Global Development: Views from the Center

Hilary Clinton’s developmental agenda only looks good because it’s another of the same — it follows the beaten path and mind set of the US leadership. Unfortunately the current developmental assistance given by US and G8 has failed and has little chance of success because it is essentially symptomatic. At one time I was a member of Nigeria’s Roll Back Malaria Committee for years. Malaria is still every thing but rolled back. AIDS prevention programmes only succeed by proclamation rather than objectively. More money into these problems which are symptomatic of failed governance and economic programmes will continue to fail. Only a people can develop itself. You should help poor nations to develop by:
1)Educational (especially technical) assistance.
2)Helping them to build infrastructure. In Nigeria, where I live, the problems of poor infrastructure (no good roads, inadequate potable water and negligible electricity supply) FAR OUTWEIGH the problems of AIDS and Malaria.
3) Supporting development banks to give micro credit to deserving professionals and artisans to establish small scale businesses. Irrespective of proclamations by the Breton Woods agencies and third world governments there is insignificant credit facilities in developing countries like Nigeria.
4)The US and G8 genuinely collaborating to allow reforms in the WTO Doha round of talks to open all markets, not just the third world markets. The G8 has manufactured goods which they want to sell unhindered to the third world. The third world has migrant professionals whose monetary repatriations to their home countries surpass developmental funds. The US and G8 countries should open their labour markets to qualified persons from all over the world to earn income because that’s all the products (albeit invisible) their countries have now. That is equity.
I would recommend that Hilary reads the poem: “The Road Not Taken” by Robert Frost (1874-1963). Moral: If we do things differently, perhaps we stand a better chance of making the world a safer, prosperous and happier place.

I agree that trade and infrastructure are important, but I think these candidates should be commended for promising resources that will save people's lives. After all, people need to be alive in order to utilize the infrastructure and engage in trade. Malaria programs HAVE in fact produced real results and Clinton is right to propose a bigger investment there. Plus AIDS prevention, including in countries where HIV prevalence is many times that found in Nigeria, require much greater resources to be taken fully to scale - "proclamations" will not do the job alone. The proposals Clinton, Edwards and Obama have made also include some powerful mechanisms to ensure accountability for results, and each has important components related to income opportunities, including microenterprise. Clinton's proposal also includes some important commitments on access to education.

It's also important to keep in mind that Africans have also backed the campaign that has urged these candidates to take a stand. Seven Democratic candidates have signed a pledge on these issues, the text of which grew out of a call to action signed onto by many African groups, including several in Nigeria. People can review the list of endorsers HERE The pledge was promoted by Global AIDS Alliance Fund, with the collaboration of Iowans for AIDS Action and New Hampshire Fights AIDS, which asked the candidates to sign. People can find out more that HERE and at AIDSVote

David Bryden missed my points. I have not said the proposals of Clinton and the other US presidential candidates are misplaced in themselves. I am sure the American people want the best value for their president’s efforts and money. I recommend a change of development tactics because current ones have failed, in the main. They are only symptomatic. Treat the causes of the problems and they will abate. The mere fact that thousands of organizations in Africa endorse US developmental efforts does not prove that such efforts are efficacious. Sexed up statistics do not either. Note that most organizations in Nigeria and the whole of Africa have learnt over the years that the easiest way to get foreign aid is to sing the donor’s song loud, clear and repeatedly, irrespective of the poor efficacy of such aid. This pattern of thinking is not new in human history. The mere fact that most people on this planet thought that the world was flat at one time did not make it right! If more Africans engage in independent thinking they will not endorse the manner of current or proposed developmental aids. I have practiced medicine in Africa for more than 29 years and I know that dehydration and other problems associated with inadequate potable water kill people more and faster than malaria and AIDS! Out of curiosity, I checked the lending interest rates of four microfinance banks in Lagos. The rates were 42% – 72% per annum on December, 12, 2007. Artisans and other poor people who borrow $300 - $500 must first deposit 20% of that sum before they get the credit. Most credits are for 1 – 6 months. And yet, our governments, the Breton Woods institutions and other aid agencies keep on announcing untrue, and (feel good) economic growth data in world arena.

The US and the world need a deep and courageous US president to lead the world. Would any of your presidential contenders have the guts to open US labour markets to legal immigrants (especially professional services) and encourage other G8 nations to do likewise, as an instrument of global development?