Back Issues

The Paris Declaration and aid effectiveness

Yash Tandon

2008-06-10

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/features/48634

The Third High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness will be held this September in Accra. But is aid effectiveness a mirage? Yash Tandon dissects the Paris Declaration in relation to aid effectiveness and reaches the conclusion that "under the pretext of making aid more effective, the aid effectiveness project is a form of collective colonialism by Northern donors of those Southern countries that, through weakness, vulnerability or psychological dependency, allow themselves to be subjected to it at the Accra conference in September." But all is not lost and he also offers a way out.
====

A HISTORICAL AND CONTEXUAL NOTE

The Paris Declaration and the debate on aid effectiveness must first be placed in its proper conceptual and historical context. The origins of the debate lie in the concept of ‘failed states’ that in the 1990s became a common explanation for ‘crisis’ in large parts of the South. Theorists, largely in the US and Europe, argued that failed states were at the root of global instability and terrorism. They had lost their legitimacy and credibility, giving the North the right to intervene in order to reshape them as democratic states that would no longer pose a threat to the rest of the civilised world.

Robert Cooper, for example, described a zone of the ‘pre-modern world, the pre-state’, which was in a condition of ‘post-imperial chaos’: ‘The existence of such a zone of chaos is nothing new, but previously such areas, precisely because of their chaos, were isolated from the rest of the world. Not so today… If they become too dangerous for the established states to tolerate, it is possible to imagine a defensive imperialism. If non-state actors, notably drug, crime or terrorist syndicates take to using non-state (that is pre-modern) bases for attacks on the more orderly parts of the world, then the organised states may eventually have to respond' [1].

Cooper, an English version of the American neo-Conservatives, might have been ignored had not some of his ideas been given a boost a year later by Martin Wolf, a respected columnist for the Financial Times. In an article entitled ‘The need for a new imperialism’ [2], Wolf argued that Afghanistan was but an extreme example of a ‘failed state’. There were others, which not only posed a threat to the rest of the world but reduced the lives of their own people. ‘If a failed state is to be rescued,’ Wolf wrote, ‘the essential parts of honest government – above all the coercive apparatus – must be provided from outside…. To tackle the challenge of the failed state, what is needed is not pious aspirations but an honest and organised coercive force.’ In his view this entailed ‘a transformation in our approach to national sovereignty – the building block of today’s world.’ The legal doctrine of sovereignty must not impede the reordering of the South, by force of arms if necessary, even pre-emptively.

In essence, underpinning Bush and Blair’s intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq was the concept of failed states and the right (indeed obligation) of the North to intervene. This was ‘hard power’ at work. Complementary expressions of ‘soft power’ included Blair’s Commission for Africa and Bush’s Millennium Challenge Account. At the World Economic Forum in January 2005 Blair called for ‘a big, big push forward’ to end poverty. The G8 meeting in July that year decided to double annual foreign aid to Africa and forgive African debt. In September the United Nations took up the theme: Jeffrey Sachs toured the world spreading the message that Africa could be saved through increased aid. The year ended with Bono being named Time magazine's person of the year for his efforts to save Africa. Aid, along with other instruments of intervention such as human rights, had become a means to democratise the South and make it safe for the rest of the world.

Many in the South condemned the idea of failed states as a Northern pretext for intervention [3]. In the North, too, some were alarmed at this new-found justification for imperial or neo-imperial intervention in their name. Others were sceptical about Bush and Blair’s grandiose plans to ‘save Africa’. As a rejoinder to the idea that accelerated aid would (or could) make Africa’s poverty history, William Easterly, formerly of the World Bank, argued that top-down, donor-driven aid does not work [4], and that aid can only play a supportive role to essentially domestic efforts. Stephen Browne emphasised aid’s inadequate market signals and the way in which donor domination distorts supply and demand [5]. Roger Riddell showed how short-term political interests distort aid [6], and argued that the aid industry must change radically to become the effective force for good that it is often claimed to be.

To summarise, then, we need to recognise that we are on very controversial and politically sensitive terrain when we talk about aid. Perhaps Bono and Sachs are honest advocates of aid, believing that the rich have a responsibility to help the poor. They do not ask if the rich had anything to do with creating poverty in the first place, but their good faith is best not questioned; they are artists and academics, not politicians, spreading the good word about humanity and humanitarianism. Bush and Blair, however, are in another camp altogether. They are in the category of people that Roger Riddell argues distort the purpose of aid because they have a political agenda, whether hidden or explicit. Their political track record suggests that they share Robert Cooper and Martin Wolf’s belief in defensive imperialism. Like their 19th century ancestors Bush and Blair are driven by a kind of missionary zeal to civilise the South and reorder it, to make it safe for democracy and ‘more like us’. Both soft and hard power are needed. Aid, from this perspective, becomes another weapon in their arsenal to discipline chaotic parts of the world. It follows that it would be irresponsible to give aid without conditions.


MORE RECENT REASONS FOR THE OECD’S AID EFFECTIVENESS INITIATIVE

More recently, aid effectiveness has been driven by three additional factors. First, the need to simplify and rationalise the complex system of aid administration and reduce transaction costs [7]. Second, demands from citizens of donor countries for greater discipline and accountability in the administration of aid by their governments. And third, a sudden awareness of the serious democratic and legitimacy deficit in the present aid architecture, dominated as it is by donor countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the World Bank and regional development banks.

The OECD took the lead to reform the aid architecture. In 2003, at an intergovernmental High Level Forum (HLF) in Rome convened by the OECD’s Development Cooperation Directorate, Northern donors discussed how to make aid more effective. In March 2005, at the second High Level Forum, the OECD adopted the so-called Paris Declaration, which aims to take ‘far-reaching and monitorable actions to reform the ways we deliver and manage aid’. By mid-December 2007, 115 countries had endorsed it. At the third HLF in Accra in September 2008 the OECD and other signatories will agree a text on the methods and modalities of making aid more effective. Meanwhile OECD countries are already implementing the Paris Declaration in conjunction with, ironically, the World Bank.

On its website the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) gives three reasons why the Paris Declaration will improve aid effectiveness. First, it goes beyond a statement of general principles; it lays down a ‘practical, action-orientated roadmap to improve the quality of aid and its impact on development’. Second, it sets out 12 indicators for monitoring and ‘encouraging progress’ against partnership commitments. Third, it promotes a model of partnership that will improve transparency and accountability in the use of development resources. At international level it provides a mechanism for donors and recipients of aid to hold each other mutually accountable and publicly monitor compliance. At country level it encourages joint assessment of progress by donors and partners using local instruments.

The Paris Declaration accepts that current accountability requirements are often ‘harder on developing countries than donors’. It also recognises that ‘aid is more effective when partner countries exercise strong and effective leadership over their development policies and strategies’. This is why ownership – i.e. developing countries exercising strong and effective leadership over their development policies and strategies – is, so the Paris Declaration says, its ‘fundamental tenet’.

THE SOUTH’S CONCERNS ABOUT THE PARIS DECLARATION AND ITS AID EFFECTIVENESS MODEL

On the face of it, then, the Paris Declaration looks a benign document. It recognises the faults of the present system, sets out reasonably sensible principles on aid and, significantly, emphasises principles of ownership by developing countries and mutual accountability between donors and recipients. Why, then, are developing countries not very excited about it? Many of them have signed on to it, but appear to have done so without fully analysing its implications. There is now growing awareness among both civil society and some government actors in developing countries that all that glitters about the Paris Declaration is not gold and that another agenda, not readily transparent on first reading, may underlie it.

The most critical analysis of the Paris Declaration has come from a study by Roberto Bissio of Social Watch for the UN Human Rights Council's High-Level Task Force on the Implementation of the Right to Development. Bissio argues that relatively minor gains in efficiency and the reduction of some transaction costs are overridden by the asymmetrical conditions under which negotiations between donors and recipients take place. He adds that the Paris Declaration ‘creates a new level of supranational economic governance above the World Bank and the regional development banks’[8].

In light of this and similar critiques [9], it is important to understand the overall purpose and methodology of the Paris Declaration to appreciate fully its implications for the aid industry. Here are some of the South’s major concerns.

1. The UN was initially excluded from the system and then, belatedly, brought in to give the Paris Declaration a semblance of credibility. The UN lacks any leverage to promote its priorities within the Paris Declaration because it was not involved from the start. For example, the ILO`s internationally recognised concept of ‘decent work’ does not appear as one of the objectives in aid evaluation – nor do many of the MDG-related objectives, especially MDG 8 that deals with North-South relations.

More worryingly, the OECD has now sought to bring the UN into the Paris Declaration process. Why should this be a matter for concern? The UN`s early involvement could have been a positive step in reforming the global aid architecture, but the OECD apparently preferred to place its trust in the Bretton Woods Institutions. It now seems that the OECD’s directorate has belatedly become aware of the World Bank and IMF’s democratic deficit, and of the need to involve the UN to provide a veneer of legitimacy.

It has done this in two ways. First, the OECD-DAC has embraced the UN’s Development Cooperation Forum (DCF) initiative. The DCF was created by the General Assembly in October 2005 as a follow-up to the 2005 World Summit [10]. It is mandated to review ‘trends in international development cooperation, including strategies, policies and financing’, to promote ‘greater coherence among the development activities of different development partners’, and to strengthen ‘the normative and operational link in the work of the United Nations’. Its overall purpose is to help strengthen the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and make it more effective. In January 2007 the General Assembly further provided for the DCF to meet biennially in a forum ‘within the framework of the ECOSOC High Level Segment’[11].

It is reasonable to suggest that once the OECD-DAC became aware of the democratic and legitimacy deficit of the IMF-World Bank architecture, it embraced the DCF to provide that missing dimension. The intention behind this move may not be as conspiratorial as it appears; it may be a genuine desire to render credibility to the Paris Declaration process. However, the OECD-DAC did not allow the UN to influence the process or the outcome (for example on ILO and MDG objectives). Furthermore, the World Bank continues to play a dominant role. All that the Paris Declaration has done is remove the more offensive vocabulary of the Bretton Woods institutions (such as ‘conditionalities’) and co-opt a new terminology (such as ‘mutual accountability’ and ‘coherence’ with development objectives).

The OECD-DAC’s second strategy has been to bring the Paris Declaration into the negotiating methodology of the UN system through the back door. This appears to be the objective of the Accra meeting in September 2008 at which the text of the so-called Accra Action Agenda (AAA) will be negotiated for adoption. What its legal implications might be nobody knows. Normally, the UN methodology of a negotiated text begins very early with experts and other stakeholders from the negotiating countries working on drafts. These early texts outline areas of convergence and divergence. The final proposed text is then negotiated by member countries, paragraph by paragraph, until a text is agreed that then has legal validity. The AAA text, on the other hand, appears to have been drafted by a working party outside the UN process, and it is this text that will be negotiated in Accra.

The intentions of those shepherding the Paris Declaration process are not clear. However, the process leading to Accra and the meeting itself do not seem calculated to build credibility for the AAA, especially given the other serious shortcomings of the Paris Declaration, as discussed briefly below.

2. Donors prepare performance conditionalities in conjunction with the World Bank. In the case of Tanzania, for example, there is a 12-page matrix and 49 pages on accounting. The matrix is prepared with no participation by the recipient country. There is no real mutual accountability, contrary to the Paris Declaration`s stated objective. If recipient countries do not perform, they are subject to penalties, but if donor countries do not perform they are not penalised. In normal business transactions, banks that lend money take risks as well as borrowers; if borrowers fail to repay, the banks pay a price. But in the aid architecture proposed by the OECD, the risks are taken by recipient countries alone.

3. The compliance tests administered by the Word Bank do not use the economic and social policies of recipient countries. With regard to procurement, for example, the tests are externally imposed based on a World Bank-devised procurement assessment methodology. There is no recipient country ownership of these tests. The rating system uses a methodology provided by the OECD-DAC and the World Bank to test the effectiveness of aid in relation to systems of both public finance management and procurement. There are twelve criteria or indicators by which to measure the performance and progress of recipient countries, graded on a scale from A to E. If recipient country systems meet agreed donor criteria they will be used to make the evaluation; if not, tests provided by the OECD-DAC and the World Bank will be used. For example, if the national procurement system is not good enough, an open tender system will be used to undertake international procurement, something that developing countries have already rejected in the context of WTO negotiations. In other words, the Paris Declaration brings through the back door what developing countries have already turned down.

4. On governance, it is once again donor procedures that determine the method of harmonisation. Although the Paris Declaration talks about ownership, the opposite is in reality the case. Harmonisation processes are externally set. Donors decide whether a particular procurement item is to be tendered internationally or nationally (or locally in a local government context), and whether it is open to the private sector or the state sector or both. Donors may disagree (for example, the US favours the private sector and the Scandinavians prefer state procurement). These disagreements are first sorted out between donors, and then become inflexible instruments of enforcement on recipient countries in the name of aid efficiency.

5. There is a shift from project lending to programme-based lending, which involves the pooling of donor resources and the injection of these funds into the national budget through direct budget support. Donor countries develop a single Joint Assistance Strategy for each country. Recipient countries must discuss their strategies with donors and the World Bank. The provision of assistance and funding is based on a collective donor assessment of recipient countries’ policies and the extent to which these policies are acceptable to donors. There is a danger that if the performance of recipients falls short of the indicators, direct budget support may become the instrument for stopping the flow of aid. Recent World Bank documents show that in Poverty Reduction Strategy assessments undertaken by the World Bank, ‘few of them provide the level of operational detail that specifies how objectives are to be achieved through policy actions’. [12] Growth is apparently much lower than expected by the donor community. If this is still the case in 2010, the implication is that donors will demand better performance from recipient countries or they might stop aid.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion is unavoidable. Under the pretext of making aid more effective, the aid effectiveness project is a form of collective colonialism by Northern donors of those Southern countries that, through weakness, vulnerability or psychological dependency, allow themselves to be subjected to it at the Accra conference in September.

Is there a way out? Can the Paris Declaration be salvaged? Yes, it can. In order to give it legitimacy and credibility, the following steps are necessary.

1. The Paris Declaration must be properly embedded in the UN system. The UN (ECOSOC, for example) must thoroughly analyse it and bring into it the UN`s evaluative criteria on aid effectiveness, such as those related to internationally agreed development goals, the MDGs, and the ILO`s concept of ‘decent work’.

2. Meanwhile, there must be a moratorium on the Accra process and the proposed Accra Action Agenda.

3. The Paris Declaration must distance itself from the Bretton Woods institutions or it will suffer the same credibility and legitimacy gap.

4. The principle of mutual accountability must be properly structured and monitored by a UN body. The Development Cooperation Forum of the UN can play this role. Although it is a new institution created as a forum, without power of implementation or enforcement, it could undertake or commission a proper study of the Paris Declaration and recommend how a two-way process of accountability could be put in place.

5. Finally, aid is not the route to development. It creates dependency and erodes self-reliance. The UN should encourage a study on how developing countries can exit from aid dependency over the next 10 or 15 years. The South Centre is already engaged on such an exercise.


* Yash Tandon is the Executive Director of South Centre (http://www.southcentre.org) based in Geneva.

*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

*For further notes, please follow this link:
[1] The Post-Modern State and the World Order, Demos, 2000

[2] Financial Times, 9 October 2001. See also ‘We cannot ignore failing states’, 8 June 2004

[3] I, with others, have drawn attention to this on several occasions, for example at the Africa Leadership Forum conference ‘Africa on the eve of the 21st Century’, Maputo, 9-11 September 1997

[4] White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good, Penguin, 2006

[5] Aid & Influence: Do Donors Help or Hinder? Earthscan, 2006

[6] Does Aid Really Work? Oxford University Press, 2007

[7] In 2005, for example, Tanzania hosted 541 donor missions and had to
account to donors for 700 projects managed by 56 parallel implementation units

[8] Human Rights Council, eighth session, Working Group on the Right to Development, High Level Task Force on the implementation of the right to development, Fourth session Geneva, 7-15 January 2008, A/HRC/8/WG.2/TF/CRP.7

[9] Among others, Nancy Alexander ‘The New Aid Model: Implications for the Aid System’, mimeo, 20 September 2007

[10] Resolution A/Res/60/1

[11] Resolution A/Res/61/16

[12] World Bank Comprehensive Development Strategies and Aid Effectiveness Reviews (AERs)

Women, water and sanitation: going the extra mile

Catherine Irura

2008-06-10

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/48637

This year's African Union Summit, 24th June to 1st July 2008, will be on ‘Meeting the Millennium Development Goals on Water and Sanitation’. What should African leaders take into account when thinking about how to meet these goals and those of The African Union Protocol on the Rights of Women in Africa? Catherine Irura tackes this question.
====

The African Union Summit is here with us again and on 24th June to 1st July 2008, African leaders will be discussing ‘Meeting the Millennium Development Goals on Water and Sanitation’. As our leaders deliberate on this very important topic we must ask ourselves whether our leaders will take into consideration women’s concerns over water and sanitation and remind them that women amount to almost more than half of the population in Africa and that their voices must not be ignored. In this article we voice some of the concerns that women would like their leaders to take into consideration as they debate on this issue.

The Millennium Development Goals (MDG’s) goal number 7 calls on governments to ensure environmental sustainability. The goal is to reduce the proportion of the people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and states as an indicator the proportion of the population using improved drinking water sources and using improved sanitation facilities. [1]. Whereas the MDG’s voices the promise to alleviate poverty from the world it is not legally binding on Governments but instead forms the minimum standards for which all countries in the world should aim to achieve. As a result many countries have continuously used the MDG’s as a standard for their policy and planning processes. The MDG’s as goal 3 also call on governments to promote gender equality and empower women at all levels including in decision making and policy formation.

The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa substantially addresses issues and challenges that women face everyday including those relating to water and sanitation. State parties are required to ensure that women have access to clean drinking water [2] and it further advocates for women’s access and control over productive resources and most importantly participation of women in conceptualization, decision-making, implementation and evaluation of development policies and programmes [3]. This is a home grown instrument that was adopted by the African Union to benefit women in Africa. The Millennium Development goals and the protocol therefore merge in buttressing the place of women in sustainable development, and their incorporation in planning procedures [4].

Water and sanitation is critical to environmental sustainability while sanitation refers to interventions to reduce people’s exposure to disease by providing a clean environment in which to live by taking measures involving both provision of facilities and behaviors which work together to form a hygienic environment [5]. There are various uses of water such as for food, sanitation, personal hygiene, care of the sick, crop irrigation and for the care of domestic livestock and poultry. Women in Africa in an effort to ensure that their families and livestock are well taken care of will walk 10–15 kilometers to get water and carry up to up to 15 litres of water per trip [6] yet their significant role in water and sanitation is constantly overlooked. Women are direct users, providers and managers of water in households and they are guardians of household hygiene [7]. This should be the basis upon which women should be fully involved in public decision making with regard to water resources. Improvement of the quality, quantity and access to clean water liberates women and young girls freeing up their time to engage in income generating activities, education and public life.

States’ failure to uphold the right to water for all infringes on the rights of women as household caretakers because they have to go the extra mile to gain access to water, which is a basic right [8]. In lower income rural areas, women have to use lower quality water which makes the household susceptible to waterborne diseases [9] which in turn drains the limited household resources due to the medical expenses incurred. The unavailability of clean water then becomes burdensome for women reducing the quality of life as they have to forgo other rights to gain basic necessities.

Women usually have no rights and/or access to land for varying legal and cultural reasons yet they are the majority of the world’s agricultural producers, playing important roles in farming, fisheries, forestry and farming. They are the least title holders among the property holders in the world [10]. For example in Kenya, customary law generally limits ownership of land and only entitles access to communal land so long as a woman is married. Legislative provisions may be gender neutral but the application of land law is gendered [11]. Most land is registered in the name of the eldest male of a household. This not only excludes women from the registration process but further predicates the rights to use land to the rights of the male title holder.

Additionally, there is little incentive for women to make environmentally sound decisions and their lack of access to credit (of which land may be required as security) hampers them from buying technologies and inputs that would be less damaging to natural resources. As providers, their willingness to eke out a bare existence despite access to agricultural resources and education on viable methods of farming may make them adapt to less labour-intensive crops and practices that may harm the environment [12] and drain the water resources. These factors may lead to declining productivity and increased environmental degradation. Recognition of women as land holders and contributors to development would motivate them to protect the environment and desire to realize the full value of land in agricultural production.

Women are also increasingly becoming heads of households partly due to the numerous conflicts in Africa, HIV/AIDS and other existing social problems. This means that they are solely responsible for providing for their families and take part in farming activities yet they do not have the legal rights to access water and land (which are the main source of livelihood). Since many women do not own land, women and girls constantly face the threat of becoming economically unstable and dependant on their male relatives or husbands. In the eventuality of economic despair they may turn to means such as prostitution or transactional sex, or bowing to certain cultural practices such as wife inheritance that expose them to sexually transmitted diseases and other health risks.

The absence of clean water acutely increases the impact of HIV/AIDS. The causes and consequences of HIV are related to wider issues revolving around poverty, food security and water and sanitation. Bad hygienic conditions affect people living with HIV and they need more water for better health and general hygiene. This somewhat suspends household responsibilities as death takes away family members leaving destitute children and elderly people [13]. In impoverished rural areas, where women themselves are sick and dying it means that they cannot walk long distances to get water.

It is a fact that the proximity of sanitary facilities to the household increases security and privacy for women. It also reduces health and digestive system problems that arise when women have to wait until nighttime to relieve themselves. Separate sanitation facilities for girls and boys in schools also boost the school attendance of girls and ensure a safe and healthier learning environment. For mothers and pregnant women, improved water supply sanitation and hygiene leads to better health and reduced labour burdens and reduced mortality rates for children.

Poor families cannot afford to buy sanitary towels or tampons for their women and girls to use and women use old rags, leaves, toilet paper or sometimes nothing at all. Poor sanitation heightens the awkward conditions women face during menstruation because it is difficult to concentrate knowing there is no water, proper sanitary facilities or sanitary towels to use. Students and female teachers may feign sickness during their menses to avoid going to school altogether. Given that on average a woman has her cycle 13 times and menstruates 4 days per period, that amounts to 52 days which is almost 2 months in a year. That is a considerable amount of time to miss out on learning and it negatively affects the general performance of girls in school. In Rwanda secondary school girls have even proposed for increase in tuition fees so that schools can provide sanitary towels [14].

It cannot be disputed that sanitary towels are basic necessities for women and promotes their sexual and reproductive health. Article 14 (1) of the Protocol on the Rights of Women in Africa requires state parties to respect and promote and the right to sexual and reproductive health of women. Despite the separate provisions for sanitation and reproductive health, we need to recognize the relation between sanitation and sexual and reproductive health and their effect on the living conditions of women. Lack of adequate sanitation and clean water makes women susceptible to infections that affect their sexual and reproductive health. The use of materials such as old rags and other unhygienic materials cause a number of health problems for women which in turn can affect their reproductive health. Often women have no resources and even time to seek proper medical treatment and for many women in the rural areas health facilities are often located far away and are inaccessible. States must ensure that when discussing about water and sanitation they take into consideration how the lack of these two impact women and the society at large.

Careers and training areas around water supply and sanitation are dominated by men. There is a need to break the social barriers restricting the participation of women in community based forums or public consultations that influence water policies from the grassroots level. If water management is to be democratic and transparent, it should represent the needs of all, that is to say that men and women ought to have an equal say. This process needs to delineate the specific roles and needs of men and women in water management and how both can be incorporated for equal and sustainable use of resources. Some of the basic rights are intertwined, for example the rights to water and land, and a practical approach needs to be established.

During times of war and conflict, sanitation facilities in camps are generally poor and women rely on foreign aid to cater for their needs. Women are the worst hit by shortages of water and poor sanitation because they have to travel longer distances to search for water under very insecure conditions. Gender inequalities regarding political, economic status, human rights, education and health increase the risks during health hazards [15]. There is a need for women to be integrated in the process of peace building and natural resource management.

In conclusion, despite the preponderance of various international instruments underlining the status of women in access to water supply and sanitation, more needs to be done at the enforcement level. There should be some active reflection of the substance of these laws and adjustment of procedures that hinder access of women to resources. The African Union Protocol on the Rights of Women and the United Nations Millennium Development goals have given Africa leaders standards that they can adopt to ensure that the right to water and proper sanitation is assured to all citizens and most importantly to women who are the caretakers of homes and the users of water and sanitation for the benefit of their families and society as a whole. African leaders can no longer afford to ignore the voice of women.


*Catherine Irura is a Law Student at the University of Nairobi and currently an intern with Equality Now, Africa Regional Office.

*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

*For further notes, please follow this link :
1. Goal 7 ( c) of the Millennium Development Goals

2. Article 15, The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and people’s rights on the Rights of Women

3. Article 19, ibid

4. Millennium Development Goals, target 7: Ensuring environmental sustainability ; halving the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water from http://www.undp.org/mdg/goal7.shtml

5. The WSCC Working group on Sanitation Promotion (WHO 1998), as found in http://www.wateraid.org/documents/a_gender_development_approach.pdf

6. See UNIFEM fact sheets – Women at a glance, http://www.unifem.org/about/fact_sheets.php?StoryID=289

7. World Bank: Water, Sanitation and Gender equality: Gender and Development Briefing Notes: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/watersanitation.pdf

8. General comment 15 on the Right to water (Article 11 and 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) from http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/cescr.htm

9. UNFPA state of the world population 2005 - http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2005/english/ch1/index.htm

10. According to Food and Agriculture Organisation: Rural women and food security: Current situations and perspectives, 1998 from http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/W8376E/w8376e00.HTM

11. Patricia Kameri-Mbote, Women, Land Rights and the Environment: The Kenyan Experience. 2006. from http://www.ielrc.org/content/a0605.pdf

12. FAO – Gender and the environment from http://www.fao.org/Gender/en/env-e.htm

13. Unifem concept paper promoting women’s rights in the context of globalization and feminized poverty http://waterwiki.net/images/d/d5/UNIFEM2004_Womens_Rights_to_Water.pdf -

14. The New times Kigali, 11th October 2007, Rwanda: Adolescents Missing School During Menstruation Call for Sanitary Pads by Paulus Kayyigwa. http://allafrica.com/stories/200710120286.htmlUN Water: Gender, Water and Sanitation: A policy brief .

15. UN Water: Gender, Water and Sanitation: A policy brief

Gender perspective on water and sanitation

Roselynn Musa

2008-06-10

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/48635

What does gender have to do with issues of sanitation and water? Roselyenn Musa gives us a multi-faceted gender perspectives that consider the role of African governments, gender awareness and water privatization amongst others.
====

INTRODUCTION

The upcoming mid-year African Union (AU) summit of heads of state and government has as its primary agenda as ‘Water and Sanitation.’ Development goals in the water and sanitation sector in Africa typically address issues of access to and the availability of adequate and safe supply and services, health and well being of all members of the society. At the Millennium Summit in 2000, Heads of State pledged to halve the proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water by the year 2015 yet at the end of 2002 some 1.1 billion people or 18% of the world’s population lacked access to safe drinking water, while 2.6 billion or 40 % of the world’s population lacked access to improved sanitation services.

Gender issues are applicable when conditions are bone dry and also when they are dangerously wet. Women and children are the first to suffer from the disruption of water supply and the provision of sanitation services. They are disproportionately affected by natural and ‘man made’ disasters as a result of gender inequalities. They play a central part in the provision, management and safeguarding of water and sanitation, but the pivotal role they play as providers and users of water and has seldom been reflected in institutional arrangements for the development and management of these resources.

This essay considers the concept of gender in the context of water supply, sanitation and hygiene development. It recalls the commitments of African governments to gender in the broader framework of international instruments. It then analyses why gender is central to water and sanitation and the implications of water privatization. It concludes with some suggestions to meet the challenge of enabling change, recommending gender awareness as one o the keys to sustainable development in water and sanitation.

DEFINING GENDER AND CONTEXT

For the purpose of this paper the term ‘gender’ describes the social relations between and characteristics of women and men. It concerns men’s and women’s participation in the determination of their lives including access to rights, power and control over resources. In most African countries men’s and women’s gender roles determine their access to, power and control over adequate water supply and sanitation services. Locating Water and Sanitation In International Gender Equality Instruments The United Nations Decade for Women and Development’s (1976-1985) themes of equality, development and peace signaled the way for international debate that encompassed the broad spectrum of development issues.

The United Nations Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (UN CEDAW, 1981) proved to be a major step forward in fostering debate and setting international standards of gender equality. Article 14 (2) calls on states to take account of particular problems faced by women and the significant role that they play in the economic survival of families. It calls for measures to eliminate discrimination against women and ensuring women’s right to enjoy adequate living conditions with respect to housing, sanitation, electricity and water supply. The United Nations 4th World Conference on Women (Beijing 1995) also calls on governments to ensure that women’s priorities are included in public investment programmes for economic infrastructure such as water and sanitation, electrification etc.

The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of women in Africa in Articles 2 and 15 enjoins governments to provide women with access to clean drinking water, enact and effectively implement appropriate legislative or regulatory measures, including those prohibiting and curbing all forms of discrimination particularly regarding those harmful practices which endanger the health and general well-being of women. It is depressing to note that most African countries’ commitments to these instruments remain only on paper.

GENDER ISSUES IN WATER SUPPLY

In developing countries some 3 billion people do not have basic access to a tap. Women and very often young girls are primarily burdened with the responsibility of fetching water for household use, transport, store and use it for cooking, cleaning, washing, and watering household animals. Men are rarely expected to perform such tasks. Yet all too often decisions about the design and location of water facilities are made without the involvement of the female users, who have most at stake in this regard.

Women and girls spending up to 6-8 hours a day collecting water can consume up to a third of daily caloric intake often bringing back a mere 15 to 20 litres which has to cover the needs of a whole family leading to rationing water in the household. Many infectious diseases are associated with poor water quality.

Carrying this heavy load consumes much of their energy (requiring 600 to 800 calories of food per day). This chore often deprives girls of time to attend school or mothers a job. It presents a health hazard, especially during development and pregnancy periods. They face the risk of drowning if the water source is a river and injuries from attacks during conflicts. With closer water comes less danger, greater self-esteem, less harassment of women and better school attendance by girls.

Water and sanitation go hand in hand, e.g. sewage thrown into the river which is a source of water supply often leads to its pollution. When there is no proper sanitation the risk of disease is higher. It is the women who have to look after sick children, and the young daughters who lose out on education.

GENDER ISSUES IN SANITATION

The UN has declared 2008 the International Year of Sanitation, and a lot still need to be done to make a difference. Human waste disposal is often a taboo subject due to cultural and gender boundaries even though it presents one of the most pressing needs

There is a need to understand the implications of gender in the broader definition of sanitation. Most of the time bad sanitation denotes a lack of toilets or latrines at home, in schools or public places. Sharing of latrines can also be a deterrent to their use by women because they do not want to be seen entering or leaving the toilet and they often have to wait until dark to defecate or urinate.

This has a number of detrimental effects including security in terms of rape and harassment and health in terms of infections that may affect future fertility. Equally invasive are issues of privacy and personal hygiene related to menstruation, washing and bathing. At school there are often no facilities for menstruating girls and where latrines exist they are often expected to share facilities with boys.

While women are mostly responsible for cleaning sanitation units they often do so without any training on the use of protective gloves and anticeptics. This could result in poor hygiene and exposure to bacteria and several parasitic infections resulting in outbreak of epidemics.

PRIVATIZATION AND THE RIGHT TO WATER

Privatization of water services versus the right to water has been controversial. Water for basic needs has been identified primarily as a public good and a human right and not as a commodity to be traded in the open market for profit.

This does not imply that the government should supply water free to the population, but implies that shifting responsibility to large private corporations may supersede attention to human needs and rights and private companies may remain largely unaccountable to the people they are supposed to benefit. This could force poor women to use contaminated water that is free rather than clean water, which they cannot afford. This of course impacts the health of the community, and may result in much higher costs in health care.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Water and sanitation goals may seem ambitious, but they are very modest as these goals do not envisage providing a tap in every kitchen or a flush toilet in every house. Access to clean water and sanitation does not only improve the health of a family, but it also provides an opportunity for girls to go to school, and for women to use their time more productively than in fetching water thereby contributing more to the economy..

Gender mainstreaming would ensure the participation of women in capacity building, design and management of water and sanitation services, but care should be taken not lead to more work and responsibilities for women and exempt or bypass men, but equitably distribute benefits and burdens between the sexes.

Budgets are a critical tool for mainstreaming. If gender considerations are built into policies and project design, they should reflect in resource allocation otherwise they will not deliver substantive equality for women. Also key is increased gender awareness, through training at all levels to achieving sustainable development.


*Roselynn Musa is the Advocacy Officer at the African Women’s Development and Communications Network, (FEMNET) in Nairobi, Kenya.

*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org

*For further notes, please follow this link:
Afshar H (ed.) (1998) ‘Women and Empowerment - Illustrations from the Third World’, Women’s Studies at York, Macmillan Press Ltd.

Black M (1998) ‘Learning What Works – A 20 Year Retrospective View on International Water and Mainstreaming Gender In Water And Sanitation:

Literature Review For The SA Department Of Water And Sanitation, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), 2002. Water: A Critical Resource. August 2002.

http://www.unfpa.org/issues/factsheets/pdfs/linking_water.pdf

http://www.worldbank.org/watsan/pdf/WSS_report_Final_19Feb.pdf

Gender and water, and sanitation in Mozambique

SOAWR

2008-06-10

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/48636

Water and Sanitation are critical elements in a sustainable livelihood strategy as it is directly related to issues of access to and control over natural resources as well as basic infrastructure and services. It has been noted that the problems of water and sanitation affect more than 800 million people- 15 percent of the world’s population and most of these are in the South of Sahara (ibid). For interested parties to come up with approaches to curb this problem, there is need to have a clear understanding of the interconnectedness of the two. Thus, the benefits of water will not be seen unless attention is also given to sanitation (Anderson 1996).

However, this article is not going to look at the approaches to overcome the water and Sanitation problem. It is going to focus at the role gender plays in Mozambique in the supply of water and Sanitation. Lastly, it will conclude with recommendations to the responsible authority so that they can be in a position to take an active part in ensuring that the Mozambican citizens have the right to better water supplies and sanitation conditions.

THE MOZAMBICAN SITUATION

Through the 2007-8 budget, the Government of Mozambique has clearly defined water, sanitation and urban development as one of its priorities. This is no other than sustainable development of the population life through the improvement of its life conditions. Thus, this brings to focus the importance of water supply and sanitation for the entire population. The National Campaign launched in February is coordinated by the Ministry of Health, together with its partners (governmental institutions, International Agencies and NGO national and international). The general objectives of this Campaign were;

- To contribute for the change of hygienic habit of the citizens. - To improve the individual hygienic conditions, conscientise and appeal people in order to change behaviour related to their habit of individual and collective habits of hygiene.

- To concretise its efforts and calls for the participation and involvement of all the citizens to promote better water supply and sanitation.

THE ROLE OF GENDER IN THE WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION

As far as water supply and sanitation in Mozambique are concerned, gender plays a paramount role. In most African cultures, it has been noted that women are the most responsible for the use and management of water resources, sanitation and health at the household level. Mozambique is not exception.

WOMEN

Both in cities and rural areas, women have the responsibility of fetching water and educating children hygienic matters. Women and girls are often obliged to walk many hours every day queuing in water points in the cities or walking long distances to fetch water, mainly in the rural areas, while men are rarely expected to perform such tasks. As they are linked to the house chores, they are mainly the ones who bear the heavy burden of trying to provide it to the family. They make sure that the laundry is done, flowers and gardens are watered and animals are given water. Women do little as far as building water sources (Water fountains) are concerned. The same applies to sanitation. They are not the ones who build the toilets (pit latrines) but they take an active role in making sure that they are clean. They also participate in community activities while men were linked to the culture.

MEN

Men are generally concerned with the building role. They are the ones who make sure that the water structures are built. In the rural area, they are the ones who dig wells and build them. They are also responsible when it comes to digging and construction pit latrines. Unlike women, they do not take an active role in maintaining the structures.

Given the fact that the Mozambican society is male dominated, most of the decision-making regarding the issue of Water and Sanitation lies in the hands of men. On the other hand women are given less opportunities to air their views and ideas on those issues. This makes them not heard. Therefore, they have very little contribution as far as this issue is concerned.

SUCCESS AND CHALLENGES

The latest report assessing progress on water and sanitation in Mozambique noted that rural water supply coverage grew significantly out of 1.055 planed water sources the number of spread water sources was 1.529. The rate of coverage also has shown the increase of rural and urban water 48.5% and 40% respectively. This gave access to drinking water to more than 9.871.523 families.

On the other hand the coverage of sanitation also increased to 47% in urban areas. Within the scope of decentralization of funds, the sector defined a new role in each level and started the process of decentralization of funds of District and Provincial levels to help with the implementation of the strategic plan of rural water and sanitation.

However the audit of performance on water for 2006-2007 found problems in finance management, a weak performance in relation to revenues, a lack of data on fund use, and lack of desegregated datas on gender in terms of access.

Nevertheless, water supply within the rural and urban communities can greatly reduce time and efforts for women looking for water.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Given the role of gender in the supply of water and sanitation in Mozambique, here are some of the recommendations we can make;

- The management of water and sanitation becomes the most important strategy resource essential for the sustainable life and achieving of the sustainable development in our country and the government should stump its efforts to up lift the lives of its citizen. It should also see to it that priorities are given to the right people. There have been situations of a project failing because attention was targeted at the wrong people.

- There is need to offer equal opportunities for sharing ideas and views for both men and women regarding water and sanitation issues.

- There must be enough consultation to the targeted people or communities be it in the urban or rural areas.

- All the gender needs should be addressed from the planning stage up to the evaluation.

- All responsible NGO working for the improvement of water supply and sanitation should work collectively to combat this problem.

- As both men and women play very significant roles in the society, there must be avenues to enhance educative programs in which the roles of both parties are stressed. There is need also to overcome the presumption of female inferiority.

- It is also important to recognise the different roles played by man and women whenever we design the project or in the planning thus can increase chances for project sustainability and at the same time for the development of the country.



*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org

*For further notes, please follow this link:
Andersson, I. 1996 Swedish support to water and sanitatrion in least developed countries. Lesson learned from 30 years fo development cooperation, Stockholm: Sida(Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency)

IRC (Interanational Water ans Sanitation Center), 1995, Water and Sanitation fro All: A World Priority, vol, 1, 2 and 3

Mozambique National Human Development Report 2006/07

Burundi: Access to water is a human right

Concilie Gahungere

2008-06-10

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/48640

If women had control over water as resource "they would be better placed to manage its use, especially in agriculture, which is the principal economic activity in Burundi, and is controlled by women." Concilie Gahungere looks at the access to water in Burundi in relation to gender.
====


Mrs Immaculee S. lives in Gikungu Rural location, which falls in the urban Gihosha district. She is 65 and lives alone with no children or domestic help. Even though she lives close to a residential area, she has no access to clean water. Everyday, she takes a 10-litre jerrican, and goes off in search of water. With her jerrican, she begs her neighborhood “bosses” for a little water. With an air of resignation, she describes how her neighbors receive her: “sometimes they open their big gates, and other times they look at us through the gate, without opening it”. She says the administration must look into providing clean water for the poor and the old. “We are old and poor, we neither have the money to pay for water, nor do we have young children to look after us”, she laments.

Mrs. Immaculee is one of many Burundian women without access to clean water. Article 15 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa stipulates under the right to food security, that states must ensure women’s access to adequate and safe nutrition. In this regards, it sets in to necessary mechanisms to:

- provide women with access to clean drinking water, sources of domestic fuel, land, and the means of producing nutritious food;

- establish adequate systems of supply and storage to ensure food security.

Mrs Odette Kayitesi is the former minister for environment. In her view, the Burundian woman’s access to clean water is a critical issue that has been debated for a long time and is still not resolved. The access water, Burundian women have to travel long distances. Often, she covers these huge distances to obtain water that is, in the final analysis, not fit for drinking. She is sometimes forced to draw water from streams for all her home needs, including drinking.

Mrs. Kayitesi laments that the lack of water points within easy access has grave hygiene consequences for the family, both in terms of the transmission of disease, and the future of the girl child. Young girls are forced to abandon the education in order to help their mothers seek out water for household use.

In Burundi, some regions have very few water sources or catchment areas. Even where there is water, the difficulty lies in making it easily accessible. This is the case in the North, the East and the North-Eastern regions. On the other hand, the central plateaus, and the Munirwa regions have sufficient water supply.

WATER ISSUES IN THE CITY

Women living in the city are not spared either when it comes to lack of clean drinking water, states Kayitesi. Some women are forced to draw water from the rivers that criss-cross Bujumbura, such as the Ntahangwa and the Rusizi. In Kayitesi’s view, there is a problem of lack of sensitization, because too many women are still underestimate the importance of clean drinking water. Another problem is that many women in poor neighborhoods do not have the resources to obtain clean drinking water. The cost of living on Burundi is very high, and more so for the poor.

WOMEN AND WATER MANAGEMENT

Our sources indicate that based on the available data, the percentage of the population with access to clean drinking water is very low. During the recent African Water Week held in Tunis, it was noted that only a small percentage of the population have access to clean drinking water and that countries have to intensify efforts by increasing drilling for clean water. Governments have been asked to meet new targets in the 2020-2025 period.

Kayitesi calls on citizens to maintain water point, noting that the population still does not take enough responsibility in protecting what already exists in the interests of sustainability.

Solange Habonimana, former chairperson of CAFOB (Collectif des Associations et ONG féminines du Burundi), agrees that Burundian women have inadequate access to water. In cases where women have access, they have no control or decision-making power. If women had decisive control over the resource, she would be better placed to manage its use, especially in agriculture, which is the principal economic activity in Burundi, and is controlled by women.


*Concilie Gahungere is the coordinator of CAFOB (Collectif des Associations et ONG féminines du Burundi). This article was translated from French by Joshua Ogada.

*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

A Critical Review of South African Xenophobic Attacks

Kola Ibrahim

2008-06-10

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/panafrican/48638

What happens when dreams are deferred and social movements all offer a neo-liberal vision? For Kola Ibrahim, South Africa is the answer.

For more than a week, a series of xenophobic attacks were launched against the foreigners by a desperate layer of the poor population of South Africa. According to reports, more than 50 persons were killed while hundreds were forced to flee their homes. Foreigners attacked included Nigerians, Zimbabweans, among others. But, the major rallying point of these desperate poor youth of Africa is that they need jobs, and the little jobs they have are being taken by the foreigners. These racist attacks in South Africa resemble the racist and far-right attacks on immigrants and other peoples in Europe and America. In as much as one cannot give any iota of support to this backward and reactionary act of a few, it is necessary to place the blame directly where it belongs.

In the first instance, it should be stated that the basis of the xenophobic attacks is to be found in the extreme poverty the South African poor population has been subjected to since the fall of apartheid. The clamour for jobs is just a reflection of growing poverty and privation. Xenophobia is the echo of a massive anger growing within the South African society. Despite the claim of increased investment and economic growth, more and more South Africans are being deprived of their daily needs while the white minority rule has been replaced by capital rule of the working majority. Following the end of apartheid, millions of poor South Africans expected a better living under their own, but the almost eight years of Mbeki rule has dashed these hopes. In the name of improvement foreign direct investment, neo-liberal economic policies were introduced vis-à-vis cut in social spending which has seen the budget for education and health care (in a country with one of the highest AIDS/HIV record), commercialization of social services (public houses, water, etc) privatization of public utilities like electricity, retrenchment among other things.

These policies tagged under Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) programme (the sister programme of Nigeria's NEEDS) have collectively meant joblessness, evictions and increased poverty. According to a 2002 report by Municipal Service Project, an estimated 10 million have had their electricity and water cut off for non-payment, two million have been evicted on this and other sundry reasons while 1.5 million have had their property seized for the same reason. In fact, fifty percent of those in arrears said they could not afford to pay no matter how much they try. Furthermore, only half of the 40 million population has access to flushing toilets while 10 percent have no access to any form of toilet at all. In 2002, through the privatization and commercialization policies of the ANC government, 200 lives were lost to cholera (the highest in the country’s history). And the introduction of water charges in Kwa Zulu Natal district has forced two thirds of the population to resort to rivers and dams for water, with the consequent health implications. Since the ANC government came to power more than a million jobs have been lost while job creation has simply dwindled.

The overall result of this is a growing poverty with over 30 percent of the population living on less than $0.9 a month while more than 70 percent live on less than $35 a month. Yet more public utilities have been handed over to private firms at rock bottom prices, a situation which has further increased the inequality level in the country. Already, more than 40 percent of the population is jobless. The situation has in fact worsened since these facts were collated.

In this kind of situation, one could only expect a growing frustration and anger. The question however is why were foreigners targeted by the angry and frustrated youth. The emergence of majority rule led to much expectation by the South African population. Unfortunately, more than ten years after, aside a few billionaires and an insignificant middle class, most of the South Africans have seen their living standards declining. Though, some foreigners usually make it in South Africa (as a result of the fact that some of them are qualified prefessionals), many foreigners are also poor especially those who left their countries due to political and social strife. As a result of this growing misery, many South Africans have been looking for a way out.

The ruling ANC has stifled dissenting views within the party. This coupled with the alliance of the major opposition groups - the central trade union, COSATU and the Communist Party (which has in the real sense turned to the right) has denied most South Africans a vehicle to demand for change. The central trade union has been diverting the mass anger to safe mode which has made many to lose hope in the possibility of the labour movement driving cahnge. Furthermore, more and more sectors of the economy are being handed over to the private sector all in a bid to weaken the mass movement. It is the summation of all this that led to the current crisis. As the legendary Polish revolutionary, Rosa Luxembourg once said that 'it is either socialism or capitalist barbarism".

It is also important to mention the contribution of he Mbeki/ANC government's foreign policy. It is a known fact that Mbeki government is giving silent support to the tyrannical Mugabe government in Zimbabwe, which has led to tens of thousands of political refugees fleeing to South African shanties. This has added further pressure on the dilapidating public service and utilities. Immigration, rather than generating brotherly support and affection ,will only generate xenophobia and the growth of racism.

It is noteworthy that the xenophobic attacks occur in the shanties areas of the country where stark poverty prevails. It is in this areas that most of the foreigners are residing as they attempt to escape from the neo-liberal misery they face in their countries. For instance in Nigeria, millions are still living in poverty while just one percent of the population is controls over 80 percent of the oil wealth. Education, health and other social infrastructure is in shambles. Nothing is working. In this situation, immigration becomes a solution. Even professionals (doctors, nurses, engineers, etc) are leaving the country to better their lots.

According to IFAD, "three fourths of poor people in Western and Middle Africa — an estimated 90 million people — live in rural areas and depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. One in five lives in a country is affected by warfare." The common denominator in all these African countries is the implementation of neo-liberal economic policies such as privatization which lead to growing economic misery for the vast majority of the citizenry.

Growing economic misery in the absence of political alternatives for the masses can only fuel reactionary, backward ideas like racism. It is a reality that the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Stalinism - a grotesque caricature of genuine ideas of Marxism - has led to many worker organizations succumbing to the ideas of capitalist neo-liberalism, thus denying the poor masses an alternative to the capitalist policies. Most labour movement leaderships - from South Africa to Nigeria, Kenya, Botswana, etc - serve as a stabilizing force for capitalism.

But the masses are ready to struggle for change. The recent protests against food prices have confirmed this. However, the absence of a viable political structure that will translate the anger of the masses into a radical political change is frustrating the masses. Unless radical, democratic mass political parties with genuine socialist ideas are founded in every African country and coupled with a genuine working people's solidarity, xenophobia and ethnic violence will never stop. The current capitalist governments in Africa have shown that they cannot move Africa forward. They will not even use Africa’s enormous resources (human, material, monetary and natural) to fund social services. This is South Africa’s long-term lesson.


*Kola Ibrahim is a Member of the Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM), Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife.

*Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

Castro: getting it right!

Noah Tucker

2008-06-10

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/letters/48639

Kola Ibrahim's remarks about the achievements of the Cuban revolution and the negative effects of neo-liberalism are accurate enough; but unfortunately much of the article is sheer drivel, reflecting either a paucity of historical knowledge and analysis on the part of the writer, or an attempt to conceal the truth. A few examples: "...the Soviet Union only supported Cuba as long as her expansionist interest were satisfied." The Soviet Union gave diplomatic and material support to revolutionary and anti-imperialist movements and states, but this was limited by its policy of 'peaceful co-existence' with the West and its position of relative weakness (eg in material wealth, level of technology and military power) vis a vis the USA & its allies. It is certainly an arguable view that the Soviet Communist Party's main international policy line was wrong, but to describe the USSR as expansionist flies in the face of the facts.

"Cuba.. would not... internationalise the revolution..." A truly bizarre assertion, particularly as it comes from an African writer. Cuban soldiers fought in the Congo in the 1960s, and thousands more later on in Southern Africa. The defeat of the SADF at Cuito Canavale would have been impossible without the Cuban fighters.

"[Cuba] would accept Soviet goods at any cost... a terrible effect on Cuba as many inferior goods were brought in without any alternative." In fact, Cuba got its petroleum, industrial equipment and consumer goods from the USSR and other CMEA members at very low cost. They were paid for by Cuba supplying sugar at significantly above the prevailing world market price, and through 'soft' loans on terms which were very advantageous for the Cubans. Through these arrangements, which are usually described as a 'Soviet subsidy' by Western commentators, living standards in Cuba rose very substantially, despite the US blockade. It was when they came to an end that the Cuban economy crashed, leading to the 'Special Period' of great material hardship.

Kola Ibrahim notes that "It is not for the capitalist apologists to teach Cuba democracy..."- but presumably it is OK for him or her as a non-capitalist apologist' to try to teach democracy to Cuba: "There is need for a socialist multi-party democracy from local to national level in Cuba and the ability of the people to determine and discuss every government policy." Well, Cuban democracy is far from perfect as even its Communist Party leaders would agree. But by making this remark without noting the relatively very high level of participation by the Cubans in choosing their representatives and deciding policy, Kola Ibrahim conceals the reality in terms of democracy in Cuba. It is unworthy that a supposed 'tribute' to Fidel should contain such falsehoods and distortions.

Fahamu