On October 26, 1998, Hurricane Mitch was classified as a
Category 5 hurricane. It had formed a few days earlier and greatly affected
Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Honduras. According to one report, of the almost
19,000 people killed by Mitch, 14,600 were from Honduras. About 70% of
Honduras’s agricultural production was lost.
Then the aid agencies descended on Honduras and the other
countries.
Aid was needed – not only short time rescue and food and
housing, but also long term rebuilding of the country.
NGOs, church groups, and governmental aid agencies came.
But, as Jeffrey T. Jackson notes in The
Globalizers: Development Workers in Action, their presence was a mixed bag.
Money is power. In most cases aid that comes from government
and international aid agencies has numerous strings attached and are often
there to advance the interests of the donor countries. As Jackson notes, “it is
the donor countries that benefit most from development assistance and nation
building in the developing world.”
In his chapter on “Rebuilding after Hurricane Mitch,” he
details what happened. People were helped and a few of the agenda of Honduran
social organizations (such as democratization, decentralization, and
transparency) began to be addressed at least in theory.
But I think that the presence of these large globalizing
agencies and innumerable non-governmental was not positive.
My first complaint is that these agencies brought their
agendas and tried to garner support, rather than really empowering the people
affected by the disaster. Development aid is power and is often used in ways
that do not respect the rights of people. They enhance the interests of the
giver rather than help the recipients work together to enhance their own lives.
Secondly, all this aid came and so many agencies continue to
exist in Honduras that their presence may contribute to the passivity and
fatalism I’ve seen here. “We can’t do it. We have no money. What aid agency (or
governmental body) can GIVE us what we need?” There are a few projects and
processes that do try to have people organize, set their own agendas, and move
forward to make their lives more human. But the presence of so many groups can
lead to a passivity that becomes dependent on outside groups which then set the
agenda for the people.
Thirdly, since they usually don’t deal with the systematic
causes of injustice and poverty they may enhance the power of the economic and
political elites.
It is interesting that this is what the Catholic bishops
warned about in the Second Vatican Council’s Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World [Gaudium et Spes], ¶63:
…we are at a moment in history when the development of economic life could diminish social inequalities if that development were guided and coordinated in a reasonable and human way. Yet all too often it serves only to intensify the inequalities.
How we change this is a serious issue. I may need to try to
return to my thoughts in a future blog post. But I wanted to recall the
devastation of Hurricane Mitch fifteen years ago and note the dangers of
certain types of development and development assistance.
1 comment:
John - Thank you for that post. Amazing that it's been 15 years; especially with all the awful and wondrous memories from that time.
Post a Comment