<proud smile>
Who wants charity? : Demand markets, attract investment, forget aid
SANJAYA BARU
Now that Japan has decided to withdraw the “measures” taken against India and Pakistan, a Japanese euphemism for the sanctions imposed as punishment for the May 1998 nuclear tests, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee must make bold to declare when he visits Tokyo that he will not seek any aid or financial assistance from Japan. No grants or aid, please; open markets, inward investment and job opportunities for Indians will do, thank you.
Someone in the finance ministry may say that this is money worth having. Aid and cheap loans help in the short run. There are teams of officials employed to process aid, with opportunities to travel to the aid-giving countries, and politicians like signing bilateral agreements at stately photo-ops. Even the aid-givers like the experience of travelling to distant corners of the world where they are received with decorum and courtesy and they can go home and tell their guilt-ridden liberal constituents that they have done their bit for the poor of the world. It’s a conspiracy of convenience that no one likes to expose — neither the recipient nor the donor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A democratically elected government must spend its own tax payers’ money to educate its people, bring succour to the poor and
care for the distressed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The time, however, has come for India to say no to grants and aid. We did that with a couple of Scandinavian countries which also withdrew aid in 1998 to punish India for going nuclear. After some time when they offered to rescind their notifications and resume aid they were politely told to keep their money. We have learnt to say no to Scandinavia, it’s time to say no to Japan, Britain, the US and lesser mortals.
The government’s sober and muted response to the decision of the US and Japan to lift sanctions is a welcome departure from earlier practice of expressing exaggerated gratitude for such token gestures. Japan had in fact been told that it could earn some diplomatic brownie points with India if it had voluntarily lifted sanctions before the US. This advice was conveyed to Tokyo but Japanese officials said that its stance on nuclear policy was linked to domestic politics and the strong anti-nuclear sentiment in Japan, the “only victim of a nuclear attack”.
“We would like to withdraw these measures” many Japanese officials told their Indian interlocutors over the past two years, “but what can we do, domestic political opinion in Japan was alienated by India’s tests which provoked poorer Pakistan to also follow suit.” Why cannot India at least declare its willingness to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), (“you don’t actually have to do it, just say you will and that can help us ease sanctions” we were told). Mercifully, our political leadership was not easily scared into doing the bidding for now these measures have been removed with no promise on CTBT.
But all that seems to have changed the moment the US decided to withdraw sanctions. The US did so to help Pakistan to enable the latter to help the US in the campaign in Afghanistan. So why has Japan chipped in? Clearly, to help the cause in Afghanistan. Cynics would say don’t complain, after all the purpose of getting Japan to lift sanctions has been served. If this means getting some easy money from Japan, why not?
Sorry, our view is that this gift horse is not worth riding. Just say thank you, we don’t need this charity. More trade? Yes. More investment? Yes. More jobs in the information technology sector for Indian techies? Yes. Trade, investment and skill flows are fine. Aid is not needed, should not be taken and all aid programmes must be wound up. Not just with Japan, but with all the rich industrial countries. We must learn to live without aid.
It is demeaning that our governments have no problem accepting foreign aid for poverty alleviation, literacy programmes, rural development and now even “good governance”! Economic assistance can be accepted where it comes with technology that is not locally available. It is useful in areas where Indians secure access to new technologies and managerial practices, but a democratically elected government must spend its own tax payers’ money to educate its people, bring succour to the poor and care for the distressed.
It is disturbing to see how even the anti-west leftwing and populist political leadership at home that so readily debunks foreign investment has no compunction in accepting foreign aid. There is righteous indignation against multilateral trade regimes and financial institutions, of which we are in fact members and where we have a voice, but no qualms in accepting aid. Why this condoning of alms-seeking even as we damn deal making?
If India is not prepared to cut deals in the World Trade Organisation and if the policy of “give and take” is unacceptable, what makes aid-receiving politically correct? Indian diplomacy must at all international forums remind the developed industrial nations that they all, with the exception of a few Scandinavian countries, have reneged on their commitment to the UN to set aside a mere 0.7 per cent of their national income for development assistance to the developing countries. Yes, that point must be made. But there is no reason why we must seek a share of that pittance.
Let Pakistan rejoice the lifting of sanctions, a country that has damned its economic future by diverting its wealth to “jehad”, militarism and to foreign banks. Must we be in that category?
We felt elevated the day the government announced a donation of a million dollars worth of cyproflaxycin tablets for US citizens seeking cheap medicines to fight the anthrax scare. When the Gujarat earthquake crumbled so many homes and hopes it was correct to accept foreign help. On such occasions accepting help is a graceful act of gratitude.
One must differentiate between such help and the regular bilateral aid, often tied to unacceptable conditions that continues to come and that is increasingly becoming a means of fiscal balancing by state governments. The only development expenditure incurred by many state governments is now financed by foreign aid. Just as huge bureaucracies and vested interests took root in New Delhi in the aid business, there are now in many state capitals public careers being made by the dispensation of foreign aid.
So huge is this foreign funded developmental activity that the Department for International Development (DFID) of the UK now even employs IAS officers to administer its aid programmes! A new vested interest in the perpetuation of aid may have already come into place. This must end. Equally importantly, even as we stop aid, we must fill the external resources gap with more trade and investment flows and adopt more liberal economic policies and create the domestic infrastructure that enables trade and investment flows to grow. Developed countries will then think twice before they impose sanctions. Sanctions are imposed to hurt others, not one’s own. Ironically, they are also lifted to help one’s own, not others.
indian-express.com |
