A couple of weeks ago, an experts group of the United Nations published a very detailed indictment of Rwanda's government with uncharacteristically blunt allegations that this government supported M-23 rebels who have committed unbelievable atrocities in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Predictably, the Rwanda's government issued a rebuttal covered here, that questioned the objectivity and standards of proof required to sustain those allegations. The United States and the British Government subsequently communicated that some financial support could be withdrawn due to the gravity of those allegations.
This episode revealed the fact that a country that relies on foreign assistance for a substantial portion of its expenditure runs the risk of pressure for political purposes. Apart from the predictable denials and assertion of sovereignty favoured by many countries on that continent, Rwanda's government went further. At a public meeting, President Kagame inaugurated the establishment of a Development Fund intended to cover the country against the risk of financial assistance being turned into a political tool. New of Rwanda reports here that the the Agaciro Fund was formally established and is a call for ensuring independence from foreign assistance.
To my mind, African countries almost always exhibit this degree of nationalism as a response to a challenge from other areas. I am therefore not impressed by this move and consider it a diversionary technique that fails to respond to the issue at hand. It need not have taken the threats of suspension of financial assistance for a country to respond to that risk. This is mere symbolism which is another matter in which African governments excel. My free advise is that governments that spend substantially more than they can collect in revenues should either expand revenues or cut down expenditure. A development fund as an manifestation of national pride is acceptable to me but does not respond to the need to clarify the allegations that are made. Whereas public sectors officials are falling over one another to make pledges and contributions in public, I am not convinced that these contributions do any more than divert money that would have been saved.
This episode revealed the fact that a country that relies on foreign assistance for a substantial portion of its expenditure runs the risk of pressure for political purposes. Apart from the predictable denials and assertion of sovereignty favoured by many countries on that continent, Rwanda's government went further. At a public meeting, President Kagame inaugurated the establishment of a Development Fund intended to cover the country against the risk of financial assistance being turned into a political tool. New of Rwanda reports here that the the Agaciro Fund was formally established and is a call for ensuring independence from foreign assistance.
To my mind, African countries almost always exhibit this degree of nationalism as a response to a challenge from other areas. I am therefore not impressed by this move and consider it a diversionary technique that fails to respond to the issue at hand. It need not have taken the threats of suspension of financial assistance for a country to respond to that risk. This is mere symbolism which is another matter in which African governments excel. My free advise is that governments that spend substantially more than they can collect in revenues should either expand revenues or cut down expenditure. A development fund as an manifestation of national pride is acceptable to me but does not respond to the need to clarify the allegations that are made. Whereas public sectors officials are falling over one another to make pledges and contributions in public, I am not convinced that these contributions do any more than divert money that would have been saved.
2 comments:
You're analysis of the situation is completely off the mark. Put yourself in Rwanda's shoes. Someone accuses you of a crime and never gave you the chance to defend yourself and all of a sudden your supporters think you're guilty and withdraw money they were going to send. Your glossing over the rebuttal speaks volumes as well. Good on Rwanda to come up with a concrete plan to stand on it's own feet. More African countries should do this as they are more than capable!
I am wondering whether anonymous read the whole post at all. If its needs restatement, the post states clearly that the allegations were denied. That matter is above question and so my comment was that the situation reveals that this government relied on substantial budget support and this exposes it to pressure coming from political situations. If african countries are as capable of standing on their feet as you claim, then they need not wait until they are accused of aggravating regional instability to realize that is is useful to raise sufficient revenue for public expenditure.
Post a Comment