Leading economist and director of Earth Institute discusses aid and global warming
Posts Tagged ‘Aid and development’
In conversation with Jeffrey Sachs
UN faces $5bn aid gap in recession
Half-yearly report says members countries have less funds to spare while poverty is on the increase in developing world
The United Nations is warning of a $4.8bn (£2.9bn) shortfall in funding to tackle humanitarian crises in the world’s poorest countries, as the credit crunch leaves developed world governments with little cash to spare.
Delivering its half-yearly update about emergency fund-raising, John Holmes, of the UN’s Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, said that while the UN’s emergency appeals had received more funds than at the same time last year, the economic crisis was exacerbating poverty and increasing need.
“It is clear that the global recession puts pressure on the aid budgets of all donor governments, but of course it puts immeasurably more pressure on crises-stricken people in poor countries,” he said.
The UN has raised a total of $4.6bn over the past six months for its humanitarian appeals – but Holmes said it had identified $4.8bn of “unmet needs” – the biggest gap ever.
Holmes compared the shortfall in funding for the world’s poorest people with the vast sums spent by the US, UK and other developed countries on bailing out their banking sectors.
“If just a fraction of the hundreds of billions of dollars recently committed by governments to private financial institutions were allocated to humanitarian action, these appeals could already be fully funded, and those in need could be getting the best available protection and assistance, on time,” Holmes said.
He singled out Kenya, Palestine and Zimbabwe as states whose financing needs have become more severe over the past six months, and said the UN is keen to raise more resources during the rest of the year.
Holmes said humanitarian needs in just one country, Somalia, had decreased recently – but only because a food aid project had been cancelled due to rising insecurity for the staff working on the ground.
Aid agencies have repeatedly sounded the alarm since the global downturn began last year about the disproportionate impact on poor countries, which often rely heavily on export earnings.
World trade volumes have collapsed over the past six months, and unlike their richer counterparts, governments in the developing world find it hard to raise funds on international capital markets. Only a small proportion of the funding pledged at the G20 summit in London earlier this year to combat the impact of the crisis was targeted at the world’s poor.
Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi came under international pressure in the run-up to the G8 summit he hosted in L’Aquila earlier this month, after cutting Italy’s aid budget.
At a recent conference in New York, organised by the president of the UN general assembly, member-states pledged to offer extra aid, but little has so far been forthcoming.
Fears of food crisis in Katine
• Katine farmers worry about food shortages
• Amref and Farm-Africa assess food situation
• Soroti district ‘experiencing famine’
Explainer: The food crisis in Uganda
Julius Eilu, 38, is worried. On a Sunday afternoon in Katine, north-east Uganda, he, his wife, Petelina Akello, and nine children sit around a small mound – no more than 1kg – of cassava flour meal, accompanied by wild vegetables.
“Now that they [the children] have had a meal during the day, at night we’ll just convince them to sleep,” said Eilu, his hair unkempt, shirt unbuttoned, face unwashed. “I keep worrying about what to do if this situation does not change.”
The situation he refers to is the severe food shortages being experienced in the Teso region of Uganda.
And what will Eilu, a farmer, do? “I don’t know,” he laughs, as people here often do at a grim situation. “I don’t know. Maybe I have to stop fathering children.”
There are many like Eilu in this region and in other parts of Uganda.
Earlier this month the government acknowledged that food shortages in the country had reached famine levels.
Soroti, the district in which Katine sub-county is found, is one of 17 regions in the north and east of Uganda that the government has defined as experiencing famine. While Katine has not reached this level, food shortages and rising prices indicate a potential crisis.
In the north and east of Uganda at least 35 people are reported to have recently died of starvation. The government said last week that so far 51 districts had requested relief food. Local and national leaders blame the famine on weather calamities starting with the floods of late 2007. After the floods came drought, tempered by late and poor rains, which resulted in food stress during much of 2008. The same pattern recurred in the first half of this year, culminating into the current drought.
Like many farmers in Katine, Eilu and his wife hoped to begin harvesting food last month, but they got nothing. “We planted one acre of millet, half an acre of sorghum and about a quarter acre of groundnuts but they have dried in the garden,” said Akello, as she showed me the empty granary in her compound. “And the cassava we planted last year did poorly again because of the drought.”
The government has announced it is allocating UShs 20bn (US$10m) to buy relief food and is seeking another $85m. But this money is yet to reach Katine. Christine Agwero, a member of the Katine sub-county council, says in her parish of Ochuloi many families are now having one meal a day, while children are starting to skip school so as not to miss out on that meal.
Calls for action
The district chairman of Soroti, Stephen Ochola, said the entire district was affected by the food crisis, including Serere and Kasilo counties, which usually grow a lot of food. Although Soroti had not received any food relief, Ochola hoped for help from the central government and agencies like the World Food Programme (WFP) and the Soroti Catholic Diocese Integrated Development Organisation (SOCADIDO).
Earlier this month, these two organisations and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) carried out a rapid assessment of the region’s food situation and their report was expected last week.
The head of SOCADIDO, Father Silver Opio, said only after such a report would the agencies determine the next course of action. Last year the church organisation, relying on donations from larger bodies like the American Catholic Relief Services, provided some food relief to Katine and other areas.
Opio said he had asked the priests in charge of the diocese’s 22 parishes in the Teso region to send him their assessment of the food situation in their parishes. He said getting accurate data was difficult because even parishes that were deemed to have reasonable levels of food had pockets of starvation that needed to be addressed.
But Ochola, a member of the opposition party Forum for Democratic Change, said that since last year, Teso leaders have been warning the government of possible famine because of the back-to-back drought, but no action was taken.
“May be if, by God’s grace, we get the second rains, we will save the situation. If we don’t get the second rains, next year will be worse,” he said.
Last weekend, the Ugandan president, Yoweri Museveni, sought to reassure people in Teso of his government’s support. The New Vision newspaper quoted him as telling people in Bukedea district that “the people will not die of hunger because crops have failed”. The government would provide food relief and later farm implements and planting materials.
That would pleasantly surprise Eilu, who thinks an NGO, rather than the government, might offer assistance. In the last few weeks Eilu has been selling firewood in Soroti town to earn money to buy food from the market, but there is only a limited number of trees.
The family could offer their farm labour in exchange for food or cash. But with the dry weather, said Akello, there is no farm work to be had. Other people have resorted to selling goats or chickens to raise money for food, leaving themselves even more vulnerable.
“I think I may have to sell my one cow,” said Julius Epudu, a father of four from Ajobi village, Katine, as he surveys his dry, half a hectare (1 acre) garden of sorghum. “When these ones [children] start crying and I have no more money, I may have to sell that cow.”
Affect on project
The food shortages are starting to affect aspects of the Amref project in Katine. In Ajobi village, in Katine parish, one member of the village savings and loan association (VSLA) has disappeared without repaying a loan of UShs 60,000 ($30). The member had borrowed the money in April with the intention of using it for petty trade, but he has so far failed to pay it back and has fled the village.
“Actually some members have proposed that we dissolve the group and share out the savings, but I have said no,” said chairwoman Stella Apeduna.
Already the groundnuts and vegetable seeds distributed to farmers three months ago have gone to waste, as plants are drying in the gardens. Amref fears that contributions by users for the upkeep of water sources could reduce as families use all their money for food.
The health component of the project may not be spared either. Other parts of Uganda have reported severe malnutrition and Sam Agom, the in-charge medic at Tiriri health centre, fears similar problems may be experienced in Katine.
“Right now we don’t have anti-malaria medicines and our people have been selling food to buy medicines that we prescribe. Now if they have very little food, the disease situation in the community could get worse,” Agom said.
Amref’s country director Joshua Kyallo said the organisation was gravely concerned about the situation. Amref and Farm-Africa, which is offering technical support on the livelihoods component of the Katine project, were now gathering information on the effect of the food shortages on the community and the project, and would discuss the matter with district leaders, line ministries in Kampala and organisations like the WFP.
“If we see that the situation is getting out of control, or if government declares this a crisis situation, then Amref would make a separate appeal to respond to the problem,” Kyallo said.
George Mukkath, the director of programmes at Farm-Africa, said he was concerned about the low availability of food in the sub-county because the next harvest was “a long way down the road”. He said the fact that the price of maize had nearly doubled in Katine was one clear indicator that there was something chronically wrong.
Farmers needed more crop varieties that were drought-resistant. The 18 farmers groups established in Katine were given a new variety of cassava “but if they can introduce other crops which can withstand water stress, they will get a crop”, said Mukkath.
“We need to have wider discussions with Amref on how to deal with the current food crisis. We are talking to them and they are talking to people on the ground.”
He added: “I see an opportunity in this situation to address long-term food security. How it can be integrated into health, education and water and sanitation programmes. If there is no food security, health suffers, children don’t go to school. It’s important we all have discussions at a later stage on how to address these things.”
For Julius Eilu, a member of the Emorikikinos farmers group, the situation is getting out of hand.
Cash offered for drought plans
Katine’s 18 farmers groups offered money to help cope with drought and food shortages affecting north-east Uganda
Katine farmers are being encouraged to apply for funds to support income generating ideas to improve livelihoods in the sub-county.
The African Medical and Research Foundation (Amref), which is implementing a three-year development project in the sub-county, with assistance from Farm-Africa, has put up UShs 18m (around US$8,700) to fund proposals submitted by the 18 farmers groups.
The move follows a drought in the region that has left crops destroyed and many families in dire need.
At the beginning of the season, the farmers groups, which cover around 540 households, were given seeds under the project’s livelihoods component. But erratic rainfalls have not produced the intended harvest.
Livelihoods project assistant David Ogwang says climate change had proved that it was “dangerous” to rely on giving farmers seeds. “We want to supply farmers with inputs as well as provide them with alternative income generating activities. That is why we have asked the farmers to submit their proposals stating the kind of enterprises they would want to run,” he said.
Each group has been allocated UShs 1m and has been invited to propose ways in which it could be spent. Amref is advising farmers on which enterprise to choose, according to the ability of each group to manage it, and will evaluate each proposal. Farmers will not be given the money directly. Amref will conduct any procurement involved.
The scheme will start off with affordable ventures, such as supporting farmers to buy hens, or goats. It would not run to the purchase of cattle. Ogwang says Amref would not consider such expensive ideas until it was sure the farmers were capable of taking care of the animals. Katine has no veterinary services, although the project has trained some animal health workers to help bridge the gap.
So far, most of the farmers’ proposals have been for funding for animals.
“We have nothing; all our crops have been destroyed by the drought. That is why we, as Ajobi farmers, are changing to sheep rearing. You know, the problem is that the project over emphasised farm inputs without considering the factor of climate. In farming there are two things with crops; you either lose or gain, but it’s not the case with rearing animals,” said Charles Otuba, the group’s vice-chairman.
Members of the Olwelai farmers group have applied for money to rear goats.
Olocoi’s farmers group wants to use the money to enhance its village savings and loans association (VSLA). The group’s chairman, Cornelius Onaba, says the decision to zero in on VSLAs follows a consensus that this could accelerate living standards more quickly.
“Each group is supposed to get UShs 1m to run enterprises of their choice, but this money is too little to cover all the 30 members of a [VSLA] group. So what we have agreed in our proposal is that we support our VSLA such that members are able to borrow money and use it to run their business. We also agreed that each member who borrows that money will have to pay certain interest. In this way we believe that the money would help us, rather than using it to buy goats,” Onaba said.
Whether Onaba’s plan is approved, however, is unclear. While Amref is interested in enhancing VSLAs, which are run in Katine by Care International and local NGO Uweso, the rules around these associations may not allow for extra money to be added.
Send in the accountants
Many of Africa’s leaders will have been distressed to hear Obama’s message on aid conditions
Africa’s leaders have become accustomed to a protective stance of victimhood. They only need to say “neo-colonial” for world leaders to back off from criticism. And moats have made the problem worse: imagine the retort to a British politician complaining about African governance. Obama’s arrival in Africa was preceded by his spectacular apology to the Muslim world, so many African leaders must have been hoping for more of the absolving balm of western guilt. They did not get it. Instead, Obama delivered three unwelcome messages.
The most explosive was that Africa’s core problem is its own misgovernance: Africa’s persistent poverty has been largely self-inflicted. Obama is the first western leader to have the political space to deliver this tough but necessary message. He does not need a photo-op with smiling Africans to signal to voters back home that he is a compassionate sort of guy. Nor does he risk being denounced. His protection is in part that it is not possible to imagine Obama in a pith helmet; but beyond that, nobody can seriously question Obama’s sincere concern to help his father’s continent. His statement cannot be interpreted as being the preliminaries to neglect.
Second, the solution to misgovernance will come from within Africa: the key struggle is internal. By choosing to visit Ghana – which recently hosted an honest election, with the governing party narrowly losing – Obama flagged up that leadership depends critically on the integrity of the political process.
Obama has made a clarion call for change, but more importantly, he is the change. Africans see Obama as a fellow African, but unlike most of Africa’s own leaders he personifies the leadership values that he preaches. Poor leadership is not intrinsic to African leadership; it is intrinsic only to the people who have jostled their way into presidencies.
Why has the selection of African leadership been so disastrous? The problem lies not with Africans but with the structure of the polities in which they live. Around the world the chance of a stolen election soars if the society is poor, small, and resource-rich. Even then it is not inevitable: Botswana started with just these features yet it is a functioning democracy. But such countries need strong checks and balances such as a free press and what political scientists call “veto points” – independent bases of power that can block presidential decisions. The democratisation that swept across Africa after the fall of the Soviet Union in most cases amounted to little more than elections.
Which takes us to Obama’s final message: America will help, where it can, to tilt the balance towards brave people struggling for change. American money will be conditional upon decent governance. Where public money can be looted, the political class – no matter what its original composition – will end up peopled by crooks. In Africa aid is such a major component of public money that the scope for capture matters enormously.
To date America and Europe have chosen different mechanisms for aid: Europe has favoured budget support, in which the recipient government decides how the money is spent; America has preferred project aid, where the money is tied to a specific expenditure. In badly governed countries the effect has been the same: the money has been captured by politicians who are the core of the problem. Project aid only gives the illusion of integrity: governments get donors to finance the projects they would have done anyway, and this releases their own money for the presidential wish list. It is the wish list that project aid is really paying for.
The Obama principle provides the basis for a new, common approach. Where governance is satisfactory, as in Ghana, budget support is the only sensible basis for aid. Europe has it right: why should US politicians try to dictate to the Ghanaian government how to spend aid when Ghanaians are able to hold their government to account? At the other end of the governance spectrum neither budget support nor project aid can tackle the problem.
We can learn from Paddy Ashdown‘s experience in Bosnia. He concluded that what he had needed were not doctors without borders, but accountants without borders. Where governance is inadequate, aid should only come with an army of accountants able to ensure that it is not captured. The missing piece of international architecture is an independent assessment of the integrity of budget systems. Where a budget system was certified as satisfactory, Europe and America could safely converge on budget support. Where it was found unsatisfactory, aid would be conditional upon accountants. Governments would know that to get foreign accountants off their backs they need to build systems that withstand scrutiny. The rationale for cleaning up budgets is not that it would safeguard our money, but that it would clean up politics, and build on the distress that Obama’s speech will have caused Africa’s crooked politicians.
Time for action on agriculture
With announcements on agriculture expected from the G8 today, Farm-Africa’s new chairman, Martin Evans, tells Liz Ford what Africa’s subsistence farmers really need
Asked what he would like the G8 to do for African farmers this week, the new chairman of Farm-Africa, Martin Evans, doesn’t hesitate to offer a list. Top of that list is money for research into new disease-resistant seed varieties, improved animal healthcare, particularly in those areas vulnerable to climate change, and help for farmers to access new technology and markets.
“What we’d like to see is basically the same thing as African farmers. We need to look at what they want and how the G8 can help supply these things,” says the agricultural economist.
“Money from the G8 that is put into agriculture research systems can have huge benefits. Fund additional research into improved seeds and animal disease prevention and you will offer a safeguard for years ahead. If they [G8] are really paying for agriculture, let’s see some money go into research.”
Farm-Africa is working with the African Medical and Research Foundation (Amref) on improving livelihoods in Katine, north-east Uganda, as part of the Guardian’s three-year development project in the region.
Working with 18 farmers groups in the rural sub-county, the project has seen the introduction of new disease-resistant, high-yielding cassava, which has just produced its first harvest, and plans are underway to build a storage centre for crops, which will allow farmers to sell in bulk and hopefully get a better deal. Mobile phones are increasingly being used by farmers to find the best place to sell their goods.
Crisis talks
After more than 20 years of neglect from the international community, the world food crisis has pushed agriculture if not to the top, then certainly high up on to the G8 agenda this year, which could mean real benefits for farmers. Today a new initiative to fund farming and to tackle global hunger are due to be announced by leaders meeting in Italy, which reportedly could entail an investment of $12bn over the next three years.
The UK’s Department for International Development (DfID) has already laid out its commitment to revitalising agriculture and improving food security in its white paper, published on Monday. What it promises is not dissimilar to Evans’ wishlist. The paper, Building our Common Future, talks about helping subsistence farmers to get seeds and fertilisers, credit and access to markets, and of supporting agricultural research. It mentions “doubling agricultural production in Africa over the next 20 years” and calls on the international community to deliver the $20bn of new funding for food and agriculture promised last year (perhaps an inauspicious sign for any further cash pledges).
“We are just waking up to the fact that agriculture has been neglected and we’re seeing the impact of that. It’s absolutely true that the volume of aid and financial flows going into agriculture has been in decline over the last two decades,” says Evans, who took over as chairman this week.
The wake up call was triggered by the spike in food prices in 2007-08. Although prices for staple crops have now stabilised, DfID is still predicting long-term problems in producing and procuring food for nearly 1 billion people. The alarming rise in food prices coincided with the publication of the World Bank’s World Development Report 2008, which for the first time in more than 25 years focused on agriculture. The report said agriculture was “a vital development tool” for achieving the Millennium Development Goal to halve poverty by 2015. “The World Development Report refocused everyone’s attention,” says Evans.
Of course, helping farmers involves more than handing out seeds and discussing how new technologies can increase yields – it’s about making farming viable. “Food security is more than growing more food in your own backyard, it’s more of everything. Food security is about making farming more productive and more profitable. You need to improve access to markets. [Subsistence farmers] really don’t have good access to markets. You need investment in roads and communication technology to ensure trading conditions are right. Some money can usefully and sensibly be put into basic things like that.”
He adds: “It’s very difficult for poor people to amass any savings, so we can help them a lot by giving a bit of capital. I’m not suggesting that things are handed out on a plate. But we need to help to create the conditions that make things accessible and ensure farmers are encouraged and convinced that benefits outweigh the risks, and to take an entrepreneurial approach to things. It’s not about us turning up in our 4x4s, dumping things and leaving, it’s about working with farmers to identify problems and come up with plans. It’s very much about people helping themselves.”
He adds that farmers, the majority of whom are women, need educating on new technologies, such as how to conserve water and better irrigate land. But they also need to be convinced these new ideas are going to work. In Katine demonstration farms were set up to allow villagers to do just that.
Passing on the benefits
But with any new money promised by the international community comes the question of how it will get to farmers. Evans admits implementation is the hard bit, but that’s where NGOs like Farm-Africa step in. Donors are increasingly channelling aid through governments, but there has also been an increase in cash filtered through NGOs in recent years. “Assuming money is allocated by the G8, we hope a lot of it will come the way of good NGOs. We can do things neither governments or the commercial sector can do. But we need both.”
Looking to the future, Evans, who has more than 35 years experience working in agriculture, rural development and agribusiness, would like Farm-Africa to explore how large-scale business can benefit smallholder farmers, with whom the charity works throughout east Africa. “There are good examples where large-scale business can connect with small farmers by buying their products under contract, processing them for them and providing advice and seeds and technical support,” he says. “We can’t do these for all crops in all places, but I would like to see Farm-Africa exploring more opportunities for merging large scale agriculture and business to benefit small groups.”
“Like it or not, large-scale business is a fact. It can be a threat, but can also be a great way to look to see how Farm-Africa can open up these opportunities for the benefit of small farmers.”
Can white paper eliminate poverty?
The Department for International Development’s white paper sets out the UK government’s position on aid and development over the coming years. But does it go far enough?
The release of Department for International Development’s white paper this week, ahead of the G8 summit in Italy, sets out the UK government’s position on aid and development in an increasingly fraught and complex global environment.
The paper, Eliminating World Poverty: Building our Common Future, includes a renewed commitment to push 0.7% of Britain’s Gross National Income into international development, reaching ï¿¡9bn by 2013, and a doubling of funding (ï¿¡1bn) for African infrastructure programmes including transport, energy and trade.
There is a strong emphasis on supporting “fragile states”, with 50% of new bilateral funding going to the most vulnerable nations, and an emphasis on helping build security and justice alongside health, education and sanitation.
Climate change was also high on the paper’s agenda with a renewed commitment of ï¿¡800m to support climate change adaptation and new pilot programmes looking at initiatives such as low carbon innovation centres and a “global climate change knowledge network”.
So far it has been broadly well received by the development world. In a blog for the Overseas Development Institute, director Alison Evans says the white paper is a “valiant attempt to walk that difficult – and often blurred – line between morality and pragmatism” and pinpoints the crucial link between international development and national self-interest.
Nevertheless Evans does voice concern for what she sees as scant detail about how aid will be delivered differently or the difficult choices that DfID needs to make to deliver the transparency, scrutiny and accountability it promises throughout the paper.
The response from the NGO world has also been cautiously optimistic. Oxfam is largely positive, but expresses concern that the paper’s focus on security and justice in fragile states will come at the expense of social and economic development and health and education services.
WaterAid applauds the paper’s commitment to target support to the poorest people to help them through the financial crisis. Only 24% of global aid for water and sanitation now goes to the least developed countries.
However, despite this commitment, the NGO says there is not enough recognition of the lack of investment in improving water, sanitation and hygiene as part of wider health programmes. “It’s time for DfID to seek to fully understand the underlying causes of slow progress in health,” said policy director Henry Northover.
The white paper is being presented by the government as evidence of the UK’s commitment to honour its promises made at Gleneagles four years ago, and to put pressure on other rich nations to do the same.
But does the white paper go far enough?
Last week, in an online chat on the Katine blog, international development minister Gareth Thomas said the white paper would answer all question marks over the UK’s position on international development and aid. Has it achieved this?
The showbiz writer who went to war
Jane Bussmann used to pen facile interviews with Hollywood starlets. Then she decided to cover genocide in Africa. Why? She had a crush on a peace envoy, she tells Patrick Barkham
A comic novel about child soldiers is a difficult concept to grasp, particularly when it is written by a showbiz journalist based in Hollywood who travelled to Africa because she had a crush on an American peace negotiator. The Worst Date Ever, the true story of the last six years of Jane Bussmann’s life, is part romcom, part celebrity satire and part excoriating account of the failure to apprehend Joseph Kony, the Ugandan terrorist who has led his army of child soldiers on a 20-year campaign of hostage-taking, exploitation and murder in east Africa.
“I’m not laughing at sex slaves, I’m laughing at our excuses for not saving them,” says Bussmann, when we meet. A petite woman who looks like she could be Tracey Emin’s younger sister, she rattles out sentences peppered with expletives and dry one-liners. “It’s a book about me thinking I’ve got to change my life, with catastrophic consequences, and also the silliness of chasing a bloke you are never in a million years going to cop off with.” She calls it method writing: “You get way funnier shit in real life than you ever do in fiction.”
Bussmann became a showbiz journalist by accident. She grew up in Muswell Hill, north London, wanting to be a physicist. “Space travel seemed awesome and I remember Look and Learn books where we all wore jumpsuits to work,” she says. The future appeared perfect: “I could be really fat and wear a jumpsuit and live off pills. What could I do in this world of jumpsuits and pills? I’d probably just work on time travel. But that didn’t materialise due to the enormous quantities of booze I consumed after 16.”
Physics was supplanted by rebellion and the only A-level Bussmann picked up was in art. She was then inspired to write sitcoms by meeting Johnny Speight, the screenwriter who created Alf Garnett, when her journalist father interviewed him for the Guardian. For a decade, she scratched around the alternative comedy scene, writing for The Day Today, Brass Eye and So Graham Norton and creating a flurry of edgy sitcom ideas – about two rabbits being drafted into war and chainsmoking mums – which tended not to get made.
After moving to Hollywood to pursue her screenwriting career, she was forced to write about celebrities for women’s magazines to pay her bills. With her love of, as she puts it, booze, blasphemy and bad-taste jokes, she was spectacularly ill-suited to LA. “I can never make up my mind if LA is a really bitchy girls’ public school in which everyone is foul to each other all day long and constantly on a diet, or Jane Austen’s England where you can make a terrible social faux pas at any time but with longer life expectancy so this shit goes on for 70 years instead of 40,” she says.
It was the George Bush boom years and California was basking in “the golden age of stupid”. She would arrange an interview with Britney Spears, her entourage would cancel it, and Bussmann would have to concoct a story about how grounded and healthy Spears was when she was actually, at that time, a chaotic mess. The only good celebrities she met were Dolly Parton (“When you talk to her, you believe everything is going to be all right,” says Bussmann. “You just want to sit on her knee and your eyes are being sucked down into this valley of tits”) and Marilyn Manson (“You swoon when you interview him because he’s so gracious and funny”).
So she loyally lied about her celebrity subjects, indulging their opinions on chihuahuas and religion, until she interviewed Ashton Kutcher around the time he got together with Demi Moore. The interview was published with fictional quotes inserted by an editor, Kutcher and his lawyers went nuclear and Bussmann, who denied inventing the quotes, figured that now that she was hated by both her celebrity subjects and her journalist paymasters, she had better escape.
When she spotted a picture of John Prendergast, a US conflict negotiator who specialised in African affairs and sought to help end the conflict in Uganda, she fantasised about a route out. Prendergast “wasn’t just hot; he was wise,” she wrote. She fancied him, and as her “only job skill was turning people into celebrities” she decided to travel to Uganda to meet Prendergast and write a profile of him as the pin-up boy of peace, the George Clooney of conflict resolution.
She blagged a commission from the Sunday Times and travelled to a remote town in Uganda, only to find that Prendergast had dashed off again. Funny, excruciating and utterly exhausting, her book tells of her desperate blundering around Uganda, being spied on and befriended, and her gradual discovery of the evil surrounding Kony and his Lord’s Resistance Army.
She has a keen eye for detail, from the marbled-wash jeans on sale in the markets to the “purposeful white people dotted everywhere” who drive self-important white Toyotas with UNHCR or UNESCO on the side, “the international acronyms for don’t shoot”, and her experiences expose some uncomfortable parallels between celebrity journalism and the life of a foreign correspondent. In both Uganda and Hollywood, people in power try to bludgeon journalists into accepting their twisted versions of the truth. In both worlds, Bussmann has her reality tested daily by bullies.
Her self-deprecating descriptions of her cluelessness might, however, suggest that any idiot can become a foreign correspondent. Can anyone really pitch up overseas and uncover complex stories of violence and corruption? “A real reporter could have done it in slightly less than six years and maybe covered another couple of wars in the meantime. They could have also done it without dropping Biros on the floor with your shirt undone and whatever desperate tricks I used to get close up to colonels,” she says.
She was spurred on by guilt, because when she met children in camps who had been rescued from Kony’s army, she “very foolishly” promised them she would help, “something a real reporter would never do in a million years”, she says.
While the camps of terrified and disorientated Ugandans displaced by the fighting in the north of their country are emptying today, Kony is still a wanted man, holed up in a remote corner of the Democratic Republic of Congo and continuing to commit atrocities with his army of young conscripts and hostages.
Between the one-liners, Bussmann argues that Kony is the “perfect villain” who helped his opponents in the Ugandan government attract foreign aid while some in the army enriched themselves. “The fact that an army of 40,000 couldn’t catch one man and a bunch of kids, who at the beginning just had machetes, is highly suspicious,” she says. “Look at the ghost soldiers. This is an army that according to the [Ugandan] government newspaper have up to 60% of soldiers in certain units missing because they never existed. Corrupt bosses were claiming salaries for soldiers who didn’t exist. I don’t know much about ghosts but I know they are fucking shit at catching child kidnappers. They are right up there with werewolves, they are unreliable and useless.”
Bussmann is scathing about ineffective international efforts to stop Kony and badly targeted aid money that has poured into Uganda. For many years the west assisted the country’s long-serving president, Yoweri Museveni, and elevated him into a golden boy “when for 10 years he’s had these people living in camps and hasn’t been able to catch this one guy for 20 years,” she says. “Look at Hillary Clinton’s [1998] comment, ‘There are no easy answers.’ One nun rescued 109 girls [from Kony] and the Ugandan army rescued one. There are some easy answers. The army is bent.”
Bussmann also aims her comic fury at many of the charities working in Uganda. She thinks they helped prop up a failing regime. Charities might point out that it is almost impossible to work in a country unless you are at least tolerated by the host government. It is easy for a maverick outsider to diagnose the ills; far harder to be a charity worker and cure them. “Look at the International Committee of the Red Cross. You can’t take the argument that you can’t piss off the people you are trying to work next to. The ICRC were aware of the death camps during the second world war but they didn’t speak up for that precise reason. You don’t work with these people: you call the cops.”
The charity projects that work, argues Bussmann, are “micro-financed”, accountable and transparent, and usually where small amounts of money are “given to women who need it and know what to do with it”. (One charity boss told her that 90% of women paid back loans whereas only 10% of men did.)
It would not be giving much away to say that Bussmann’s romantic quest – to bag Prendergast – ends in failure but she is actually quite coy about their meetings in her book. Did she ever seduce him? “We did go on a date. He might have been under the illusion it was an interview. I naively believed there was a moment when there was an ‘in’. Then I just looked at him and thought, you are so out of my league. He’s like Clooney, he belongs to the world so,” she sighs with jokey theatricality, “I let him go.” They met again last week at a conference in Washington. “He looked at me slightly differently when he saw me so I think he’s read the book. He looked slightly nervous.”
Before she wrote the book, Bussmann turned this extraordinary tale into a one-woman play, performing off Broadway and at the Edinburgh Festival. She has sold the film rights and is now working on the script. Given her contempt for Los Angeles, I am surprised when she says she is still living there. Why did she return? “Fuck knows.” Are there any good things about it? “The salads are huge. And old Hollywood – you feel you are surrounded by benevolent ghosts.”
Although she is planning to travel back to Africa to write a TV drama set in the Congo, she is still based in LA for her other work commitments. She is developing a sitcom and writing a book about her terrible dating experiences in California called Awful Nights. “I’ll do that and get the fuck out. I’m going to live in Nairobi. I’ve got it all planned.” Why Nairobi? Her answer is typical of Bussmann. “Lunatics. You don’t go a single day without an insane conversation”.
• The Worst Date Ever: War Crimes, Hollywood Heart-Throbs and Other Abominations is published by Macmillan at £12.99. Bussmann will be performing her show Bussmann’s Holiday at the Assembly Rooms, Edinburgh, from 24-30 August.
The anti-aid agenda
If Berlusconi sets the tone at next week’s G8, it will be a disaster for a cherished Labour goal
The G8 is less than a week away but already the Italian presidency is seen as having a disastrous impact on aid. Uninterested, disorganised and short is likely to be the summary of the summit by the end of next week: the G8 leaders, according to the latest plans, will have only three hours sitting down together.
While the developing world reels from the economic downturn, Italy has shown no ambition for the aid agenda. It is falling dramatically behind on its own commitments made in 2005 at Gleneagles and is instituting draconian cuts of 56% in its aid budget this year. Italy will end up with the lowest rate of aid – less than 0.1% of GDP – in the G8, despite its reiterations of commitment to the European agreement to reach 0.51% by 2010.
Italy’s lamentable performance is prompting a crisis of identity for the G8. Accusations of summit ceremony with no substance have always dogged the event, but given that it no longer represents all the biggest economies (China is not a member), or the biggest populations (such as China or India), its one last claim to world leadership has been as the world’s biggest aid donor. But even that claim now looks fragile in Italy’s hands. Spain has overtaken Italy in GDP per capita and now has one of the highest aid rates in the EU, handsomely ahead of Italy. The question of whether Silvio Berlusconi has forfeited his right to a place at the top table is likely to hover over events next week.
But the failures of Rome are only one aspect of how to ensure the survival of one of Labour’s most cherished achievements over the last 12 years: pushing increased aid up both the international and domestic agenda. By 2010 Britain is on track to have increased its aid budget to 0.62% of GDP, one of the highest in the EU and not far short of the totemic 0.7% set by the UN in 1970. While many departments are braced for cuts, aid is to increase – and the Tories have promised to abide by the increases. Labour has established a new political consensus on aid domestically, and an international profile on the issue which is widely admired. But can it hold?
That is part of the impetus behind the white paper expected next week from Department of International Development (DfiD). It indicates a growing unease across many parts of government that now is the time to lash the legacy down, to make it as difficult as possible for the Tories to unpick. The aim is to make aid analogous with the NHS or the BBC, a significant part of British identity. That means that a lot more people need to know what DfiD does, and this is what lies behind proposals to rebrand with a logo of UKaid.
It’s all laudable stuff, but difficult. At heart, aid is a moral argument about interconnectedness in a small world, and Labour has doggedly championed that message under the likes of Clare Short, Hilary Benn and, now, Douglas Alexander. The Tories have bought into that, because as one observer put it: “It’s a cheap way to detoxify the brand, aid represents only 1% of government spending.” But the concern is that the Tories might dilute the primacy of poverty reduction – diverting money into Foreign Office objectives, perhaps dismantling Dfid, as John Major and Douglas Hurd suggested recently. So the new white paper will try to buttress the moral argument with an awareness of self-interest: African economies, if strong enough, offer huge potential markets.
With energy draining away at an international level and a critique of aid gathering strength with the likes of economist Dambisa Moyo, it’s a vulnerable moment for the aid agenda. The fear is that achievements are hard won – involving huge effort in mobilising people on to the streets – and can easily fall apart: commitments dropped, and targets missed when everyone thought the job had been largely done.
Development Q&A: Gareth Thomas
Debate aid, trade and debt with the UK international development minister, Gareth Thomas, who will be live online at 2pm on Tuesday 30 June to answer your questions. Scroll down to read his answers
With the imminent publication of a white paper that is expected to set out the government’s plans to eliminate poverty, the UK international development minister, Gareth Thomas, will be online for one hour at 2pm (BST) on Tuesday 30 June 2009 to answer your questions about aid, debt and development.
Thomas has held positions in the Department for International Development for the past six years.
Before becoming international development minister in the reshuffle earlier this month, replacing Ivan Lewis, Thomas was joint minister of state for DfID, the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and UK Trade and Investment. Prior to that, he was undersecretary of state for DfID and DBERR.
Between 2003 and 2007 he was undersecretary of state in DfID with responsibility for Asia, Europe, Latin America, the Caribbean and Overseas Dependent Territories. He was also DfID’s green minister with responsibility for the department’s environmental performance.
DfID has taken an interest in the Guardian’s Katine project. Earlier this year, the head of DfID Uganda and Ivan Lewis visited the sub-county.
DfID is Uganda’s fourth largest donor, pouring millions of pounds into the country annually.
Post your questions to Gareth Thomas now and find out what the minister says from 2pm on Tuesday.
If you have problems posting a question, email Katine.editor@guardian.co.uk




Send in the accountants
Many of Africa’s leaders will have been distressed to hear Obama’s message on aid conditions
Africa’s leaders have become accustomed to a protective stance of victimhood. They only need to say “neo-colonial” for world leaders to back off from criticism. And moats have made the problem worse: imagine the retort to a British politician complaining about African governance. Obama’s arrival in Africa was preceded by his spectacular apology to the Muslim world, so many African leaders must have been hoping for more of the absolving balm of western guilt. They did not get it. Instead, Obama delivered three unwelcome messages.
The most explosive was that Africa’s core problem is its own misgovernance: Africa’s persistent poverty has been largely self-inflicted. Obama is the first western leader to have the political space to deliver this tough but necessary message. He does not need a photo-op with smiling Africans to signal to voters back home that he is a compassionate sort of guy. Nor does he risk being denounced. His protection is in part that it is not possible to imagine Obama in a pith helmet; but beyond that, nobody can seriously question Obama’s sincere concern to help his father’s continent. His statement cannot be interpreted as being the preliminaries to neglect.
Second, the solution to misgovernance will come from within Africa: the key struggle is internal. By choosing to visit Ghana – which recently hosted an honest election, with the governing party narrowly losing – Obama flagged up that leadership depends critically on the integrity of the political process.
Obama has made a clarion call for change, but more importantly, he is the change. Africans see Obama as a fellow African, but unlike most of Africa’s own leaders he personifies the leadership values that he preaches. Poor leadership is not intrinsic to African leadership; it is intrinsic only to the people who have jostled their way into presidencies.
Why has the selection of African leadership been so disastrous? The problem lies not with Africans but with the structure of the polities in which they live. Around the world the chance of a stolen election soars if the society is poor, small, and resource-rich. Even then it is not inevitable: Botswana started with just these features yet it is a functioning democracy. But such countries need strong checks and balances such as a free press and what political scientists call “veto points” – independent bases of power that can block presidential decisions. The democratisation that swept across Africa after the fall of the Soviet Union in most cases amounted to little more than elections.
Which takes us to Obama’s final message: America will help, where it can, to tilt the balance towards brave people struggling for change. American money will be conditional upon decent governance. Where public money can be looted, the political class – no matter what its original composition – will end up peopled by crooks. In Africa aid is such a major component of public money that the scope for capture matters enormously.
To date America and Europe have chosen different mechanisms for aid: Europe has favoured budget support, in which the recipient government decides how the money is spent; America has preferred project aid, where the money is tied to a specific expenditure. In badly governed countries the effect has been the same: the money has been captured by politicians who are the core of the problem. Project aid only gives the illusion of integrity: governments get donors to finance the projects they would have done anyway, and this releases their own money for the presidential wish list. It is the wish list that project aid is really paying for.
The Obama principle provides the basis for a new, common approach. Where governance is satisfactory, as in Ghana, budget support is the only sensible basis for aid. Europe has it right: why should US politicians try to dictate to the Ghanaian government how to spend aid when Ghanaians are able to hold their government to account? At the other end of the governance spectrum neither budget support nor project aid can tackle the problem.
We can learn from Paddy Ashdown‘s experience in Bosnia. He concluded that what he had needed were not doctors without borders, but accountants without borders. Where governance is inadequate, aid should only come with an army of accountants able to ensure that it is not captured. The missing piece of international architecture is an independent assessment of the integrity of budget systems. Where a budget system was certified as satisfactory, Europe and America could safely converge on budget support. Where it was found unsatisfactory, aid would be conditional upon accountants. Governments would know that to get foreign accountants off their backs they need to build systems that withstand scrutiny. The rationale for cleaning up budgets is not that it would safeguard our money, but that it would clean up politics, and build on the distress that Obama’s speech will have caused Africa’s crooked politicians.