The Written Word
for December 23, 2001

Most one liners betray a surface truism but as often as not paper over some harsh realities.

Whenever a third world country defaults on a loan … or warlords intercept food supplies destined for the poor and convert them into cash … in short whenever there is an appropriate excuse, the one liner pops up – "we should look after our own poor before we take care of ‘these’ people". Then the arguments is filled out by tales of want – real want – within Canada and cut backs of government services to the needy and so on. And, for many, the case is made.

Now there is a national crisis in Argentina which is more than that – it is a regional crisis that threatens to have world wide implications.

There are two arguments to consider, I think.

In the case of the desperately needy there is simply the matter of humanity. The poorest person in Canada looks rich indeed compared to those who try unsuccessfully to eke out an existence in sub Sahara Africa where the barren belt moves inexorably southward. Or in the Horn of Africa. Surely there can be no argument against coming to the aid of those who simply cannot help themselves. If the food is being diverted, it is the supply system that must be fixed rather than using that as an excuse to do nothing.

Then there is the economic argument. Countries that cannot sustain themselves become dangerous places not only to themselves but their neighbours and the neighbourhood is often world wide. Sometimes that danger is a violent one bringing not only internal unrest but serious threats to others. Sometimes the consequences outside the country are economic. Sometimes they are both.

Giving aid is not easy. Many times through the IMF and World Bank serious and severe conditions are imposed on the government receiving the aid. Very often those conditions force the government to take social decisions that are very unhelpful politically and will make things much worse for the poorer citizens. In short, sometimes the way help is given just adds to the problem.

Often times it’s hard to have much sympathy for the country in question. Argentina, a country with bountiful resources, an old civilization and an educated population is just such a place.

But look at what the collapse of Argentina means. It has enormous impact not just on its neighbours but stock and bond markets around the world. That, in turn, has a big impact on the holdings of many people very much including elderly people on fixed incomes.

What I think has to be understood is that there are far more failures than successes in foreign aid. It’s a hard sell politically in the donor nation and it’s even harder when the donor nation, like Canada, forgives loans. But like so many things the question is, what about the alternative?

Canada, recently, forgave loans to Caribbean nations. The consequence – on a financial basis only – of not helping is that people starve and money refused with one hand has to be offered with another. The ability of that nation to buy Canadian products is diminished and in due course the problem appears as refugee claimants wash up on our shores. Lest one raise an eyebrow at that, think back on the refugee problems arising out of Viet Nam in the 80s and 90s. Look at the refugee problems besetting the European Community today.

The world cannot continue – looking at the broader picture – as 1/3 rich and 2/3 poor. All the rich countries have a role to play out of humanitarian concerns but also very much out of self interest.

Of course we must do the job better – but we must do the job even though the failures always seem to outnumber the successes, in part because we never seem to look at the successes in making our evaluations.

Canada, as one of the world’s richest nations, must always play its part in the world community and Canadians should understand that.

To all, from Wendy and me – and little Chauncey, the chocolate Labrador puppy waiting with his Mummy until he’s seven weeks old and can come home – the very happiest of Christmases and a most prosperous New Year.