implications for foreign aid across the continent: the shifting africa policies of china and the usa

The Beginnings of Giants

Philosophies, cultures, histories and ideologies are pushing the agendas of China and the USA across the African continent. The USA is flexing its well-honed military resources to provide counter-terrorism trainings in key countries while China is investing in growing economies in a soft power move that often places them above the USA in local influence. China is working now to change its image in Africa as the international community has raised issues. The USA continues a humanitarian military presence, however there may be a new shift in the USA's Africa policy with a newly elected President. Foreign aid in Africa is influenced by the cultural histories and philosophies of the USA and China.

Asserting its extensive soft power in economics China is quickly becoming a world leader in the current financial crisis: contributing to the IMF, long the bastion of Western power, and pushing for a new reserve currency that is not the dollar. As a full understanding is reached on the financial crisis' effects, China has said it will continue to support emerging African economies while there is talk that the USA will become protectionist. The USA has steadily fallen as a foreign aid leader in Africa and is increasingly using Chinese financial tactics to cope with its own severe economic downturn. Since 2006 the Chinese government has been working to create a less controversial policy in Africa. In supporting human rights and international institutions, will they learn from the USA's Africa policy? A new administration is in the White House and the USA is building a more comprehensive Africa policy. The USA has borrowed ideas from the Chinese policy book on dealing with the economic crisis, will they also look to China in building new partnerships with African countries?

There has been increasing talk and scholarship on the implications of Chinese actions on the African continent especially in relation to the USA’s presence. Many experts and pundits don’t go beyond surface level involvements between the world powers. Scholarship often fails to deconstruct media representations of both China and the USA. The media more often paints China as an evil imperialist nation scooping up African resources. While Chinese actions in Africa are problematic, the USA is not exempt from imperialist or destructive actions in Africa either. Current scholarship fails to delve into the historical philosophies and histories of both China and the USA. Culture and world visions are not taken into account when analyzing the Africa policies of these countries. The respective views and values on moral aspiration, international leadership and “othering” has driven scholarship on the quest for power between China and the USA on the African continent.

*Disclaimer: Below is a full 25 page research paper. Read at your own attention span.

Internationally Related

Within the realm of international relations, both China and the USA are taking more normative approaches to engaging in African affairs. By taking more country specific approaches to engagement and focusing on providing services to people, China and the USA have been working to use more diplomatic actions to gain the upper hand in Africa. The actions of both China and the USA have been problematic when it comes to engaging Africa. China has implemented numerous aid programs, but is seen as hypocritical in its policy of not getting involved a country’s domestic affairs. Some Africanist scholars have noted that the USA’s policy is borrowed directly from European imperial histories. These competing policies both based off of diplomacy have numerous points of contention, but is that reason for China and the USA to not cooperate?

Still, the United States has much to gain from cooperating with China on foreign aid and Africa policy. The US could help China develop a more permanent and transparent aid bureaucracy which would allow Chinese liberals to better promote their interests through the system. Also, the United States should encourage China to play a larger role in the donor community, allowing China to evaluate other countries’ aid programs and being subject to the same level of scrutiny. As major oil consumers, the United States and China also have incentive to work together toward political stability and energy security on the continent.

Very often China is painted as an aggressor on the African continent by Western scholars, however these scholars tend to forget the histories of their own countries and their policies, which are based in colonialism, imperialism, and neocolonial actions. If an approach is taken that builds of off John Fairbank’s call for a re-evaluation of Chinese perceptions and Paul Cohen’s call for a “china-centered” history. The importance of Western governments recognizing their past and rethinking how they perceive a growing leader in international relations cannot be emphasized more.

Our American assumptions about East Asia and our instinctive responses to problems there have been and still are far less conscious and far more blind and culture-bound than we realize…. Too often we have leapt before looking and become partisan in feeling before making a serious intellectual effort to see all sides, including particularly our own side. (John King Fairbank)

This is most relatable to Alexander George’s “fundamental attribution error.” The West (USA) is looking for an enemy within China’s policies in Africa as a way to position themselves strategically. Since the USA looked for the negative in Chinese policy, they found an enemy in China.

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace scholars who wanted the USA to engage China in more involvement in the international donor community in 2006 were right on track. China has now said that it will become more involved in the IMF and will contribute “within its ability.” China’s efforts to strengthen its standing with the international community are directly in line with its history of diplomacy. Michael Hunt talks of this long tradition of Chinese diplomacy, but it is most important to compare this to the USA’s diplomatic history within the international system.

The IMF […] warned that the $25 billion figure is only a conservative estimate as the situation on ground indicates that more countries will be more deeply affected, outside the 20 countries earlier identified by the body as much hit by the crisis. "The IMF study finds that more than 20 countries are particularly vulnerable to the unfolding crisis. At least US$25 billion in urgent concessional financing will be needed this year in the most affected countries, but much more may be needed given the heavy downside risks to the global economic outlook, and the prospect of more countries being affected as the crisis deepens," said IMF Managing Director, Dominique Strauss-Kahn. He warned that the number of vulnerable countries could double, raising additional financing needs to $140 billion.

As China has said it will continue to support emerging African economies into the current financial crisis , another historic financial crisis should be analyzed. In this current economic crisis China has pledged support within the IMF as the "international community is determined to act together to get through the time of hardship." China is emerging as a strong leader in this current crisis by calling for reform along with their financial support. In contrast, during the Great Depression, the effects were more sever because there was a lack of strong international leadership. Following World War I the USA had gained prominence as an economic player, but was not interested in becoming a leader in the international economic game. A major reason that the USA was not interested during the Great Depression was because financially helping Europe had no short-term gain. Will China take this same mode of thinking? Harold James notes that this will be China’s dilemma in the current crisis, but it appears that China is following their cultural traditions and is coming to the aid of the international community instead of taking an protectionist policy. The current economic crisis seems to be another example of the USA shrinking from an international leadership role. China shows that it is committed to the international community, where the USA is narrowly focused on national interest.

Both China and the USA have taken on more bilateral agreements with other countries as of recent. China most notably, since the 1990s, made multiple bilateral agreements with African (and other) countries in the multiple tours taken by their government leaders. The Obama Administration has taken a very strong stance that its foreign policy will be driven by diplomacy. This also happens to be the Chinese government’s number one strategy to foreign policy.

In recent years, China has begun to take a less confrontational, more sophisticated, more confident, and, at times, more constructive approach toward regional and global affairs. In contrast to a decade ago, the world's most populous country now largely works within the international system. It has embraced much of the current constellation of international institutions, rules, and norms as a means to promote its national interests. And it has even sought to shape the evolution of that system in limited ways.

While it is difficult to gauge Obama’s foreign policy of diplomacy as of yet, significant efforts have been made to meet with world leaders of countries where relations with the USA have been strained. The Chinese effort is measurable and visible over an almost 10 year period. China is growing a network of cooperation across the African continent and the globe while the USA is just beginning to mend broken international relationships and extend a hand to former enemies. Africa is a growing interest for both countries, how long will it be before China and the USA cooperate more closely on African issues?

Before delving too deeply into the nuances and implications of various foreign policies, it is important to understand the origins of Chinese and USA cultural traditions and international involvements.

Invisibly Shared Power

The basis of Chinese international relations begins with the teachings of Fu Xi, author of the I-Ching. The I-Ching’s lesson on the Law of Change and promotion of harmony (yin/yang) governed early Chinese policy where there must be a complimentary balance. A very important concept to understand within Chinese foreign policy based in the I-Ching is “The Principle of Heaven.” This is sometimes called the Rise of the Dragon and teaches about how one should act, whether an individual or a state actor, when the top is reached. In the Chinese tradition, one who reaches the top has two choices: to be arrogant which will result in falling from heaven [the top]; or to assist those below in also reaching the top. This teaching plays into the I-Ching’s “Concept of Hegemony,” which is best explained with the analogy of “a group of dragons without a chief.” In the “Concept of Hegemony” there is no one leader in the international community there would be multiple hegemons that work together to bring more into the “group of dragons.”

This philosophy coupled with the Chinese traditions of a collective societal structure has translated to foreign policy as China works to increase cooperation with many international actors. The diplomatic history of China dates as far back as 3000 BC. However, China was not always so internationally focused. During its history China was controlled and relegated to a lesser status by the British government’s colonial treaty system. The treaty system essentially placed China under the economic control of the British government. Following the end of the treaty system China became more nationally focused. Many scholars such as Sun Yat-Sen, Cohen, and Hunt, write on how building a strong and safe China was the priority that developed as a response to the imperial treaty system which had divided the country and weakened the people by creating widespread poverty.

The ideas of the I-Ching continued to be taught years later by Lao Zi and Confucius. These ideas seemed to pervade Chinese cultural traditions and it is no surprise that they translated into the foreign policy of China. One of Lao Zi’s great contributions to Chinese international relations was on political philosophy. He wrote that the best leaders are known when the people feel like they have accomplished something on their own and the leader has only acted as an “invisible hand” to guide them. This idea is evident in Chinese foreign policy as China seeks to bring other countries up with them into the “group of dragons” and increase cooperation within international systems.

The Rise of Individualism

Needless to say the USA has a very different, and much shorter, history than China. As a country of immigrants the USA developed a cultural tradition focused on the individual. The idea posited by Fritijof Capra that Western societies were very logic based and Eastern societies were more intuition based shows the strong focus of the USA cultural tradition on the productivity of the individual within a growing economy.

The development of the USA into industrialization was fueled in large part by the emergence of the nuclear family. The nuclear family was a result of the large number of immigrants who arrived in the USA as individuals often without any extended family. Talcott Parsons, argues that “the nuclear family fits industrial needs because, on the one hand, it allows families to be mobile and economically independent of the wider kin group; and, on the other hand, it ensures that in an individualistic and impersonal world, adults and children have a stable, if limited, set of affective relationships.”

In the history of the USA the individual has been the building block and has driven the success of the country. Because the USA has such a short history and has built itself from the people and ideas of other countries, it is a country that does not have its own distinct or concrete cultural tradition. It is a cultural tradition that is constantly changing. The best idea that can sum up cultural tradition in the USA is that of “pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.” This individualist fervor can be easily translated into the USA’s foreign policy as it is focused narrowly on USA national interests and is not driven by cooperation with others.

Sino-African Relations

The earliest records of interactions between the Chinese and the African continent comes by way of myth and trade. Somewhere around 1414, the “treasure fleet” of Zheng He landed on the East African coast. He returned with two giraffes, which were gifts from the Malindi King (present day Kenya), which the Chinese thought were “qilin.” Qilin were mythical creatures thought to symbolize a well-governed country or one where a wise man was born. This marked the earliest Sino-African relations based in trade.
The tradition of Chinese-African cooperation grew significantly between 1949 and 1970.

Peking had diplomatic relations with fifteen African states in 1970. Approximately 5.1 percent of China’s imports and exports were in African trade in 1966. By mid-1966 China had promised African countries $350,000,000 in aid, although the sums made available and actually drawn were much less. But these figures are dwarfed by her commitment to finance and build the Tanzania-Zambia railway; China could spend $280,000,000 or more for that project.

This time period marked significant Chinese involvement in African development. This was a period in which the majority of African countries gained independence and began working to develop themselves. Beyond the trade relations that are now ever growing, the political ties have been and remain strong. During the 1960s China provided military and financial to nationalist movements as well as increasing development dollars - $100 million. They also sent 150,000 technicians to implement projects in agriculture, transport, and infrastructure development. China was involved in numerous independence movements. In the build-up to democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, China was providing financial support, but it wasn't enough. After Lumumba was assassinated by the USA CIA, the Chinese demonstrated en masse. Millions gathered in Peking, 400,000 in Shanghai, which solidified the Chinese influence and support for further revolutionary movements. A new regime was supported in Tanzania (1964) until Nyerere took power. Nyerere even adopted the Mao-style uniform. Chinese engineers built a railroad from Zambia to Dar es Salaam, Tanzania showing the Chinese economic might and proving that China was serious in Africa. China supported many nationalist and revolutionary movements (see inset map, Page 9) with arms, money, medical supplies, scholarships, and guerrilla trainings and camps.

In 1971 China received 76 votes for a permanent UN Security Council seat. Of those votes 26 were from African countries and by the 1980s fourty-four African countries had established diplomatic ties with Beijing. These ties soon faded out, but have recently been rekindled in the 1990s and even more recently in 2006. In the third China-Africa forum of 2006, 48 African countries were represented. During the past three years the Chinese President, Prime Minister, and Minister of Foreign Affairs have visited almost 20 African countries in efforts to strengthen diplomatic relations.

China has regained a strong influence in African countries. Their power is unmatched and their recent wave of settlement unprecedented. This is a point of contention for both Western powers that may be afraid of the growing Chinese power and the people of African countries who should be wary of another possible exploiter. The Chinese may have a history of support, development and influence, but that does not justify current action.

Colonial Legacy of the USA

Born of European heritage, the USA’s Africa policy is not far departed from the same heritage. From the early American explorers commissioned by European powers, the USA’s Africa policy has been driven by misperceptions and national interests.

One might ask why the Berlin Conference is pertinent to an examination of modern U.S./African policy issues. The answer, to some may appear elliptical. And that is because we were not a party to that Conference or to the spoils of its outcome. Put another way, the United States was never a colonial power in Africa. And because of that the U.S. had a great opportunity to shape post independent relations between Africa and the West. Indeed, Africans looked to the United States to play a neutral and constructive role in bridging relations with the West.

It was seemingly impossible for the USA to play a neutral role when there was so much to gain from Africa. The USA’s past is inexorably linked to the African slave trade and events that followed, further connections increased with support for Liberia, and exploitation began when its own multinational corporations became wise to the vast natural resources of the continent.

During the Cold War, the USA’s Africa policy was one founded on “Soviet containment.” The Cold War saw USA involvement in establishing proxy wars to stem the spread of communism across Africa. The CIA was involved in a number of controversial coups as well as rebel movements within countries run by governments close to the Soviet Union. As a result of Cold War policy a number of countries are notably still in turmoil: DRC and Uganda.

With the end of the Cold War some have ventured to say the USA is engaging in a “containment strategy” for China and also for the “war on terrorism.” The ideas of containment for China and terrorism has translated into growing misperceptions about Chinese intentions in Africa as well as implications for the delivery of development aid by the USA.

Development Aid

Foreign aid; development assistance; foreign investment; these terms are now gaining another synonym: rogue aid. Rogue aiders are defined as such, "Because their goal is not to help other countries develop. Rather, they are motivated by a desire to further their own national interests, advance an ideological agenda, or sometimes line their own pockets. Rogue aid providers couldn’t care less about the long-term well-being of the population of the countries they 'aid'."

China is now the largest rogue aid competitor. Moises Naim says, "My friend was visibly shaken. He had just learned that he had lost one of his clients to Chinese competitors. 'It’s amazing,” he told me. “The Chinese have completely priced us out of the market. We can’t compete with what they are able to offer'." China can outbid the World Bank in foreign aid lending power! What does this say for the future of the aid community? What does this say for the future of development? Naim gives three simple answers as to why China and other countries are stepping up their aid game. "[...] money, access to raw materials, and international politics." China now rivals OECD countries of the developed West in providing foreign aid. In 2006-2008, China provided over $10 billion in loans to African countries.

Along with the financial crisis, China is becoming a world leader in giving development aid and engaging in development projects, especially in Africa. The USA has in recent years given out more development aid than ever before, specifically in Africa, but this is still dwarfed by Chinese investment in African development. USA development aid is also increasingly controlled by the military. Almost 25% of all development funds are implemented by the military up from just 3%, while USAID has fallen from 65% to less than 40%.

The gradual shift from USAID to the USA military implementing development aid and projects has been calculated. Many believe that the advent of AFRICOM and the shift in development aid funding is a direct response to China’s growth on the continent. One scholar says that the USA is launching a new “containment strategy” for China in Africa via military presence. When asked about the motives of USA development aid, Navy Captain Paul Dies said, "I can tell you with a straight face, and I swear on my mother's grave, our mission here is purely humanitarian. There's no ulterior motive."

The Bush administration has laid the foundation of a new containment strategy for its successor with the establishment of AFRICOM, enabling the United States to leverage more effectively its soft and hard power assets to contain China. The next administration will be forced to confront China's rise and its rapidly expanding influence in Africa. Writing in the November/December 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs, Senator John McCain identified China's rise as a "central challenge" for the next president and cautioned against Beijing's expanding economic and diplomatic relations with African nations Sudan and Zimbabwe. In the coming years, Washington's new containment strategy will likely mature as China's balancing efforts in Africa collide with U.S. interests.

A few authors of African affairs have noted that members of Obama’s transition team are very supportive of AFRICOM as a means to increase diplomatic relations with Africa, but they are quick to note that this is a problematic approach to Obama’s call for diplomacy first. Disproving that there is “no alternate motive” is very easily done when the locations of USA military aid is implemented.

Another side to Chinese development aid investment can be seen in the form of the Chinese population. A recent wave of nearly 750,000 Chinese migrants to Africa are not the first. In the 1960s Mao Zedong sent people to forge political ties with the continent. This newest wave or Chinese people is to strengthen the Chinese claims over raw materials and markets. The head of the China Export-Import Bank has said that he will support this migration with "investment, project development, and help with the sale of products." Mr. Li says,"There's no harm in allowing [Chinese] farmers to leave the country to become farm owners [in Africa]," he added.
Mission of the China Export-Import Bank:

The main mandate of the Bank is to implement the state policies in industry, foreign trade and economy and finance to provide policy financial support so as to promote the export of Chinese mechanical and electronic products and high- and new-tech products, to support Chinese companies with comparative advantages to "go global" for offshore construction contracts and overseas investment projects, to develop and strengthen relations with foreign countries, and to enhance Sino-foreign economic and technological cooperation and exchanges.

The numbers of Chinese migrants has dramatically increased. A large part of China’s development aid policy is that African governments use Chinese contract labor, so the aid funding goes directly back to China. China's work in the DRC is its largest loan out to any African country. There are plans to build a road from Kisangani to the Zambian border and a major railway to connect the mineral rich provice of Katanga to the port city of Matadi. Other funds are set aside to rebuild the deteriorating mining infrastructure. As well as being the biggest loan supplier, China also has the largest building company, China Road and Bridge Construction, owned by the Chinese government, with 29 projects in Africa (many financed by the World Bank or other lenders) and offices in 22 African countries.

A final, but contentious, piece of the development aid debate hinges on Taiwan. When China launched its Africa policy plan in the 1990s, Taiwan was not a huge issue. Now China has provided development aid to six African countries that have switched their recognition of Taiwan. Lesotho and Niger switched their diplomatic recognition to the PRC in 1994 and 1996, the Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau, and South Africa switched their recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1998, and Liberia switched recognition to Beijing in 2003.

It is in the areas of development policy, however, that we and others in the West have experienced our greatest failures in Africa. This is so largely because while well intentioned in many instances, we have sought to export our values and ways of doing things to Africa. In both the public and private sectors, NGOs notwithstanding,for fifty years it has been our way or the highway. Our money or no money. For 50 years our aid to Africa has been tied to our own formulations, priorities and institutions. The approaches made by the Bretton Woods financial institutions have not been different. In like manner, the major international financial institutions have dictated the terms of development under the rubrics of partnership and sustainability while excluding Africans from the councils of governance and staff leadership. These institutions, the World Bank,IMF, IFC, and others, have conditioned their aid on structural adjustment and other private sector strategies while shielding themselves from the consequences and accountabilities associated with outcomes and policy failures.

Development aid is probably the area of most contention between China and the USA. Some want to see greater collaboration with the USA helping China reverse its “rogue aid” policies. Others criticize both the USA and China in their implementation of development aid. The Western aid institutions and agency have come under much criticism latterly from withint their own communities. The Chinese take a policy that is very much in line with the idea of bring up many countries to the “group of dragons,” but on the other hand it is often only China that benefits. The USA follows a fairly rigid policy that has specific national security interests at heart and nothing more.

Military Support

Both China and the USA have had long time military involvement on the African continent. From early Chinese military expeditions to exploratory actions of the USA, military presence in Africa is nothing new. China is often criticized for its small arms trade with corrupt African governments. The USA is criticized for attempting to have African militaries do its dirty work through anti-terrorism trainings many of which are held in strategic resource countries. Where the USA has not sent troops, China has increased its number of peacekeepers and has sent active troops of the People’s Army as a way to strengthen diplomatic ties. Oddly enough military support is directly related to development aid.

AFRICOM is seen by some as a milestone in US foreign policy showing that the US actually does care about Africa. I would say this is a great representation of how we have seen Africa throughout our policy writing - only important when the USA has a self-interest or gain to achieve. It seems that the only future for US foreign policy in Africa will be military based. Our 'development' and aid work will be conducted by the military and people will begin looking to the military for aid and assistance. Kenyan columnist, Salim Lone, sums up the fears of many, "The military now is going to be working with civil society, to promote health and education. Africa is going to look at all its development efforts through the lens of the Pentagon. That's a truly dangerous dimension. We don't need militarisation of Africa, we don't need securitisation of aid and development in Africa." The Association for Concerned African Scholars (ACAS) has a comprehensive archive of USA military involvement in Africa. The archive lists that every African country has received military support whether it be supplies or trainings from the USA military, including the USA base in Djibouti.

“Its the oil, stupid!” As the phrase goes, some experts argue that the real reason that China and the USA are engaging in development aid and military support is to access the natural resource wealth of African countries. China has been accused of this in relation to the genocide in Sudan.

Sudan, which now supplies 7 percent of China’s total oil imports, has benefited from the largest Chinese investments. The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) is the single largest shareholder (40 percent) in the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company, which controls Sudan’s oil fields, and has invested $3 billion in refinery and pipeline construction in Sudan since 1999.

China has also invested heavily in Angola’s oil development and Nigeria’s. The USA depends largely on Nigeria’s oil wealth, but it seems China is cutting in on the business.

Investment in oil development is one thing, but investment by way of military support is another story. The USA has invested millions of dollars and has conducted hundreds of joint military trainings with African countries. China is accused of fueling genocide against an ethnic minority in Sudan through its small arms sales.

Weapons deliveries from China to Sudan since 1995 have included ammunition, tanks, helicopters, and fighter aircraft. China also became a major supplier of antipersonnel and antitank mines after 1980, according to a Sudanese government official.

The evidence for military support influencing development aid implementation has become overwhelming for both China and the USA. Neither country is exempt from blame in meddling in the affairs of African countries trying to development and build stable economies. Both countries have long histories of military involvement in Africa from colonial times and earlier. Neither country is new to playing with African foreign policy. However what is most important is how China and the USA implement their support. China tends to claim no involvement in “domestic affairs,” but their actions often translate into serious domestic effects. The USA claims to be working towards anti-terrorism (a containment strategy?), but this is often a larger tactic to get closer to the natural resource wealth of African countries. The policies seem very similar, but China and the USA come from different cultural traditions that drive their policy decisions.

Conclusion

The implications for foreign aid both developmental and military, is determined by the cultural traditions of a particular country as well as a long-standing involvement on the African continent.

China builds from a philosophy based on bringing everyone up to the same level. They have had trade relations with African countries since the 14th Century and take pride in having been involved in African liberation struggles. The Chinese traditions that look at hegemony, leadership, and responsibility have translated into their foreign policy actions. The underlying assumptions of Western/ USA academics shows the continued misperceptions of Chinese intentions in Africa. While there are a number of problematic policies, the Chinese government gives responses that follow in the steps of its cultural tradition. With a very long cultural tradition, China works to push cooperation on the African continent, but to what degree is cooperation competition for resources?

The USA is, and has always been, very focused on national interest. If there were no national interest to engaging African countries then the USA would most likely not be there. The serious shift in implementation of USA foreign aid dollars is very worrisome and does not bode well for the future of African development practice. The colonial legacy of the USA’s policy in Africa perpetuates the failures of the past into the future of African development. A re-militaization of Africa is a poor policy for “Chinese or terrorist containment” and must be re-evaluated by Obama. The potential for the USA Africa policy to depart from the detrimental ideas of the Bush administration is very strong under Obama.

While there are problems on both sides of the Africa policies, China and the USA can learn from each other on how they engage African countries. China has an excellent cooperation model and the USA has serious potential to support human rights and accountability. As soon as the Obama administration releases a serious Africa policy brief, scholars and experts can be sure that the USA is committed to a positive shift in the way Africa has been handled. Since the 1990s China has developed a serious Africa policy and for good reason. They now hold the sway of the majority of all African leaders and have access to their resources and markets.

Calls for diplomacy can no longer fall on deaf ears as policies shift, foreign aid is restructured, and economies continue to falter. China and the USA will have to prove to the world that they are ready to build a working world order. A world order where there are multiple hegemons: China as a financially stable elder and the USA as a young and ambitious innovator. There is much that the two countries can collaborate on especially in regards to development practice and foreign aid across Africa. The continent needs renewed policies that see outcomes in an “Africa-centered” view. The world’s giants can no longer use and abuse the African continent, rather they need to actively engage Africa if financial and social woes are to be remedied.

Works Cited:
“Africa Outreach Includes Training, Humanitarian Aid.” America.gov. .

Bristow, Michael. “China in Africa, developing ties.” BBC News, Beijing. 29 November 2007. .

Brookes, Peter and Ji Hye Shin. “China’s Influence in Africa: Implications for the United States.” The Heritage Foundation. 22 February 2006. .

Chen, Shirong. “China seeks broader Africa role.” BBC News. 12 February 2008. .

“China ready to contribute to the IMF.” BBC News. 27 March 2009.
.

“China’s aid to Africa continues despite crisis.” China Daily. 6 February 2009. .

“China’s involvement in Sudan: arms and oil.” Human Rights Watch. November 2003. .

“China opens coffers to minerals.” BBC News. 18 September 2007.
.

Ching, Frank. “China’s Africa policy changing for the better.” Japan Times. 11 September 2008. .

Engdahl, F. William. “China and USA in New cold war over Africa's oil riches: its the oil stupid!” Global Research. 20 May 2007. .

Eze, C. Paschal. “America versus China in Africa: Oil and minerals first.” AfricaResults.com. .

French, Howard W. and Lydia Polgreen. “Entrepreneurs from China Flourish in Africa.” New York Times. 18 August 2007. .

Gordon, Daniel. “The controversy over Africom.” BBC News. 3 October 2007. .

Hansen, Stephanie. “Imaging Obama’s Africa Policy.” Council on Foreign Relations. 22 December 2008. .

Hanson, Stephanie. “China, Africa, and Oil.” Council on Foreign Relations. 6 June 2008. .

Haru, Mutasa. “US military aid troubles Africa.” Aljazeera. 24 October 2008. .

Holslag, Jonathon. “… or Is America the New China?” Foreign Policy. March 2009. < story_id="4778&page="2">.

Hill, Alex B. “Chinese exodus of influence.” When not in Africa. 30 January 2008. .

Hill, Alex B. “No more foreign aid institutions. . .its china.” When not in Africa. 4 April 2007. .

James, Harold. “Is China the New America?” Foreign Policy. March 2009. .

Krebs, Sylvia. “China to Africa, Africa to China.” US-China Review. Vol. XXXI, No. 3, Summer 2007.

Krebs, Sylvia. “The ‘African Marco Polo’ in China.” US-China Review. Vol. XXXI, No. 3, Summer 2007.

Kurlantzick, Josh, David Shinn and Minxin Pei. “China’s Africa Strategy: A New Approach to Development and Diplomacy.” Carnegie Endowment. 12 December 2006. .

Larkin, Bruce D. China and Africa 1949-1970. University of California Press: Berkley and Los Angeles, 1971.

Mederios, Evan S. and M. Taylor Fravel. “China’s New Diplomacy.” Foreign Affairs. November/ December 2003. <>.

Naim, Moises. “Rogue Aid.” Foreign Policy. March/ April 2007. .

Onu, Emele. “Africa: Continent Needs U.S.$25 Billion Bailout, Says IMF.” ThisDay. 4 March 2009. .

Parsons, Talcott and Robert Bales. Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. Routledge, 1998 (original 1955).

Sanket. “Chinese migrants in Africa (and vice versa).” World Bank: People Move. 15 January 2009. .

Skypek, Thomas M. “The Great Game in Africa: Washington’s Emerging Containment Strategy.” The Weekly Standard. 9 October 2008. .

Tuckey, Beth. “Obama: Africa, US Africa Policy, and AFRICOM.” Pambazuka News. 6 November 2008. .

“USA arms war-torn Africa under guise of humanitarian aid.” Pravda.ru. .

“US – Making Peace or Fueling War on the Continent?” AfricaFocus. 18 March 2009. .

“US Military Involvement by Country.” Association of Concerned Africa Scholars. 11 February 2003. .

Ward, Haskell. “Africa: U.S.-Africa Relations Hampered by Colonial Legacy.” AllAfrica.com. 10 April 2009. .

Zunes, Stephen. “Barack Obama on Diplomacy.” Foreign Policy In Focus. 17 January 2008. .

definition of development (revisited): beauty in the palm of your hand

Last summer I wrote about the definition of development after having a conversation with an incredible Peace Corps volunteer in Ghana who was really making the most of his time and abilities. The conversation that we had really made me think about the term 'development' and what it really means. Before that conversation and since I have been working to create my own definition, or rather I have been working to make the term stand for what I believe development should be all about.

This is what I wrote from Ghana on 7 June 2007:

This discussion with Alex really made me think about 'development' as the word was thrown around a lot that night. Alex has said that he really likes the Peace Corps model because it deals with integration. A volunteer is placed in a village or area and works with the people to improve their situation. This as opposed to some large organization or institution just giving out money to big plans they believe will work. But, what is the definition of development? Who gets to determine what development is? Who is allowed to call one developed or developing or underdeveloped? Is development all based on a desire or push to become Western? Yes, I think in the very recent past it was and really still is to a degree, but for me development holds a different definition. Development for me mirrors positive progress in people's lives. Development should be based on getting and giving people their basic needs (rights) for survival and life. Even in this regard the almighty 'West' needs development.

Now my development studies have become more involved and I will apply certain paradigms of thought and different theories of development from many different minds. Before I get into theory I want to begin by tackling the continuously difficult task of writing a definition of development.

Development is a loaded term and cannot be the way that we approach others in need. From President Truman's "launch" (Wolfgang Sachs, 2) of the idea of development in 1949 during his inauguration speech in which he declared "underdeveloped areas," the West began a long blinding road on which the US would always be number one with no need for 'development.' Development in this sense creates an inferior to superior relationship between those who need help and those who have the resources. This is where the idea of the 'third world' comes in. Two years ago I wrote on the idea of the 'third world' and how the term's use perpetuates bad ideas in development. The notion of being better because of circumstance is an extreme detriment in development work. In actuality the West is developing just as much as those we deem 'underdeveloped.'

We are developing the way we see the world and how we react or act to the different situations that various people face. We are developing our ability to care and show compassion, the most basic human action, to those who need our help. We need to start developing a process to assist those who most need our help. We need to develop our government's actions to fit the size of its big words and statements. The world's people need to recognize that we are not separated by very much anymore, except maybe our prejudices and false perceptions. We are not so distant as to claim we live in different worlds any longer. The distance is only in our minds.
From: new world discovered 3 September 2006

Development and its Uses

Truman called others 'underdeveloped' and what we have now seen is the disparity between rich and poor has grown exponentially. The 'underdeveloped' were not able to come closer to the 'developed.' We began calling some countries 'developing' as they adopted our ideas for governance, economy, liberalized markets, and modernity. This began the 'era of development' and Wolfgang Sachs provides us with an excellent quote:

"Like a towering lighthouse guiding sailors towards the coast, 'development' stood as the idea which oriented emerging nations in their journey through post-war history. No matter whether democracies or dictatorships, the countries of the South proclaimed development as their primary aspiration, after they had been freed from colonial subordination. Four decades later, governments and citizens alike still have their eyes fixed on this light flashing just as far away as ever: every effort and and every sacrifice is justified in reaching the goal, but the light keeps on receding into the dark." (Thomas, Ch. 1)

Here is where we can draw on a theme of 'development of the mind.' This idea has been grown on the backs of the very people that 'development' seeks to assist. Born of colonization which promoted a certain nihilism of colonized populations and modernization as a result of capitalist systems imposed on those populations, the development of the mind made people think that they weren't good enough and that they did not have the capacity to do for themselves. This is also a mentality that can be found within the slave and Black populations of the US. When a people is subjugated it takes a long time to redevelop the thinking that is not rooted in subordination. Everything was made simple and efficient for the imperial masters to control and capitalise on stolen wealth. Esteva importantly notes that for people to embrace 'development' they have to first perceive themselves to be 'underdeveloped.' (7) In this sense development negates the very person seeking to improve their life through 'development' because, "it undermines confidence in oneself and one's own culture." (Esteva, 8) The nature of 'development' almost always forgets about history and culture. Economists come at development with the idea of a level playing field that just needs to be built upon, but that is never the case. Histories of colonization which spurred war and violent conflict cannot be sliced out of development work. Colonized populations often had their histories and cultures re-written. In the case of Rwanda a homogeneous people were divided and pitted against one another. In South Africa culture was bound by 'bantustans.' In every corner of the globe a system focusing on mass production and the attainment of 'wealth' was imposed on traditional ways of life, cultures were and are altered as a result - sometimes even discarded. The "standardization of desires and dreams" (Wolfgang Sachs, 4) resulted and now we have 'development.'

What we also can look back and see is the use of 'development' as a "weapon in the competition between political system." (Wolfgang Sachs, 2) The Cold War led to a widespread allocation of 'rogue aid,' that is aid that is given without restriction and without being tied to a government or 'development' agency. This 'rogue aid' was given to win over world leaders to the side of the US or Soviet Union. Development as a weapon has created long-term effects that can still be seen as countries fell to dictators and authoritarian regimes fueled by 'rogue aid' and their militarization by Cold War powers. The 'era of development can also be called the 'era of the Cold War.' (Wolfgang Sachs, 4) Our privilege and 'wealth' does not give us a free ticket to 'develop' the rest of the world or tell them that they are living poorly. If the world was to be 'developed' entirely we, as a global society, would be reduced to a dead population living on top of each other on a barren planet devoid of all nature because we exploited both ourselves and our habitat. In some areas of 'development' I would even say that the West has taken irrational steps backwards.

Paradigms

There are three non-distinct paradigms or theories of development. The first is what we have seen for the past four decades since Truman's statement on underdevelopment. Development as Modernization puts forth the idea that the "modern money economy should and would overcome the traditional subsistence economy." (Ruonavaara, 2000) This is where 'development' has acted as a "Westernization of the world" (Wolfgang Sachs, 4) and the beginnings of a failed system that does not serve people's needs.

In the 1980s Alternative Development came into fashion to deal with the failure of Development as Modernization. The problem here was a misuse of privilege. Scientific knowledge was favored over all as professionals and experts came in as 'facilitators.' The positive of Alternative Development was the greater focus on people and 'including the excluded.' Women, minority groups, and the actual people being 'developed' were engaged in their own development. The failure of this paradigm was the hierarchical structure of facilitator and underdeveloped community, the lack of agency given in development, and the focus on modern and scientific knowledge as the only way to go.

Now there is the paradigm of Alternatives to Development or what some call Post-Development. This is an absolute "rejection and the replacement of the Development as Modernization model." (Ruonavaara) Alternatives to Development employs re-membering people into society, a step further than 'including the excluded,' participatory and cooperative practices, as well as allowing "professionals and non-professionals to talk about development in new ways." (Ruonavaara)

I say these paradigms are non-distinct because it is often difficult to specifically define approaches to development in reality as one paradigm or the other. Often it is easy to place certain development practices within the paradigms, but not the actions of an entire agency or organization.

Definitions

Alan Thomas tells us that the term 'development' is used in three main ways:

1. as a vision, description or measure of the state of being of a desirable society;
2. as an historical process of social change in which societies are transformed over long periods;
3. as consisting of deliberate efforts aimed at improvement on the part of various agencies, including governments, all kinds of organizations and social movements.

Chambers (1997, from Thomas, Ch. 2) defined development as just 'good change.' Thomas breaks this down excellently in his second chapter and the important concept to note is the ambiguity of 'development.' People have different ideas of what change is, of what progress entails, and especially of how we should get to that good change from where we are now. The nature of the defining is how 'development' happens in reality.

Cowen and Shenton write, "The burden of development was to compensate for the negative propensities of capitalism through the reconstruction of social order. To develop, the, was to ameliorate the social misery which arose out of an immanent process of capitalist growth." (Thomas, Ch. 2) If capitalism is to be a working system of self-regulating markets then everything must become a commodity. The problem here is that everything cannot be a commodity: life, mind, dignity, equality - these cannot be bought, sold, and produced or regulated by any market.

Jeffrey Sachs talks about development (economic) in relation to a ladder, (Sachs, 18) where once you reach the first rung you are set on your path to development. This falls in line with the Development as Modernization approach. The problem with Sachs' definition is that he creates a linear model that does not work in reality, people are often moving up and down the ladder - or not even on it because development can not focus solely on the economic. The political, social, and cultural must also be taken into account. Sachs' other problem arrives when he defines poverty as a trap. This definition takes out all history and accountability in relation to one's poverty. It discounts how one got into poverty in the first place or how a country or community lives in poverty.

Wolfgang Sachs defines development as, "an amoeba-like concept, shapeless but ineradicable. Its contours are so blurred that it denoted nothing - while it spreads everywhere because it connotes the best of intentions. The term is hailed by the IMF and Vatican alike, by revolutionaries carrying their guns as well as field experts carrying their Samsonites. Though development has no content, it does possess one function: it allows any intervention to be sanctified in the name of a higher goal."(4)

Responsible Development- My definition:

Therefore all past implementations of development as intervention, as hegemonic control, as a political weapon, as a ladder, as Westernization, as capitalist, and as modernization have led to a more underdeveloped world where people are not valued and all that matters is the production and perpetuation of the current system for those are the forefront. Wolfgang Sachs says, "The idea of development stands like a ruin in the intellectual landscape" and "its time to dismantle this mental structure." (Thomas, Ch. 1) I already wrote about the idea of development of the mind and so now how does someone from the West who wants to help those in need around the world engage in 'development' that will actually produce the desired results for people?

My definition of development falls along the lines of the 'alternatives to development' paradigm. I believe very strongly in people-centered development that is needs based. Where there is a focus on individuals as part of the whole and not on just numbers of people assisted, growth of GDP, or increase in production. I want to see development that uses what works and not just what looks good. Development that strengthens local communities and connects them to others, that evaluates itself often, that doesn't 'other,' that spreads a cooperative mentality of interdependence, that believes in the co-evolution of people with nature, that does not feel guilty, but responsible, that uses unsustainable development to adopt sustainable practices. Development should be a resource for people who have historically and systematically been subjugated and oppressed so that they may have agency and actualize their own development. I am a strong believer in a communal and cooperative living style, this is a 'modern' idea based in practices of traditional societies. My definition of development is not an ideology, but rather it draws on wisdom from historical experience.

Development should be a vision that is defined by the community as a whole. I believe strongly in empowerment where the 'developer' does not act as an overseer or facilitator, but a resource and a support. This is where development needs to become a redistribution of power and resources that will transform the way institutions have worked. Along with empowerment comes the idea of participation. Both the 'developer' and those to 'develop' need to be participants on equal footing in the development process. In this way communities are able to develop themselves and take into account their social and cultural practices without being controlled by an outsider. Development as we have seen pushed for a conformity of global society - development should instead embrace diversity and equality in difference.

My economics mirrors the ideas of E.F. Schumacher where he focuses on economics as if people mattered. Schumacher uses Buddhism as an example of people and nature centered development practice. He writes:

"Simplicity and non-violence are obviously closely related. The optimal pattern of consumption, producing a high degree of human satisfaction by means of a relatively low rate of consumption, allows people to live without great pressure and strain and to fulfill the primary injunction of Buddhist teaching: 'Cease to do evil; try to do good.'" (62)

He also writes about production at the local level for the local level and how that lessens human consumption as a "rational way of economic life." Schumacher notes that now (1973, even more now) the human population lives parasitically on the earth, the market is an institution of individualism and severs all responsibility. (46) Development needs to be about wellbeing of both the individual and the world around them.

The examples of subsistence and traditional communities are excellent, 'small' examples of how development should work.

"A world of 'humanized' production, based on a small scale but modern and scientific technology, a world of co-operation in villages and small towns, a world of enriched social relationships growing out of a process of production and exchange that is under human control rather than 'alienated'. . ." (Kitching, 1982, p.179 from Thomas, 35)

There are many examples of this and even now practices within the 'developed' world are moving towards subsistence and small scale, cooperative and local. Within the 'developed' world there is a growing number of local farmer's markets, organic growers, and alternative organizations focused on serving people's needs. Even Barbara Kingslover's latest book, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle is based on locally grown, locally purchased food as a way to develop a more environment friendly and people friendly society. This local food movement is growing fast.

Some may try and say that it is just a phenomena as food and fuel prices soar, but really it is a long held style of living rooted in historic, traditional knowledge which we are finally returning to: a method of living that is more holistic and accounts for the co-evolution of humans and nature. Evidence of these traditional practices is still seen today. There have been attempts to return to a historically sustainable way of life through movements like Kibbutz in Israel, Ujamaa in Tanzania, Revolutionary Inter-Communalism within the Black Panther Party of the US, as well as implementations of communes, cooperatives and collectives in the Western world - some that begin as far as 200 years ago. There are distinct reasons why these models have failed to achieve widespread results, but the most detrimental effect brings us back to the idea of 'development of the mind.'People are too often trapped in a system's way of thinking and living that it is too difficult to cut out un-necessary desire or it creates an inability to see beyond the current status quo and way of life.

One example of a community that was self-sufficient, sustainable, and at peace with others and its environment was the Ladakh in northern most point of India next to Kashmir. The Ladakh were a traditional indigenous community that operated on communal living. They lived with no strain on the natural environment. There was no pollution, excessive noise, or a lack of resources. People worked on their own time and used what would be called 'primitive technology.'As soon as modernity and 'development' entered the scene the sustainable way of life of the Ladakh disappeared. Modern society claimed to understand and control the natural order, with energy and capital intensive, consumptive, and environmentally unfriendly practices. The elderly no longer had a role in the community with the creation of Western schools and business because of this young people did not learn tolerance and responsibility at an early age. Modern society broke down family and community ties. Agriculture was no longer an acceptable business, pollution grew, the status of women fell as men felt more and more insecure in the 'modern world.' A community where there were no constraints, no stresses, no violence, no capital or pollution was turned into what we now see on a worldwide scale with the propagation of capitalism. Polluted environments, where everyone is in a rush, and once you can no longer produce you have no place in society. We now live as parasites on the earth as opposed to co-evolving partners with the earth. We now value products and productivity above people. There are many related examples across the globe of communities like the Ladakh. Now the Ladakh Development Foundation exists to empower the community to improve itself.

It seems with all this understanding of history, 'development' should become a simplifying of life. We should re-learn traditional values of these communities and apply them to our own lives. Living non-hierarchically, with community consensus, subsistence, and holistically. There are too many broken people, we need to reverse our practices and rewrite our theories. There are many efforts now developing across the globe to spur a "green economy," one that attempts to place the environment at the core of our societal progression. It has had mixed results, but the majority good. Where gardens are established on roofs (green roofs), community parks take the place of abandoned factories, and bringing people out of poverty is the norm. The Green for All organization is working to build an inclusive "green" economy that will assist and benefit everyone.

Green For All believes a shift to a clean, green economy can improve the health and well-being of low-income people, who suffer disproportionately from cancer, asthma and other respiratory ailments in our current pollution-based economy. Such a shift can also create and expand entrepreneurial, wealth-building opportunities for American workers who need new avenues of economic advance. In other words: we believe that the national effort to curb global warming and oil dependence can simultaneously create well-paid green-collar jobs, safer streets and healthier communities.

The notion of a growing or strong nation or country by way of its GDP or economic output does not give a comprehensive definition of the development of a country when people are a means to an end. And so 'development' at national and state levels is irrelevant when there are people who still live without their basic necessities at the small-scale, local and community level.

steel villages and concrete fences

13 May 2008

Everyone waves from their steel-corrugated shacks, children smile and get excited, parents and elders are welcoming - looking out over the shanty town roof tops that extend as far as the eye can see in each direction you can't help but wonder that within this poverty and desolation mixed with laughter and happiness - what potential can be harnessed, what community action can be inspired to make South Africa's future brighter by and for those who live here.

The government built lavatories and sinks for the informal settlement so sanitation is good. They provide building materials for brick houses through the Reconstruction and Development Program (RDP), but where are the education improvements? the health support? the food subsidies? A government can't do it all and so places like VVOCF exist!

This all made me think more about the African health worker crisis as I see the direct result of it, the effectiveness of government funded health care, and the access to nutritional information and education.

chinese exodus of influence

In the early days of African discovery soldiers, missionaries, and explorers led the way towards the attempted understanding of and preceding conquest of Africa. This push came from the world powers of the day in Western Europe - now we see a new wave of settlers moving in on the African continent. However, this exodus should not be a surprise. Lured by the increase in wealth, property, and life style, Chinese migrants are starting new lives in Africa. Approved by the Beijing government, the migrants are involved in agriculture reform, construction (which is a huge Chinese business in Africa), and trade.

The Chinese relationship with Africa is strong and this new development should not come as a surprise. "To build a unified front against imperialism," was the Chinese goal in the 1950s. This involved supporting the growing African decolonization, nationalist movements, and revolutions. There is a strong history of economic ties between China and Africa. We can see this in Chinese blue and white porcelain found at African gravesites from the expeditions of Zheng He. Zheng He left the Cape of Good Hope with the gift of a giraffe. Trade relations with China only increased from there.

China began its first bilateral agreements in 1956 with Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Sudan, and Guinea. China had been in agreement with the Soviet Union in supporting African revolutions, but China became more interested in providing financial and military support for nationalist movements. In the 1960s there were nineteen African countries with official ties to Beijing. The recent wave of nearly 750,000 Chinese migrants are not the first. In the 1960s Mao Zedong sent people to forge political ties with the continent. This newest wave or Chinese people is to strengthen the Chinese claims over raw materials and markets. The head of the China Export-Import Bank has said that he will support this migration with "investment, project development, and help with the sale of products." Mr. Li says,"There's no harm in allowing [Chinese] farmers to leave the country to become farm owners [in Africa]," he added.

Mission of the China Export-Import Bank:

The main mandate of the Bank is to implement the state policies in industry, foreign trade and economy and finance to provide policy financial support so as to promote the export of Chinese mechanical and electronic products and high- and new-tech products, to support Chinese companies with comparative advantages to "go global" for offshore construction contracts and overseas investment projects, to develop and strengthen relations with foreign countries, and to enhance Sino-foreign economic and technological cooperation and exchanges.

Beyond the trade relations that are now ever growing, the political ties have been and remain strong. During the 1960s China provided military and financial to nationalist movements as well as increasing development dollars - $100 million. They also sent 150,000 technicians to implement projects in agriculture, transport, and infrastructure development. China was involved in numerous independence movements. In the build-up to democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, China was providing financial support, but it wasn't enough. After Lumumba was assassinated by the efforts of the CIA, the Chinese demonstrated en masse. Millions gathered in Peking, 400,000 in Shanghai which solidified the Chinese influence and support for further revolutionary movements. A new regime was supported in Tanzania (1964) until Nyerere took power. Nyerere even adopted the Mao-style uniform. Chinese engineers built a railroad from Zambia to Dar es Salaam, Tanzania showing the Chinese economic might and proving that China was serious in Africa. China supported many nationalist and revolutionary movements (see map) with arms, money, medical supplies, scholarships, and guerrilla trainings and camps.

In 1971 China received 76 votes for a permanent UN Security Council seat. Of those votes 26 were from African countries and by the 1980s fourty-four African countries had established diplomatic ties with Beijing. These ties soon faded out, but have recently been rekindled in the 1990s and more recently in 2006. In the third China-Africa forum 48 African countries were represented. China now represents the leading Asian developing giant, above India, Singapore, and Thailand. China now rivals OECD countries or the developed West in providing foreign aid (rogue aid). China now outbids the World Bank and in 2006-2008 provided over $10 billion in loans to African countries.

China has regained its strong influence in African countries. Their power is unmatched and their recent wave of settlement unprecedented. This is a point of contention for both Western powers who may be afraid of the growing Chinese power and the people of African countries who should be wary of another exploiter. The Chinese may have a history of support, development, and influence, but that does not justify current action.

young people are the key drivers of social change

Harry S. Truman Scholarship Policy Proposal by: Alex B. Hill

Problem Statement
International development is a vast and complex issue. With over 18 million people dying each year from the lack of development assistance in health infrastructure something new needs to be done. Within the US there is a trend that foreign aid dollars are coming more from private NGOs and nonprofits as opposed to official government agencies. For so many years international development was tackled in simplified single-issue campaigns, which only created any effect in the short-term. This can be attributed to the fact that most Americans have a limited worldview. Most Americans have not traveled internationally, especially to developing countries. Therefore international development issues remain remote and abstract to most Americans. International development is a long-term issue. It is inherently complex and difficult to understand. There is no single enemy, and outcomes are rarely clear-cut or translatable through numbers. Faced with this challenge, some countries have opted to undertake broad-based efforts to build increased public understanding of development issues.4 There are a number of programs that promote volunteering and global engagement, such as the Peace Corps and Volunteers for Prosperity, through USA Freedom Corps. While these programs offer opportunities for highly educated and skilled Americans there exists a great void for those who are inspired and motivated, but may not have the degree or skills to qualify for these programs. The way to bring about increased political will on development issues in the US will lie in the creation of a long-term cultural and social movement, spurred by young people, to change the way in which many Americans think about international development. If this movement is to achieve change, it will be vital to increase the knowledge and understanding of development issues among the public.

Proposed Solution
Young people are the key drivers of social change. Considering this fact, there needs to be a policy focused on engaging young people in order to build a domestic constituency for international development that will create lasting connections. The policies on education and participation related to international development need to change. Young people have grown up with internet, global popular culture, and easier communications and travel, which has made the world smaller, more connected, and more accessible. Young people, specifically college students, have the opportunities to study abroad and are almost constantly encouraged to participate in global exchanges. Young people are left out of the equation when they exist as the greatest asset to making change in the development sector. If the problem is to be remedied then there needs to be a two-step plan. The first step needs to be increased support for a development curriculum in middle and high schools. This is where the US has fallen far behind Europe. European education efforts have focused their resources on offering learning initiatives for young people. Focusing on youth has been a key strategy of both European NGOs and government for many years. Countries that have embraced a long-term vision of youth-focused development education have the highest public awareness and support for development. According to the OECD the US spends less per capita on development education than any other OECD country. The second step needs to combine the learning activities of the school curriculum with action opportunities. The traditional classroom will not be enough to keep the engagement necessary to build an active constituency for change. Having action programs for youth will be a great method of measuring the success of the educational component. Pivotal to both steps will be increased support for a collaborative body dedicated to promoting development education. The US Development Education Alliance has been largely ineffective because it lacks support from both NGOs and the government agencies. This body needs to be coordinated at the national level and networked internationally so that efforts can be combined for maximum effect.

Major Obstacles/ Implementation Challenges
The major challenge facing this policy proposal is the US education system. In the US is largely determined locally, as opposed to Europe, where national governments set education policy standards. This will be the greatest difficulty in implementing a development-oriented curriculum. The next challenge will be government support. Having a coherent government platform to support development education will lend recognition and incredible support to the effort. Without a government backing, the policy will likely fail. Likewise, the US Development Education Alliance will need greater support from NGOs and government agencies, such as the USA Freedom Corps, Peace Corps, and USAID, in order to push for a change in policy.

Check out the Development Education Association, based out of the UK, it is a network of all development education organizations.

the longest driveway

On our way to the village of Danfa, where we were to conduct our community health diagnosis, it all became clear to me why the roads that we had driven on were being so developed. I learned from one of our interpreters that there was a new presidential palace being constructed on the top of the mountain past Mampong Regional Hospital. I learned that the roads before had been very precarious and dangerous, but nevertheless the entire route from the main road near our hostel in Accra-Shiashie all the way up to the mountain communities near the palace saw road development to the extreme. It was to be the president's new driveway. The longest driveway that I know of, but when you get a police motorcade that clears the roads to take you home, why not have a smooth path in the name of development? This makes me wonder. . . will the surrounding communities benefit? Will they get development help and road improvements? I think not as evidenced by the poor side roads and lack of interest in rural communities (or so it seems). Is a long driveway really necessary (too much snow in Michigan)?

17 June 2007
We arrived back in Danfa, as we had previously visited, and moved into our guest house near the community health clinic. The clinic was constructed back in 1969 with the help of the University of California (no one knows which one) and serves six local communities of over 60,000 people. Many medical students stay in the guest housing to conduct community health diagnoses. This is why ours was to be in the village of Otinibi, just down the road about two kilometers. We were to interview four individuals with pre-determined backgrounds to see how well the community was doing in regards to health. Here is where many students first saw a very rural village with not much development. However, here there was a fair degree of development due to the involvement of the University of California and other NGOs from the UK and Norway. This is where I felt most welcome and at ease. There is no rushing in the village, there are no hawkers, no one will lie to you for help, the scenery is beautiful - mountains in the background, heart wrenching picture opportunities of children, the freedom of the wilderness, there is just such a better atmosphere and disposition that it is very difficult to explain. It is because of villages like these that I fell in love with Africa. The guest house was a very nice place where we could all live, cook, clean, and work together. Everyone took turns cooking a meal and cleaning up, playing cards, singing songs, kicking a soccer ball around, and just having a good time. Hurrah for group bonding!

18 June 2007

The very next day we awoke early to cook (Team 3) oats, eggs, and cinnamon toast - believe me this is an amazing breakfast. After eating we met our interpreters for the day. They would assist us in interviewing community members about health practices. We split into groups and were assigned an interpreter. Elkanne, 18 years old and son of our coordinator, was our interpreter. He was a very nice kid and was very good at helping us understand the health of the community. We walked the two kilometers to Otinibi and began interviewing. The village is like many that we have seen here. In the early stages of 'development,' a hardworking chief, mud buildings, sheet metal roofs, no defined pathways, a borehole for water, coconut trees, and lots of 'bush.' The village is beautiful and I can't get enough of it. We conducted our interviews, meeting a great array of people from a man who spoke for his wife, a not so enthusiastic bachelor, and an awesome grandmother who supposedly grows the best of the best peppers. We learned of many different aspects of community health and saw a great deal of the community to assess its health. We chatted with the chief as he passed by and attempted to climb coconut trees. Elkanne was much better than I was.


While we were heading back to our guest house in Danfa, after completing interviews, we passed by a kente cloth weaving 'factory' of sorts. We came across a young boy weaving so fast and with such skill, it was amazing. Later we found out that this was a place of child labour and that these children did not attend school, which is against the law. On leaving we informed the chief and he said that he was going to register all the children in the area who were supposed to be in school. He would then confront the man running the operation and extend some help for the children.

The Interpreters:


Our Findings
We identified four key areas that contributed to the community health of Otinibi: Nutrition, Sanitation, Water Source, and Health Service Use. Each of the four people we interviewed told us that they ate only kenkey (pounded maize) and fufu (pounded cassava), none of then had anything else to supplement their diets. No fruits, no proteins, no vegetables. We wondered what effect this had on the community health as much of the diet was composed of starch. We then asked about waste removal and everyone told us that they used the dump by the bush, only the grandmother told us that sometimes they burned it. For human waste they all went to the bush, which as you may guess is very unhygenic. The public toilets have been broken for some years (collapsed). This moved us into asking where the families got their water. There is a newly installed pipe tap which everyone said they used, but we were told that it cost 200 cedis per bucket. Is this really the primary source of water? I can't imagine everyone paying for a bucket of water every time they need it. Before the tap, the community used the borehole (pump well) to get water. Everyone told us that they knew the water was safe to drink because they drank it and didn't get sick. Or did they? This is where we wondered if the common ailments of headache and fever, which were diagnosed as malaria, were really due to the water. There was also a stagnant pond that some people used to get water for bathing.

As far as the decision of what medicine to use, we observed self-medication, use of orthodox and traditional medicines. In the community everyone told us that the Danfa Clinic was their number one choice of medical care. I contributed this to the construction of the Danfa Clinic and the subsequent outreach programs conducted in the surrounding communities. No one, except the grandmother, even touched on the use of traditional medicine. The grandmother did not like the orthodox medicine because the pills made her sick. When we visited she was cooking some leaves from the bush for her fever and she said that these worked very well. However, she did not see an herbalist and knew what to use herself. This use of traditional practice when the modern approach does not work was also seen at the bonesetter's clinic. One man did not want metal inserted in his arm another could not get placed in a modern clinic. In this scientific age the traditional herbalists/bonesetters are using modern x-rays to do their work and it seems to be working well. We also visited the traditional birth attendant (TBA). The one we visited happened to be trained and served the larger community including Otinibi. She was trained in 1996 and before that she just used her experiences and teachings from elders to do her work. We learned that in many cases traditional medicine is reverted to for reasons of proximity, emergency, and convenience. The vast majority of the Otinibi community used the modern medicine and 'knew' that it was the best option. The father we interviewed even went to the chemist (pharmacy) to pick up headache medication for his wife. When I asked Elkanne what he thought about traditional medicine he quickly responded that he only used the Danfa Clinic, but why not? His father worked at the Clinic and the parental influence is very strong in Otinibi. The parents we interviewed would take their children first to the clinic before themselves.

Our Recommendations
We observed a number of open pits and stagnant water sources. There was an old open well that had accumulated a disgusting degree of trash, fecal matter, and god knows what else. We recommended that these holes be filled in to reduce injury risk and mosquito breeding. Our next recommendation was for a separation of trash and regular removal. We also saw a positive in starting a composting project. This could help with the community's subsistence farming. Since it was the rainy season many homes had closed windows and poor ventilation. For this we recommended screens or mosquito nets on the windows to keep out pests and provide ventilation. For nutrition we recommended maybe introducing beans to be grown and eaten as a source of protein. We also recommended that the people eat what they grow. A number of those interviewed grew vegetables and other foods, but only to sell. Eating the local fruits would also help the nutrition of the community. These were just the small ways that we saw to improve the community health. I would say that the community was for the most part healthy and just needed to act on some simple measures to ensure a greater wellbeing. I also noticed that there was a great lack of emergency transportation. There was none except for the local vehicles. I saw people hurriedly carrying sick people into the clinic, the TBA talked of childbirth emergencies with no transport, I have seen and heard this before - investing in an ambulance may help.

While in Danfa/ Otinibi we had number of delicious Ghanaian dishes:

Palava Sauce (spinachy) and Boiled Cassava


Groundnut Soup with Chicken and Rice Balls


We saw a scorpion! In Ghana they are seen as very evil creatures and are the evil-doers of witches. This one was caught in the gutter and after we all took our pictures and left was probably smashed to a pulp. Scorpions are hated with the passion of a million fires in Ghana.

Index of blog post series on Ghana.

a mixture of black, white, red

14 June 2007
Our third visit to the Volta Region.
We visited the Akosombo Dam, creator of the largest man-made lake in all the world. This dam was constructed in a brief three years by Italian engineers. The Lake is formed from the Black, White, and Red Volta Rivers coming from Togo, Benin, and Cote d'Ivoire. Volta in the local language means 'rapids,' now there is just a giant dam. The dam was built to be used for electricity and to create a source for fishing. The dam was huge and presented a great mark on the landscape of Ghana's lush forests near the Volta Region. The dam provides all the power for Ghana, but currently there is an energy crisis. We have experienced this crisis with frequent black outs and power outages al across Ghana. We discovered why this is happening by viewing the extremely low water levels for the operation of the dam. Our guide told us that they are waiting for the rainy season to get into full swing to fill the Lake Volta and increase the power.
No pictures were allowed of the operational side of the dam, but here they are. After learning all about the dealings and history of the dam and how it works we walked back across the bridgeway and I noticed that there were less power lines heading to the north of Ghana and a great number headed to the Accra city center and southern Ghana. This seemed to be an all too common theme and yet again more evidence of the disparitites between North and South in Ghana. Kyle noted correctly that this was a great scar of development. The dam stopped up the rivers that now create the Lake Volta which covers one fourth of the country. It harnesses the water for electricity and development. It sits high and heavy on the once beautiful landscape on Ghana and screams of a continued practice of harmful 'development.'


Seeing Lake Volta for the first time reminded me of an article that our professor showed to us about child labour in the fishing industry on lake Volta. The article was from the New York Times and followed the stories of families that could not eat and sold their children into labour for money with the promise of seeing their child once a year and being sent more money. Those promises rarely hold up and often the children are beaten, overworked, and never return home. The article covered the story of a young boy who worked on Lake Volta, fishing in the potentially dangerous waters with little sleep or rest, and a lot of work. Child labour is not beyond the 'most developed' country in Africa. It happens here, in the very eyes of development.


We headed over to the Volta Lake Hotel to have lunch. The hotel was a great Western hub catering to Obrunis (this is the correct spelling) and providing one of the most delicious meals yet. I forgot to take a picture before the meal, but here is the after picture of my ravaged plate. I was quite hungry by this time and the fillet of perch with a cocktail fruit drink and fresh fruit hit the spot.
Our bus driver was very tired this day since the day before the bus needed repair and there was trouble finding the part, he had been up since 5 am that day. He took a little nap.

Index of blog post series on Ghana.