Heartland

African relief: Praise and caution
Monday, June 13, 2005 Posted: 0739 GMT (1539 HKT)


(CNN) -- The new head of the World Bank has praised a historic agreement by Group of Eight finance ministers to cancel up to $55 billion in foreign debt owed by some of the world's poorest nations.

But Paul Wolfowitz on Sunday also urged G8 nations to extend the relief package to Nigeria, Africa's biggest debtor.

Speaking a day after the G8 announcement, Wolfowitz said creditor nations "will hopefully come up with a deal to forgive Nigeria's debt. I'm very positive that something serious will happen."

Wolfowitz, who took over as president of the 184-nation development bank last week, said he was "really delighted" with the debt deal.

He was speaking to reporters after arriving in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, on the first leg of a four-nation Africa tour.

On Saturday in London, the G8 ministers backed a plan that calls for an immediate scrapping of 100 percent of the debt owed by 18 countries.

Those countries -- many in sub-Saharan Africa -- owe about $40 billion to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the African Development Bank.

The G8 ministers also said 20 other countries could be eligible for debt relief if they meet targets for good governance and tackling corruption -- bringing the total package to more than $55 billion.

Nigeria is Africa's most populous nation and the most heavily indebted country on the continent, owing $35 billion. But as the world's seventh-largest oil exporter, Nigeria doesn't meet the World Bank definition of a low-income country.

The G8 ministers said Nigeria's foreign debt would be considered separately by the Paris Club of international lenders.

Saturday's agreement was reached ahead of a G8 summit July 6-8 in Gleneagles, Scotland, were the debt relief package will need to be endorsed by member countries -- the United States, Britain, Japan, Canada, Russia, Germany, Italy and France.

The countries to received immediate debt relief are Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guyana, Honduras, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.

Sub-Saharan Africa owe about $68 billion to international lending agencies.

The debts would be written off by the lenders in an effort to allow the debtor countries to start fresh, get their books in order and eventually be able to borrow again for economic development, health, education and social programs, rather than simply to repay existing loans.

While the accord was generally greeted with enthusiasm, others struck a note of caution.

A spokesman for Make Poverty History -- coalition dedicated to the eradication of poverty -- said this is "good news, but more needs to be done."

"This is some of the debts of some of the world's poorest countries. And we have been campaigning for that 100 percent to be 100 percent of all the debts of all the world's poorest countries," Stephen Rand said.

On Sunday, South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu said the accord was as "a splendid start" but urged the G8 to extend the relief deal to cover about 62 countries that are heavily indebted.

Tutu, who is on a speaking tour of Britain, also called on officials to closely monitor the debt relief package to ensure funds were not diverted by corrupt leaders.

"It's so important that NEPAD (New Partnership For Africa's Development) and the AU (African Union) should begin to be quite serious about applying their review system to ensure that money that is going to be saved does in fact go to the people who most need it," Tutu told BBC Television.

dead stars wrote:Nigeria is Africa's most populous nation and the most heavily indebted country on the continent, owing $35 billion. But as the world's seventh-largest oil exporter

Francis wrote:Where has all the money gone then?

andymackem wrote:Can I get my mortgage paid off now? It would greatly benefit my long-term financial status and prospects for development.

I can stop making repayments, if that helps.

hallucienate wrote:

andymackem wrote:Can I get my mortgage paid off now? It would greatly benefit my long-term financial status and prospects for development.

I can stop making repayments, if that helps.

yeah, but you don't have starving people in your back garden.

andymackem wrote:Given the current corruption in Africa, were most of these countries actually better off in the imperial days?

Is it better to be ruled corruptly close to home, or indifferently from afar?

Instead of loading ourselves up on post-empire guilt, it is possible to put a case for Africa's greatest advancement coming under foreign rule?

Just a thought. I don't know much about this topic so I'm seeking the views of those who might.

andymackem wrote:Given the current corruption in Africa, were most of these countries actually better off in the imperial days?

Is it better to be ruled corruptly close to home, or indifferently from afar?

andymackem wrote: Instead of loading ourselves up on post-empire guilt, it is possible to put a case for Africa's greatest advancement coming under foreign rule?

Just a thought. I don't know much about this topic so I'm seeking the views of those who might.

andymackem wrote:@ hal: first, it's only fair to point out that my knowledge of Africa is (rather shamefully) derived solely from European TV news. In short that's famine, civil war, Aids, a bit more civil war which is causing a famine and racial/religious tension.

andymackem wrote: I recognise your points about the imposition of an alien culture and the damage to indigenous culture, and I'm not about to advance a defence of slavery.

But weren't African tribes quite happily doing this to each other before Europe sailed over to have a look? I find it hard to believe that Hutus and Tutsis got along just fine for thousands of years and then suddenly 'learned' attempted genocide from the wicked white man. Slavery has been commonplace in non-western society as well: think ancient Egypt, since we're talking about Africa. You'll struggle to convince me that pre-imperial Africa was a bastion of liberal democracy, any more than post-imperial Africa is.

andymackem wrote: I'm in danger of turning Africa into the Heart of Darkness (we haven't touched on traditions like cannibalism - that may not have happened in Africa, but colonists certainly encountered it in Polynesia - or other 'barbarous' practises). Also, I'm not naive enough to believe that the age of Empire was built on pure altruism. But even if the methods were misguided, there were people who wanted to use empire as a positive force to bring education, better healthcare and sanitation, transport infrastructure and the like into the colonised areas. It may only be enlightened self-interest, but you could put that forward as evidence of advancement.

andymackem wrote:To continue playing devil's advocate ....

@ boudicca - it _did_ take us a long time to reach a functional democratic system, but we were among the first to attempt that journey. Might subsequent nations not manage to learn from our mistakes and avoid some of the problems we suffered? Places like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania seem to have adopted democratic government's far more swiftly after their succession from the USSR, despite no significant democrat (or even independent) tradtion pre-1990. Why have they done so, while Belarus remains a kind of Stalinist theme-park, the Caucuses erupt into violence (and start blowing up Russian trains, to my considerable disquiet ) and the 'Stans compete for 'more bizarre cult of personality in central Asia'? Most of Africa seems to be falling into the latter category of autocracy and internecine violence.

hallucienate wrote:I do believe that the tribes had an easier time avoiding each other. Modern Africa's borders aren't based on tribal borders but on old colonial ones. This means that tribes that formerly had their own territories and had little to do with one another now have been forced to govern together. Imagine France and England being forced into a common government at the dawn of their democracies.

hallucienate wrote:It's impossible to say what Africa would be like if colonialism hadn't happened, but I can't possibly see it being any worse off. It desperately needs a Marshal Plan and seeing as the G8 played a part in f**king it up I do believe they should play a part in uplifting it.

Francis wrote:As an aside, how's the reconciliation process going in South Africa? Do blacks and whites of your generation mix? Or is there too much resentment/ guilt?

Francis wrote:I agree in principle, but, from where I'm standing, Africa looks a hell of a lot messier than post WWII Europe.

Francis wrote: As an aside, how's the reconciliation process going in South Africa? Do blacks and whites of your generation mix? Or is there too much resentment/ guilt?

hallucienate wrote:

Francis wrote:I agree in principle, but, from where I'm standing, Africa looks a hell of a lot messier than post WWII Europe.

Which is why the need is even greater?

andymackem wrote: Places like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania seem to have adopted democratic government's far more swiftly after their succession from the USSR, despite no significant democrat (or even independent) tradtion pre-1990.