You don't have to comment on the specifics, you just have to relate them to the big picture you draw. I say there is lack of coherence.
Debt forgiveness and economic aid is part of that solution, but ultimately the political and economic development can only be done by the people themselves.
The articles I quoted give an example when debt forgiveness is made conditional on the local government abolishing what has been in place before: grain stocks, price controls, free distribution; and set free processess that made the situation worse: trading of agricultural products to the highest bidder (exporting it to neighbouring countries); and all that at a time when the overall production shortage was not in any way catastrophic: a mere 11% below average. None of this you can blame on the locals and lack of development -- this is the 'development' we prescribe to them. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
If Niger is still exporting food - what is the income derived being used for? Is there an internal tribal/class/elite structure whereby some starve and some are relatively well off? Are their huge internal inefficiencies, waste, corruption, and lack of planning? Are there projects in train which can improve the overall productive capacity and income distribution of the economy?
I'm afraid the specifics ARE very important, and blanket assertions that "its all the West's fault" don't really help to resolve the problem because "the West" is never going to take 100% responsibility for resolving the problems, and the whole point of development is to devolve responsibility, power and capability to the the local polity. "It's a mystery to me - the game commences, For the usual fee - plus expenses, Confidential information - it's in my diary..."
That's nice words. In effect, it turned out to be about giving Western companies better access to local markets, capitalising on legacy dependency. But whatever the reasoning, the lethal effect on local population is the same.
If Niger is still exporting food
Not Niger, traders. (If the specifics are important, let's read with precision.) You understand, private enterprise.
- what is the income derived being used for?
That's irrelevant. Whether that income is turned back into the economy or spent on luxury (which means that ultimately the money goes back to us in the West) or gets lost in corruption, people will starve. (Unless you use money from selling food to buy food for food distribution, which doesn't make any sense.)
Is there an internal tribal/class/elite structure whereby some starve and some are relatively well off?
I refer you back to the article. The problem is that the poorest can't afford food at market prices, even subsidized prices.
Are their huge internal inefficiencies, waste, corruption, and lack of planning?
That's again irrelevant. As I said, upon Western demands, planning already in place was abolished.
Are there projects in train which can improve the overall productive capacity and income distribution of the economy?
That's again irrelevant. Wait, no: if such projects would not be in place, Western demands of neoliberal reform are knowingly putting locals at risk.
blanket assertions that "its all the West's fault"
You saw no such blanket assertion above, neither from me nor in the quoted articles. You saw quite specific points based on a real-world example. Meanwhile, what I saw from you were blanket assertions (or at least the insinuation of blanket assertions in the form of questions) without any use of evidence.
help to resolve the problem
I'm talking about a problem caused by the West, a minor shortage that wouldn't have turned into a famine without Western intervention, all this while ostensibly working on resolving earlier problems - at their own terms.
the whole point of development is to devolve responsibility, power and capability to the the local polity.
Prescribing economic policy is no devolution of responsibility, power and capability. It's the seizure of them. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
