Homeworks academic service


The effects of war and peace on foreign aid

It has also greatly reduced the areas that can be served by humanitarian organizations. According to Grunewald 2012an interview survey conducted in Mogadishu revealed that residents were terrified to move around, thus making survival extremely difficult during military operations. Lack of mobility makes access to basic resources like water, food, and wood almost impossible.

Provision of humanitarian aid in Somalia has also changed with the nature and phases of war. In 1990s when the war in Mogadishu was mainly between different factions, the city was divided into enclaves. Accordingly, in order to survive, people had only two options, either to hide or move. Those providing aid could be able to maneuver access and deliveries because confrontation were limited to a few areas.

The Effects of War and Peace on Foreign Aid

Instead, they have taken advantage of the aid to further their personal goals. For instance, in 1970s the government in the country under the leadership of Siad Barre took advantage of international assistance initiated following the harsh food shortage between 1973 and 1974. This was also the case during the Ogaden War pitting Somalia and Ethiopia.

  • According to Warsame 2012 , foreign aid to Somalia has received similar criticism as the aid to the rest of Africa;
  • This is mainly due to its effect on the continent and failure to improve standards of living;
  • Following increased financial injections by the UN to Mogadishu, conflict between sub-clan militias escalated;
  • As a result, foreign aid has in most cases benefited those with relative power as opposed to those with critical need for such assistance.

Effect of Foreign Aid on Poverty and Warfare Provision of foreign aid to Somalia has not helped to reduce warfare and poverty. This has been fuelled by lack of community participation in targeting.

Community representation in the process of selecting the needy people to access the foreign aid has often been unbalanced. Self-appointed leaders and community elders are mostly involved in making these decisions. As a result, foreign aid has in most cases benefited those with relative power as opposed to those with critical need for such assistance.

Access to these resources is limited to those with control of information resources and access to specific areas such as displacement camps. These players make decisions on who should receive aid and in other scenario require the recipient to remit certain portions of the aid. In most cases, these key players in distribution of aid are political actors, businesspersons, senior community or clan members, and other influential groups and individuals.

Save Time and Improve Your Marks with Cite This For Me

Foreign aid has also fuelled animosity between different factions in the country as opposed to bringing about peace and stability. According to Perrin 1998aid can increase the level of conflicts in a country. It can make the situation worse by setting up a parallel economy, which accelerates the rate of a collapsing state.

Following increased financial injections by the UN to Mogadishu, conflict between sub-clan militias escalated. Increased rates of aid diversion and an increasing demand for protection of humanitarian officials led to more violence.

  1. This was also the case during the Ogaden War pitting Somalia and Ethiopia.
  2. Effect of Foreign Aid on Poverty and Warfare Provision of foreign aid to Somalia has not helped to reduce warfare and poverty. It has also greatly reduced the areas that can be served by humanitarian organizations.
  3. These kinds of payments were common and acceptable because many agencies needed to have some access to the needy population that was of great economic value.

Many leaders of different factions during UNOSOM period used funds from international sources to garner support and cling onto power as well as improve their stands as warlords. To operate in Somalia, humanitarian agencies had to pay huge amounts of money for protection purposes to different authorities and guards.

  • According to Warsame 2012 , foreign aid to Somalia has received similar criticism as the aid to the rest of Africa;
  • For instance, in 1970s the government in the country under the leadership of Siad Barre took advantage of international assistance initiated following the harsh food shortage between 1973 and 1974;
  • These players make decisions on who should receive aid and in other scenario require the recipient to remit certain portions of the aid.

These kinds of payments were common and acceptable because many agencies needed to have some access to the needy population that was of great economic value. The number of agencies operating in Somalia during the period increased and the pay for staffs working as either programme officers or security personnel skyrocketed. According to Warsame 2012foreign aid to Somalia has received similar criticism as the aid to the rest of Africa.

This is mainly due to its effect on the continent and failure to improve standards of living. It is suggested that despite increased rates of aid to the continent, the levels of poverty have gone up as opposed to declining. It has trapped these developing nations in cycles of corruption, dependency, market distortion, and increased poverty. Arguably, this aid benefits mainly the ruling elites and supports corrupt regimes.

The largest proportion of the aid does not reach the intended population. A good example is a study in 1998 that indicated that aid in Somalia by World Bank led to increased dependency on foreign food, affected local prices, and lowered motivation to grow local food.

According to Maren 2002foreign aid has turned Somali that was once self-sufficient to a chronically dependent nation on foreign food. Further, he criticizes humanitarian organizations operating in the country like Save the Children and CARE, for pursuing their own goals as opposed to helping to reduce the famine.