Re: Western aid - good or bad?
|
In Reply to: Western aid - good or bad? posted by huw on May 11, 2002 at 21:21:00:
1. Western Governments and Aid organisations need to see the true perspective of how the Nepali government treats its own people before just pooring money into Nepal. Where does that money go? Most likely into the hands of the corrupt beurocracy, unless there are stringent safeguards and all community collaboration. There is a very pleasant square in Kathmandu, built to the tune of $800,00USD all in the name of putting on a show for some Asian heads of governments meeting hald last year. In building this nice green patch down near the river on the way to Patan (still incomplete) peoples houses were torn down. There is a nice bus depot in Patan full of buses donated by I think the Japanese government many years ago, in which the buses now idely stand for want of maintenance and repair etc, and yet the Nepali government can spend 100's of thousands of dollars putting on a show for other governments...
2. It would not hurt trekkers if somehow the government were brought to some sense of it's moral accountability of human rights to its own people. I for one could hang off going to Nepal if that's what it took to show the government of Nepal that it needs to take seriously that its own people are hurting because of the governments own corruption.
3. Take a look at my post earlier about what Amnesty International has to say about the way BOTh the government and Maoists have acted. Organisations such as this can bring a sense of accountability to the Nepali government.
See http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/recent/asa310162002
4. I would condem Mr Deuba's actions and also the blind, stupidity of Mr Bush et al to think that they can stamp out "terrorism" with the sword! What happens when you play with the tigers tail??
5. Perhaps we who love the beauty, the people of Nepal etc should staying away in droves in protest to the government and Maoist and send them a message to get their house in order, otherwise there will be no 'tourist industry'. (In the overall scheme of things I doubt whether tourism really benefits a broad spectrum of Nepali people anyway - so be it. I know it does some good but probably for a minority - some poor porters/guides and their extended families, but an aweful lot of money must end up in western trekking agents pockets and their affiliated Nepali mates in Kathmandu somewhere).
6. Western Aid can be of benefit only when westerners work together in partnership with the local level - village level - to empower people. Look at some of the benefits brought through village rural development schemes, tree planting, education (especially of women), hospitals, hydropower, water supply et etc. Without the RIGHT kind of aid Nepal would be in a far worse postion than it is today. Western 'aid' that Mr Deuba wants from Mr Bush and his cohorts will ultimately harm the nation of Nepal, unless there is a real change of heart by the government of Nepal to deal justly and love mercy.
: Did anyone see the articles, both leader and news report, in The Daily Telegraph (English) on Thursday May 8th?
: It reported the attack on the security post on Wednesday in which 140 police and soldiers were killed, and then went on to discuss western help. Apparently Mr Deuba the Nepalese PM had talks with Mr Bush this week who has promised military aid to fight the Maoists. Initially he has asked congress for £14 million and has promised to supply money, arms, ammunition and helicopters. The leader article then went on to say that Deuba is meeting PM Blair this coming week to ask us for aid, and that Blair should respond generously to his requests, although in fairness it does say that there should be checks to counter rampant corruption.
: My worry, and I know this was mentioned here a few months ago, is that whatever the rights and wrongs, once we become involved in this way we will become allied to government forces in the eyes of the Maoists. This would be the end of trekking in Nepal for a long time. Or amd I just worrying unnecessarily?
: Huw