Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19980715111345.00883100@pdc6.mail.yale.edu> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 11:13:45 -0400 From: Pascal Collotte <mailto:pascal.collotte@YALE.EDU> Subject: USAID Policy To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
I have been in the third world development business for the past 10 years. One should differenciate multi-lateral donors from bi=lateral ones. USAID is a bi-lateral donor agency and so are the French Cooperation,ODA - UK, the German aid agency (forgot the name), AUSAID, Japan .... Bi-lateral agencies' money is set to help politically ansd/or economically targeted countries while facilitating entry in such countries for their corporations. Thus it should be obvious that those agencies help their countrymen or corp. The fact that USAID is more upfront with its policy should not be upsetting. If Eritrea has the guts to turndown US aid, the Eritrean government must have strong reasons for such decision and must have weighted the concequenses.Multi-lateral aid is another business. Yet it is not innocent either.
Pascal
At 16:28 7/14/98 +0100, you wrote: >Mathew,
>
>In message <mailto:s5ab04c6.010@ntca.org>, Matthew Parry writes:
>
>> Regarding JCW's recent sardonic posting about US citizenship
>> requirements
>
>Dr J's posting repeats what I have flamed as aggressively in the
>past.
>
>The issue is not so much that US citizens should fill USAID posts,
>though this exclusive requirement is quite unnecessary in a
>development agency.
>
>The question is why even junior positions at USAID need to hold high
>security clearences?
>
>
>> We are all aware that a good chunk of the US Government's foreign
>> aid is used to hire US citizens for foreign postings, to purchase
>> American goods for overseas distribution, to ship goods on US flag
>> ships, etc. Without these requirements, few legislators would
>> approve the foreign aid budget each year, especially for black hole
>> countries like the Sudan and Somalia. That's not going to change
>> anytime soon -it's not a perfect system, but it does have merits.
>
>This is nonsense.
>
>Foreign Aid has a purpose which is different from country to country
>but should ideally be the advancement of the recipient country's
>infrastructure and/or human resources and not only subsidizing the
>donor country's export industry.
>
>Most of them do it, though. I don't mind so much, if we were being
>told, to use the money on equipment originating in the donor country
>for example.
>
>But, they peddle scrap metal which they can't put into their own land
>fills any more because of the stringent environmental laws and even
>expect us to be thankful for it.
>
>What really gets me is when they then say donor country A gave X
>Million in Foreign AID to developing country B.
>
>
>However, what sets USAID apart from the others is that it conducts
>foreign assistance and humanitarian aid to advance the political and
>economic interests of the United States.
>
>
>el