With the ever increasing food and energy prices, and the global economic growth decreasing, aid to poor nations has slumped even though now, more so than ever before, assistance is greatly needed. A recent UN report says that aid has dropped by 8.4% in 2007, after a 4.7% drop in 2006. Aid commitments made by the G8 industrialized nations have lagged, especially in Africa. They pledged in 2005 to donate $25 billion to Africa by 2010; however, only $4 billion has actually been delivered.
There is a huge gap between aid targets of what was set by the Millennium Development Goals in 2000 (set by the UN to halve the world’s global poverty conditions by 2015) and what have actually been achieved now. The report includes that 52 underdeveloped countries spent more money paying off debts than on public health and education, affordable drugs and the distribution of those drugs for pandemic diseases remains inadequate, and technology and internet use to gain knowledge continues to lag. The UN wants the richest 22 countries to donate 0.7% of their national income to aid; however, only 5 countries have actually participated and only donated 0.45% of their national income at that. Out of those 5 countries, the US is not included.
The UN continuously asks for more money to aid developing countries. However, as it would seem, more nations are entering into an economic downturn themselves. For example, the US has been hit hard because of a bad economy. How is the US really supposed to donate money to other nations’ aid when it is so unbalanced itself? The declining aid to poor nations is tragic, but maybe there is a solution. Each nation has its own natural resources readily available. Instead of the UN asking for donations, policies should be implemented to improve the use of natural resources in a country. Using those resources more effectively for the countries’ own purposes, instead of exploiting resources and exporting goods, could enable a country to prosper, or at least move in a positive direction out of poverty.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/world/05nations.html?ref=africa
3 comments:
I have to agree with you when you say that the downturn of one nation's economy means that the level of aid another country receives is minimized. It is also very rational of you to state that the government of the United States cannot give money that it does not have to those in poverty. Your plan for reallocation of resources is a good one, I believe.
I also agree with your statements about a nation's falling economy affecting the amount of aid that would be supplied. In addition, the reality of the United States' economic issues is becoming more aware to those countries who have yet to see their promised aid.
This is an interesting story. It's sad to think that our hands are kind of tied behind our backs. We want to do so much, but in reality can't really do what we want.
Post a Comment