Path: utzoo!ncc!alberta!myrias!sjl
From: sjl@myrias.UUCP (Stuart Lomas)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Clark's speech to CIC; frontline states
Message-ID: <578@myrias.UUCP>
Date: 24 Mar 88 21:33:36 GMT
References: <560@auvax.UUCP> <2367@unicus.UUCP> <573@myrias.UUCP> <3173@hcr.UUCP> <576@myrias.UUCP> <1900@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Myrias Research, Edmonton
Lines: 32

In article <1900@ubc-cs.UUCP> acton@anchor.cs.ubc.ca (Donald Acton) writes
(regarding demanding democratic reform as a condition of aid to Zambia):

>}I believe we have no business demanding "democratic reform" of a government
>}that is (a) not guilt of major human rights abuses, (b) very stable, and
>}(c) popular domestically. Can demonstrate that my assumptions are wrong?
>  
>It is our money we are giving away so we can demand anything we want.
>The recipients are under no obligation to accept it. You or I may not
>like the strings we attach to the money but we can certainly can attach
>strings to it.

Of course we can attach strings, and I believe that we often do, although
normally those strings have to do with the permitted use of the funds. In
Zambia, the only Canadian aid project I heard of was improving roads in
northern Zambia, south of Lake Tanganika.

I don't believe it is to our advantage to try to force the whole world to
adhere to our ideals about government. People have a right to govern
themselves as they choose, and to make their own mistakes. Perhaps we should
apply economic pressure on governments that do not appear to have the support
of their people, but that does not seem to be the case in Zambia. (I could
understand wanting to pressure Zambia on their record of managing endangered
species, though)

Coupled with responsible, non-agressive diplomacy, our international aid
money buys us a lot of things, not least of which is good will. To get the
best value for our money, we need to consider how the strings we apply affect
the value we receive.

Stuart Lomas
{inhp4,uunet,ubc-vision}!alberta!myrias!sjl