only are the developing countries pouring more money and pledging to commit more of it, they are in agreement that the money should be increased substantially because it is grossly inadequate. Should we believe that the G8 leaders and civil society are clamouring for more resources for Africa so that the political leaders can steal more of these resources than are currently available? Such logic is weak and implausible but sadly is dominant, especially in the right wing and neoliberal circles as well as the citizens who are casual observers of international development politics.
The other fundamental problem is that the current development assistance is not sustainable. Instead of building sustainable institutions and projects, the bulk of development assistance comes in piecemeal fashion to support programmes that have short-term objectives. Such programmes create dependency and not sustainable capacity on the part of the people. The relationship of G8 with Africa is paternalistic. The G8 countries, Western governments and donors are like parents who try to provide basic needs to their children from cradle to death at the same time not allowing those children, knowingly or not, to be self sustaining. In so doing these parents would not provide their children with those social programmes such as health and education, that could enhance their ability to grow up, be independent and establish sustainable livelihoods for themselves. Africa will need handouts eternally for as long as this sort of arrangement persists. It is dehumanising and causing millions of unnecessary deaths.
Many people are shocked and outraged that about US$665 billion has been spent on development assistance to Africa and yet there is nothing concrete to show for that kind of amount. According to some, who are outraged, this is a special reason why development assistance to Africa should be stopped. As indicated above, for as long as the West continues the economics of extraction on the one hand, and continues to give piecemeal and uncoordinated development assistance on the other, then Africa will continue to be their burden. But Africans are clamouring that they can work and sustain themselves if given a fair international economic system and the political climate that underpins this rigged world order. Whether such an opportunity can be extended to the Africans lies in the attitude of the G8 countries towards fulfilling their commitments.
Indications based on past G8 summits seem to suggest that the organisation and other Western countries have a net advantage in perpetuating the current world order. From Kananaskis to Gleneagles to St. Petersburg and now Heiligendamm, we have been bombarded with long lists of communiqués outlining what the G8 intends to do for Africa. Sadly, they cannot even fulfil their own commitments of contributing 0.7 percent of annual gross domestic product they voluntarily committed themselves to 38 years ago. The failure of the G8 in fulfilling their obligations is underlined by British Prime Minister Tony Blair when he said “The important thing is that we have recommitted ourselves to all the commitments we made a couple of years ago”.