The New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) came into existence in 2001. It is purportedly a new partnership between African countries and the West in an attempt to bring Africa out of its steady decline. Will it work, or will it be another African-led disappointment? Our 2 guest bloggers this week, Roz D, and Paradon M, offer their perspectives below. Dr. D.
When we take a look at the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), established in July 2001 by the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and accepted by the G8 Summit of 2002 at Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, we already see the failings of another to-be failed endeavor. An endeavor spearheaded by only five head of states at the time and supported by Western money and institutions, both private and government acting. Like much of Africa’s constitutions throughout the continent, the goals and wording are visionary in nature, with flowery language and phrases of idealism such as “good governance as a basic requirement for peace, security, and sustainable political and socio-economic development (www.nepad.org),” but are highly improbable to achieve in reality, at least for the time being. What is addressed below is not that African countries do not appreciate outside help from various countries and organizations…it is that many African leaders are blind to their actual countries needs, blinded by the Western education, blinded by an idealism that is hardly based in reality. Of course, African leaders try to legitimize their political, economic, and social reforms under the heading of OAU, NEPAD, or even the UN. What are needed instead are truly African organizations, based in realistic goals, with greater autonomy from Western influence, via money or Western policy-making dictating this or that over the other. What are needed are organizations that are not a sham.
Too often there are program initiatives that are brainstormed, produced, and implemented by legitimate organizations, in this case the NEPAD. What organizations such as NEPAD fail to recognize is that “fixes,” if you can even call them that, expect too much in too little time. We are not talking about the three to five year terms of projects that often get started. What is needed are truly long-term projects lasting at least ten years, preferably fifteen years as a median term for change. That is not to say that because now there is more time that more “goals” can be established; it goes against the whole idea. For example, on www.nepad.org website, there is a heading titled What are the immediate desired outcomes of NEPAD? with “conflict prevention and the establishment of enduring peace on the continent” and the adoption and implementing “principles of democracy and good political economic and corporate governance, and the protection of human rights.” One thing to say about those goals: ARE YOU KIDDING ME???!!! Those are immediate goals? What is your long-term goal: world peace? The remarks are not meant to be cynical. It is just that when one’s “immediate desired outcomes” are those goals that are still continually fought everyday in even developed countries, one has to wonder if NEPAD is living in a fantasy world. One has to keep in mind that many African countries are lead by corruption and the cult of personality, some would say a legacy from the colonial age. Instead, NEPAD, if it is truly going to be effective, must tone down its immediate goals and focus and work locally with respective African nations in establishing the basics such as food, shelter, and education. Although this is a simple statement with many caveats, essentially once you have a country with an educated populace that has enough food and shelter, a governance structure and along with it, rule of law, will begin to emerge.
To establish a credible and legitimate governance within a country, what is needed are not necessarily Western forms of thinking and governance. Instead, what is need are respective African country versions of governance. Too often, Western nations hope to influence how a country develops and “grows up.” They do so by using money as the carrot. That is, basically saying that if you want our money to develop your country, you are going to have to develop according to our terms and conditions. Already, the NEPAD is mired in Western bureaucratic mess. Even the leaders of the respective countries in the NEPAD think like Westerners. What many African leaders and most Western leaders fail to recognize is that problems within a country are not necessarily just internal but also inter-state conflict. For example, that is a “civil war” in the Congo has already involved individuals from eight countries. Even more, the NEPAD must distance itself from organizations like the G8. Yes, those countries mean well but they do not understand how to help. It is like asking a car mechanic to fix a plumbing issue in a house: yes, the car mechanic wants to help and does so but does not quite understand the intricacies and needs of the plumbing system as a fully certified plumber would. To allow for greater autonomy, the NEPAD must take a stand. NEPAD must demand to those nations willing to offer help that, “We welcome your money but we’ll fix our own way. What works in Senegal does not necessarily work in Sierra Leone.”
Lastly, there is a lack in the perception of historical success among many African nations. There is the thinking that nations can be restored to their “former glory.” To be honest: there NEVER was a former glory for many African nations. Instead, most African nations are experiencing success, or at least attempts for it, on their own and for the first time. As such, there are no leaders, including those from NEPAD, that can truly say that what they are doing has been tried and tested and works. Whoever says that is lying. How does one person, how does one organization know the key to success? They do not. It takes a group of people, the citizens of a country to make success happens. Yes, an individual can prompt a reform…but it is the citizens that want to carry it out.
In the end, NEPAD, for all its talk is a sham. It needs to realize that its goals need to be more realistic and/or increase the number of years. It needs to realize that Western influence and policies do not work for every single country. Finally, it needs to realize that what they are attempting to do has never been done before and to take baby steps.
Paradon M.
NEPAD: Africa’s Pursuit of Successful Destiny
By: Rosalyn D.
Now only four years old, NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) has become an integral part of Africa’s progress made towards economic growth. The start of a millennium signaled Africa to take charge of their destiny, and pursue a new ambitious goal towards economic development. The continent saw a need to design an alternative strategy to the PRSPs (Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers) in order to confront its challenges of rising poverty levels, continual underdevelopment, and marginalization of its markets within the global economy. Hence, in July of 2001, NEPAD was adopted by the African Union.
NEPAD specified major areas of particular development assistance, including urgent debt relief; significant resources for infrastructure development; sustained financial outlays so that Africa can meet the United Nations millennium development goals of halving poverty rates by 2015; and, the end of trade distortions and agricultural subsidies by rich nations so that Africa can trade its way out of poverty through better access to lucrative Western markets.
Largely influenced by Thabo Mbeki and his idea of ‘African Renaissance,’ the institutionalization of key NEPAD principles are based on the idea that African dependence on aid and foreign intervention is a major barrier to African success. The main NEPAD principles and components are: African ownership and responsibility for
the continent’s development; the promotion and advancement of democracy, human
rights, good governance and accountable leadership; self-reliant development to
reduce dependency on aid; building capacity in African institutions; promoting intra-
Africa trade and investment; accelerating regional economic integration; advancing
women; strengthening Africa’s voice in international forums; and forging
partnerships with African civil society, the private sector, other African countries and
the international community. The efficiency of the program is characterized by executing these principles.
Endorsed by the G8, the NEPAD policies and priorities have become the internationally approved framework for Africa’s development. The APRM, African Peer Review Mechanism, has been largely successful. This peer review system has helped to establish camaraderie among the fifty-three nations, creating a forum in which each country is accountable for one another.
NEPAD has helped spread democracy and improve financial conditions. For example, in Mozambique, the world has observed peaceful changes of leadership for the first time. Also, since the implementation of the program, the average economic growth rate of Africa has increased from 2.9 in 2002 to 5.1 in 2004.
Copying is said to be the sincerest form of flattery. The NEPAD ‘Fight Against Aids’ campaign is a plan that addresses the impact of HIV and AIDS in Africa through integrated health sectors and new training techniques. This African program has been so successful in achieving positive results that other countries around the world have implemented the NEPAD Health Strategy.
Also, improvements and innovations have been made within the field of education. NEPAD has helped endorsed African partnerships through distance education learning, and exchange programs among African nations. These programs are geared for students interested in pursuing teaching, and focus on training and development.
The examples mentioned are a few of the many NEPAD successes. Clearly, the success of this program has helped to uplift Africa’s civil society. NEPAD has curt-tailed development within Africa, and has built the platform for all of Africa’s socio-economic success.
NEPAD is actualizing the AU vision of an Africa integrated, prosperous and peaceful, an Africa driven by its own citizens, a dynamic force in the global arena.
Ultimately, only time will tell how successful NEPAD will be in achieving economic development of Africa. However, the monumental progress made in just the first four years is quite notable. The initiative undertaken by the NEPAD plan is the first time Africa has banned together and taken charge of their plight. Taking charge means being held accountable for the issues that have continually plagued Africa, These include resolution of conflicts, poverty reduction, fighting corruption, eliminating the burden of disease and strengthening the capacities of African states. Arguably, the most important aspect of NEPAD is its initiative to facilitate the idea of African ownership of development issues. Unlike other development programs that have come and gone, NEPAD was created by Africans for Africans, ensuring the sustainability of success in the future.
Works Cited:
Coleman, Sarah. “ The NEPAD Formula” [Online] World Press Review. http://www.worldpress.org/Africa/578.cfm. 27 October 2005.
NEPAD – The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (October 2001), 57 pp. e-disk
“NEPAD” [online] Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/nepad. 27 October 2005.
“Nepad, the AU and the EU: the challenges of a relationship” European Union: Delegation of the European Union Commission of South Africa. [Online] http://www.eusa.org.za/PDFdownload/Speeches/Lake_Nepad_AU_EU_2003.pdf. 27 October 2005.
Taylor, Ian (2004) “Why NEPAD and African Politics Don’t Mix”, Foreign Policy in Focus e-disk
15 comments:
Paradon,
Nicely written.
The way you present NEPAD, it does seem like a sham. I agree with your opinion. The West does try to fix Africa on Western terms, not African. The West, particularly the U.S. tend to have difficulty thinking long term, anything past 10 years seems to be ages away and not worth thinking about. This mentality is what I think led NEPAD to such short term goals. The West needs to back off and be a supporter of Africa, not a manipulator or puzzle piece shuffler.
Paradon,
Nicely written.
The way you present NEPAD, it does seem like a sham. I agree with your opinion. The West does try to fix Africa on Western terms, not African. The West, particularly the U.S. tend to have difficulty thinking long term, anything past 10 years seems to be ages away and not worth thinking about. This mentality is what I think led NEPAD to such short term goals. The West needs to back off and be a supporter of Africa, not a manipulator or puzzle piece shuffler.
Paradon,
Nicely written.
The way you present NEPAD, it does seem like a sham. I agree with your opinion. The West does try to fix Africa on Western terms, not African. The West, particularly the U.S. tend to have difficulty thinking long term, anything past 10 years seems to be ages away and not worth thinking about. This mentality is what I think led NEPAD to such short term goals. The West needs to back off and be a supporter of Africa, not a manipulator or puzzle piece shuffler.
Rosalyn D,
Interesting difference of opinion between you and Paradon. You make NEPAD sound successful and worth the effort, one of the best programs to date aimed at the development of Africa. Going back to Paradon's opinion that NEPAD's goals are short-term, do you think that the reason for his negative evaluation of NEPAD is the result of he himself looking short-term at NEPAD's success or lack there of? You said that it will be a while before we can see the success of NEPAD, I agree, but don't you think there are some flaws in its framework?
Rosalyn,
If you were the head of NEPAD, based on the research you've done, what changes would you make to the system. It's a difficult question, but I'm curious as to what your answer would be. You know much more about NEPAD than I. I'll read up on NEPAD and add to your answer. Some dislike the UN. Personally, I feel it could be a useful global tool if managed properly. Do you think the UN should be involved at all with NEPAD? If so, large or limited involvement.
People talk about the future African leaders as being different from current African leaders. As being the bright beacon of the future. That today's sons and daughters of African leaders will be making the difference because they're more aware of the world and can engage with Western powers better and have Western "training and education." I don't buy it. I say...what's the difference? Weren't today's leaders also brought up under Western education? Do you really think that after years of seeing their fathers in power, in opulence, that they're really going to so willingly relinquish power? If anything, the future leaders of Africa understand even more the roots of democracy...for they are those very roots today. They see, know, and understand how those very roots can turn into a strong Canadian Maple or mutate into a hideous vine that traps and ensnares a country; the more you struggle, the tougher it is to get out.
NEPAD: African leaders through the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) have more to lose. So, why give up power? They blame the West for not fulfilling their commitments? Well, isn't that based on past experiences? Why throw money into a black hole? Sam Nujoma of Namibia says "succumbing to foreign ideologies and influences." Though, of course, maybe these leaders just want to stay in power longer and understand that if Africans are still in power, they will be as well.
Additionally, NEPAD is a lot about Human Rights. That there are certain goals to meet in order to receive more aid. This is a tough sell. Suppose an African leader decides to accept aid, takes the money, gets his people up to a "certain level" but then decides to not do anything else. Will NEPAD withdraw money or stop giving it money? Won't that increase the level of suffering within that country? Couldn't the African leader twist it around and say that NEPAD has abandoned them? How will this play out in African politics, on the international stage?
NEPAD doesn't quite know what it wants to do: focus more on political and human rights or work on the socio-economic aspect? Wouldn't working on the political and human rights trample the province of the AU?
"While its long term objective is 'to eradicate poverty in Africa,' it talks of promoting greater access to services, rather than providing legal entitlements to these services." That is, there's no guarantee; no teeth to what they're trying to achieve. These are "quick fixes" and imported technical models. They don't address the heart of the issue: guaranteed rights for all and everyone.
NEPAD objectives were started by five African heads of states. What happened to the others? Will there be a commitment; an acceptance from others? No consultation occurred; or at least attempts at it. But even if there was, and they were rejected and yet it went along, will others follow? Other countries not involved in decision-making, just like SAPs in which people had to no say. Shoved down the throats of countries.
Even if countries like S. Africa, Ghana, and Uganda are doing well...is it sustainable in NEPAD? Won't there be a disparity occurring in which counties doing less well may become jealous and refuse to go along? Also, good countries could become corrupt again because they're going up against so much...that you're surrounded by corruption and will begin to look like the environment around you.
Paradon,
I'll agree with you that west makes attempts to fix africa on western ideals, but i'd like for you to put yourself in the shoes of the western donators. If you were dedicating time and significant amounts of money to Africa wouldnt you tend to keep personal interest in mind, your placing your assets at risk and i only think its natural to want a little bit in return. Im not saying that this logic is morally correct, in fact i think its morally flawed, i just feel that self-interest is an inherent human characteristic that is not easily overcome, especially when money and opportunity for commerce is involved.
Jeff L.
To All,
With respect to Jeff's comment of the West wanting something in return they're financially helping. That is absolutely correct. I agree with you on that. The problem and concern is that for decades now, African countries have been given significant amounts of money, both in absolute and percentage terms, to help achieve properity; economically, politically, and socially. The problem is that many foreign powers are fed up. They're fed up with trying to help only to see the money get sucked up into an vacuous abyss or land in the Swiss accounts of corrupt leaders.
To Rosalyn and Matt and Jon,
The current way NEPAD is structured, organized, and working is not the best but it can be better. To completely dismantle it and replace it with something else is too much trouble and too much time and further erodes the legitimacy of organizations. That is, how many "new" organizations under different headings do we really need until something can be fixed. Whatever the name, it's still an organization like previous organizations with the same goals: helping people on the African continent. That said, what needs to be done is not a complete dismantling of NEPAD but rather a shift in focus. For the most part, NEPAD bills itself as thinking that their goal is end of human suffering and promotion of human rights, via economic prosperity. That's good and all but it really limits NEPAD by making it's goal too broad in scope. What needs to be done is that NEPAD should continue working with the African Union (AU) as an economic mechanism for achieving prosperity and curtailing human rights abuses. That is, allow the AU to focus on the political aspect while allowing NEPAD to focus on the economic aspect. In turn, by promoting good sound economic policy, eventually you will curtail abuses and so forth. In this way, it allows for NEPAD to be flexible in what it does in the sense that it doesn't have to "worry" about human rights...just the economy. The promotion of human rights will occur as a by-product of economic prosperity, the chief goal of NEPAD, in my opinion.
Rosalyn mentions NEPAD is flexible in response. While I agree that flexibility is good...the question is how much. I believe that NEPAD has too much flexibility to the point that it creates chaos and blurs the vision that they are trying to achieve.
Rosalyn,
As I'm reading your comments, I'm wondering if you're evovling your stance towards NEPAD from that of support to that of a "sham," or at the very least...skepticism? You mention that "organizational" operations is going wrong within NEPAD and that it needs a change. You also mention human rights. Instead of the word operationalization, I would use more the word "focus" in that NEPAD has too much on it's plate and thus can't work efficiently and effectively and/or human rights shoudn't be their number one priority, economic development should be. It's human rights that becomes a by-product of economic development.
Paradon,
I agree that completely dismantling NEPAD would cause more chaos. Even though the intentions of the program are not working out all that well, to completely give up and back out would leave Africa at the same position when NEPAD was first initiated. It seems as if all programs that are instituted to help the African situation bring change too fast and transition periods are always lacking. Any changes that are done in the future should be taken slowly so that the social, political, and economic climates can adjust. This would include starting and stopping programs. So if NEPAD were to be dismantled, it should gradually do it over a period of time so that there is a transition period.
--Kristy G
Paradon, Rosalyn, Kristy,
NEPAD should not be dropped. Paradon gives a good point that we don't need to keep dropping and adding new organizations. We should just improve the existing organizations unless there is a real need to create a new one. NEPAD can work if it doesn't fall down the path of the UN with poor leadership and inefficient management, as some would argue. I think that the UN and NEPAD need to work along side each other. And the developed world should fully support both, without butting in with their interests. African problems, no matter who fixes them or is leading the improvements need to be solved under "African" terms.
Matt,
You're right. NEPAD can work if it has good leadership and proper management. Maybe what it needs is more women to run the organization.
--Kristy G
Kristy G., has a good point! Maybe things would be a lot better if women were running the show in Africa.
Think about this: Betty Bigombe, is single-handedly trying to broker a peace agreement between the Ugandan government the Lord's Resistance Army in Northern Uganda -- which is responsible for killing many innocent Ugandans, and enslaving many children.
Recently, Liberia voted in Africa's first female President -- she is Harvard educated and a former finance minister....maybe there is hope....maybe Kristy G., is right...more women are needed to STOP THE SLAUGHTER!!
And. while we're at it...maybe that's what we need in the United States as well!
Cool site! Lets links exchange? :)
replica louis vuitton sunglasses
paycheck cash advance
fax loan payday quick
loan personal quick small
quick loan approval
advance cash loan payday payroll
advance online payday
credit easy fast loan payday
emergency loan payday
24 hour payday loan
free credit report and score
See you soon!
Post a Comment