| Submit your comments on this article |
| Fifth Column |
| Madhu Kishwar perfroms a flying kick NGO’s (from the top turnbuckle) |
| 2004-01-30 |
| EFL from TCS Part I of two parts. No to trade, yes to aid -Snip- The author is a senior fellow at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies. She is also founding editor of Manushi, a bimonthly journal of development and gender -snip- There is something similarly comic about the AGBs warning us about the evils of globalization despite their own politics being altogether dependent on international aid money. Most of the NGOs who have organized events at the World Social Forum could as well advertise their NGOs as being "run with 100 percent imported money." The AGBs believe that the government should prevent the entry of foreign capital in India. Here, an ethical issue is involved. If they think bringing in western money and intellectual know-how is so harmful, they ought to start their campaign by refusing to accept grants for their political work from donor agencies of various "imperialist" countries. Or do they believe that the foreign donations that come to them are holy but money that comes in as investment is evil? Is it because a good part of foreign aid money gets routed through them whereas the money that would enter our country as business investment would bypass the NGOs altogether, that they prefer foreign aid to foreign trade? How can we allow our economy to be run by the dictates of those whose own small organizations are not economically independent, whose livelihood comes from cashing-in on India’s poverty abroad, peddling the misery of the Indian people? Any self-respecting Indian would prefer we do business with foreigners as equal partners than appear before them as groveling supplicants as do many of our NGOs. Those who seriously oppose the inflow of foreign investments in India ought to set an example by resolving in Mumbai that: a) They will not take consultancies with foreign aid organizations; b) They will not write books for foreign publishers; c) They will write textbooks only for Indian readers and publish only with desi publishers rather than for "imperialist" West’s intellectual markets; d) They will run their NGOs only with local resources; e) They will not take teaching or research assignments in foreign universities; f) They will not participate in global networks financed by international donor agencies of "imperialist" countries to fight local causes; g) They will not issue press releases to international news channels about local issues and struggles in India. If the government were to impose similar restrictions on its receiving foreign money as it would like to impose on lesser mortals in the industrial sector and the farm sector, our NGOs would go screaming all over the world that their democratic rights and civil liberties were being violated. They want a jet-setting globalized politics for themselves but a closed-door economy for Indian farmers and industry. -Snip - Clearly, there are many in the NGO sector who want us to continue presenting ourselves before the world as beggars requiring endless doses of foreign aid rather than aspire to become active participants in the world economy. They have no problem in being tied to the apron strings of international donor agencies, but do not trust Indians to benefit from partnership in world trade. Their policy of "No to trade, Yes to aid" explains the real worth of their politics. |
| Posted by:Super Hose |
| #3 Gee, the NGOs haven't had a good week, PR-wise. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-1-30 10:09:19 PM |
| #2 If they think bringing in western money and intellectual know-how is so harmful, they ought to start their campaign by refusing to accept grants for their political work from donor agencies of various "imperialist" countries. What a great line! I'm going to find ways to use that line when I argue with my left-liberal friends. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2004-1-30 5:03:58 PM |
| #1 Kind of like 'Welfare' on a global scale. The NGO's want to keep hold of the purse strings so they can maintain influence. Exactly like the Democrats wanting people to remain on welfare or government-controlled medicare/social-security so they (democrats) can control their votes by saying things like 'Bush is going to slash { Medicare | Social Security | Welfare | etc...}!!! Vote Democratic!' in order to terrorize Seniors or people on entitlement programs. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-1-30 2:46:45 PM |