Successes and failures of development aid

Development aid aims to address issues like poverty, disease, and inequality, but its impact can be mixed. In some cases, it leads to significant improvements in health and human rights, while in others, it fails to deliver promised benefits and may even exacerbate problems.

Relative success: Tackling Ebola in West Africa

The Ebola outbreak from 2014 to 2016 affected countries like Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone, resulting in around 28,000 cases and 11,000 deaths. Ebola is a highly contagious and deadly virus, with a mortality rate of about 50%, spreading rapidly in areas with poor sanitation. The main affected areas included widespread outbreaks in Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia, with limited cases in Nigeria and isolated ones in Senegal and Mali.

International response:

• The World Health Organisation (WHO) coordinated efforts.
• Governments and NGOs, such as Doctors Without Borders, provided medical staff, equipment, and funding.
• The UK pledged £427 million, including troops to build treatment centres and support for vaccine development.

Outcomes:

• The intervention slowed and eventually stopped the spread.
• A vaccine was developed, aiding control in later outbreaks, such as in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2020.

Criticisms:

• Some, including Doctors Without Borders, argued the response was too slow and hampered by local governments' reluctance to share data on virus spread.
• Despite debates, the overall effort is seen as a relative success in containing a major health crisis.

Relative failure: Development interventions in Haiti

Haiti, a developing country in the Caribbean, has received substantial aid, particularly after disasters like the 2010 earthquake and 2016 hurricane.

Key project example: Caracol Industrial Park

• Funded by the USA at a cost of US$300 million, the park aimed to attract industrial investment and create jobs in northern Haiti.
• Despite investments, Haiti remains poor and disaster-vulnerable.
• The park failed to generate the promised employment, and plans for a nearby port were abandoned.
• As of 2022, farmers displaced for the project reportedly still await compensation.

Broader criticisms:

• Aid has been accused of increasing Haiti's dependency on donors, who prioritise high-profile projects over systemic issues like corruption reduction.
• This has left the country worse off in some respects, highlighting how aid can fall short of promoting sustainable development.

Impact of development aid on inequality

Development aid's effect on inequality is complex, sometimes reducing it but often increasing it, leading to disparities in health care access and life expectancy.

Examples of aid's effects on inequality

• Increased inequality in Zambia - Zambia receives over US$1 billion in annual aid, yet income inequality has risen, making it one of the world's least equal countries. This has widened gaps in health care and life expectancy between rich and poor.
• Decreased inequality in Mali - Mali also receives more than US$1 billion yearly, but inequality has fallen. Using the Gini coefficient (where a higher score means more inequality), Mali's score dropped from 50 in 1990 to 36 in 2018, showing aid's potential to promote greater equity when effectively targeted.

Development aid in superpowers' foreign policy

Superpowers often use development aid strategically as part of foreign policy to enhance their global influence, rather than solely for altruistic reasons. Success is measured by gains in alliances and access.

Ways superpowers judge aid success

• Access to resources - Aid funds infrastructure in developing countries to exploit needed resources, with conditions ensuring low-cost access for the superpower.
• Political support - Recipient countries are incentivised to back the superpower internationally, such as in United Nations (UN) votes.
• Formation of military alliances - Aid, including military support, encourages countries to join alliances like the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), strengthening the superpower's strategic position.

Costs of military interventions for human rights and sovereignty

Military interventions have shifted from purely geopolitical motives to include humanitarian ones, but they often result in loss of sovereignty (a country's independent control over its affairs) and human rights abuses.

Case study: US-led intervention in Iraq

The 2003 US-led invasion aimed to remove Saddam Hussein's regime but had profound costs. Interventions can yield short-term gains, like regime change, but often create power vacuums leading to prolonged conflict.

Loss of sovereignty:

• The USA established the Iraqi Interim Government in 2004, which lacked full authority and depended on over 160,000 US-led troops.
• A full government formed in 2006, but insecurity persisted, with US troops withdrawing by 2011.
• This vulnerability enabled the rise of the Islamic State (ISIL) in 2014, which seized major cities.

Human rights impacts:

• Removing Hussein improved rights for minorities like Kurds and paved the way for democracy.
• However, long-term effects included over 200,000 civilian deaths and displacement of more than 9 million people.
• Schools, hospitals, and health centres were destroyed, and half of Iraq's doctors fled, worsening health and education.

Benefits of non-military interventions

Non-military interventions, such as peacekeeping missions, often prove more effective than military ones in protecting human rights and promoting development, sometimes combined with limited military action.

Case study: Preventing civil war in Côte d'Ivoire

Côte d'Ivoire faced civil war from 2002 to 2007, with a peace agreement ending it. Tensions resurfaced in 2010 when President Laurent Gbagbo refused to concede an election.

Non-military efforts:

• The African Union pressured Gbagbo to end violence.
• The World Bank halted funding.

Combined military action:

• France and the UN bombed Gbagbo's military sites in 2011, leading to his arrest and trial by the International Criminal Court.

Peacebuilding:

• UN troops remained until 2017, conducting activities like training soldiers on human rights and abuse prevention.

This mix of approaches reduced damage and supported long-term stability, showing the value of non-military methods.

Consequences of non-intervention

Choosing not to intervene can allow atrocities to occur, with ripple effects on human rights, politics, and the environment.

Case study: Failure to prevent genocide in Rwanda

In 1994, nearly 800,000 people were killed in Rwanda's genocide. UN troops were present but mostly withdrew after 10 soldiers' deaths.

Long-term impacts:

• Hutu and Tutsi refugees formed armed groups in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, causing thousands of deaths and regional instability.
• Rwanda's President Paul Kagame limited freedoms like expression, claiming it prevents further genocide.
• Displacement pressured land resources, leading to deforestation and wetland destruction for housing and farming.