Effects of War and Peace on Foreign Aid

War is defined as an event with excessive aggression and societal disorder and high mortality. It is characterized with vicious conflicts that leads to massive loss of life. At times, war is a planned event where differences between two or more parties are involved. War mostly happens in an intention to alter the hierarchy of domination between the two parties. Peace on the other hand is the situation of concord that is characterized by lack of violence and tussles (Amstutz, 2005). It brings freedom and good coexistence among people. According to the world bank, developing countries are those that has their gross domestic product (GDP) lower than $12,746. The gross domestic product is the quantitative measure of the nation’s total economic activity for a specific period of time. (Anderson, et al, 2012)

The aspects of both peace and war have heavily influenced the distribution of foreign aid to the third world countries in the sub Saharan region (Abirafeh, 2009). This article aims at evaluating the positive and negative effects of peace and war on the foreign aid. We will take the case of Rwanda. The article will assess the leadership of the country and how it has used the foreign aid to get a relief from the severe problems the country has suffered from due to war and conflicts. The article will further cite the means of reducing the poverty in the country effected by the leadership in assistance of the foreign aid.

The Effects of Peace and War on the Foreign Aid

The foreign aid has a lot of influence in the sub Saharan Africa. It is meant to help eradicate poverty that is so eminent in the region. Foreign aid has caused people in the region so dependent on it such that the leaders of these countries do little to improve the livelihood of their people. The governments start to backpedal on the economic reforms once they win the annual allocations of the foreign aid. They join their subjects and become dependent on it. Such leadership earn great rebuke and dissatisfaction from the people they lead.

Foreign aid is associated with exchange conditions between the donor and the recipient. The recipient is supposed to stick to the set standards donors give their help to effect positive change in the countries. At times, they give the aid to offer political stability in such countries. In the economic perspective its meant to make sure the governments reduce their military expenditure, privatize public institutions and reduce the number of number of people in the public administration. Experts argue that the wealthier the people are, the less likely they are to fight. This is why the world bank and the international monetary fund (IMF) consider a country like Rwanda a special case. They provide them with critical loans even if they do not qualify. The country has, however, made progress in the governance since they even sent soldiers to DR Congo as peacekeepers.

Conditions imposed by the donors

The countries that get the foreign aid are supposed to meet certain conditions to benefit from the donors’ aid. The two normally have a mutual understanding and agree on certain terms. The beneficiaries usually promise to maintain democracy, fight corruption and reduce n the military expenditure. The Rwandese government has followed the set rules by the donors to continue getting the aid. The Lusaka accord that were set in place by the donors required the Rwandese troops to withdraw their troops from the DR Congo. They also promised to cut their military expenses. Rwanda has also to have the least amount of net foreign assets in the national bank of Rwanda and encourage privatization (Carey, 2005) They also pledged to encourage democracy and respect for human life and good leadership altogether.

Impacts of the foreign aid in the governance of Rwanda

Nineteen years have now passed since the genocide between Hutu and Tutsi. The genocide left Rwanda devastated and the impacts are still felt. The foreign aid helped in maintaining order by protecting the minority (the Tutsis) but has at the same time barred economic advancement of the majority, Hutus. There are two factors that explain the approach the donors have towards Rwanda. One of them is the fact that they failed to prevent the loss lives during the genocide. the international community did less to prevent it and therefore thousands of people lost their lives. The second id the fact that they appointed the Hutus to the highest ranks, the president and the prime minister. The Hutus also took other key positions in the government. This was to ease the power tussles and the resistance by the majority. It has brought positive results since the warring communities do not fight any longer. The opposition has been silenced since then but no changes has been effected concerning the foreign aid policy.

Poverty is a social problem in Rwanda as well as in other sub African countries affects the social and the economic status of these countries. There has been heated debates on how to reduce these problems but there seems to be no effective ones. The problem that has arisen is to do with the legitimacy and the efficiency of the foreign aid as a means of boosting socioeconomic advancement and cut down the level of poverty to zero

There is a high imbalance of resources in Rwanda makes poverty a real problem in the country. This has led to a decline in the living conditions of the people in the lower ranks especially those in the rural areas. The country has been at the verge of losing it in fighting battle. This calls for foreign aid to lend a hand. Statistics show that the same factors that led to the genocide in Rwanda. the same antagonism lies beneath the economic policies of the government. It has led to the big differences in the economic strength against the Hutus. Judging from the historic records, it is obvious that the situation 1950s that brought an exile to the parents of the present Tutsi elites. (Richmond, 2005). The international community has continued to offer aid in favor of Tutsis over the Hutus. The Tutsis have continued to live in the urban centers while the Hutus reside in the countryside. The current president makes sure that the aid that come from the international community goes to the minority in the urban centers since he fears the Hutus. There are little developments that happens in the rural areas where the majority lives to thwart any threats. There is, therefore, a likelihood of history repeating itself when the majority start an uprising.

Conclusion

If peace and equality are to be achieved in Rwanda, the long term cycle has to be broken. The leadership framework supports the elite minority and leaves out the majority. The mistakes of the late 1950s came to repeat itself in 1990s and this led to the genocide. It scarred the country as well as the international community since they failed to intervene. The donors therefore need to revise the international policies to make sure that their aid gets to the vast majority to ease the tensions.

References

Abirafeh, L. (2009). Gender and international aid in Afghanistan: The politics and effects of intervention. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co.

Amstutz, M. R. (2005). International ethics. Rowman & Littlefield.

Anderson, M. B. (1999). Do no harm: How aid can support peace – or war. Boulder [u.a.: Lynne Rienner Publishers

Anderson, M. B., Brown, D., & Jean, I. (2012). Time to listen: Hearing people on the receiving end of international aid. Cambridge, MA: CDA Collaborative Learning Projects.

Carey, H. F., & Richmond, O. P. (2005). Subcontracting peace: The challenges of the NGO peacebuilding. Aldershot [u.a.: Ashgate

Steering Committee of the Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda. (1996). The International response to conflict and genocide: Lessons from the Rwanda experience : joint evaluation of emergency assistance to Rwanda. Place of publication not identified: Steering Committee of the Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda.