1998-12-01
There are two kinds of countries in the world. The very rich and the very poor. On the one hand, you have North America, Europe, Japan, and some other Asian and South American countries. These nations have incredible wealth and an astonishing quality of life, including first-class health-care, transportation, education, and entertainment facilities. On the other hand you have the Sudan, Rwanda, Nigeria, Ethiopia, and other African and Asian and Central American nations. These nations can barely feed themselves, if they can feed themselves at all. They have mud roads instead of freeways. They have epidemics instead of hospitals.
Do you think we in the rich West are trying to help? We send them aid, right? We give them grants and loans, right? Wouldn't it be incredibly absurd if those poverty-stricken nations were sending us more money than we send them! Preposterous! Unbelievable! And true.
Yes, indeed. Most of the world's poorest nations are sending us money. Then we send a pittance back, to ease our consciences.
How could this happen? Very simple. In the 1960's and 70's, these countries, almost always ruled by dictators at the time, borrowed billions of dollars from banks in the West (like Citibank). What did they use this money for? To build roads? To build hospitals? To improve education? No. They used it to buy weapons. Why did they need weapons? Because their own starving people, perceiving that their dictatorial and illegitimate government cared nothing for their welfare, rose up in rebellion and tried to evict these vampires.
It only adds insult to injury that they had to buy these weapons from large Western corporations as part of the deal. So, in effect, these were loans to Boeing and McDonnel Douglas and other American and European arms manufacturers. Except that they didn't have to repay them. Countries like Peru and Brazil and Rhodesia had to repay them, with, of course, compound interest.
The result is that more money flows from the poor nations of the world to the rich than the other way around. This is a scandal. It is an outrage. It is an outrage of a scandal of a disgrace.
You ask, why don't these nations simply state the obvious: that they (the people) didn't borrow this money-- the dictators did. If you want your money back, go call on Idi Amin or Doc Duvalier or whomever, and leave us alone. Why don't they do that?
Because the pimps for these banks, the Western governments who often helped arrange these deals, will destroy these nations if they refuse to pay.
You don't believe that Western governments have these kind of perverted priorities? Consider China. After the government of China massacred hundreds, perhaps thousands of students in Tiananmen Square, President Bush squawked a little but the U.S. continued to renew China's "most favoured nation" trade status on an annual basis. Oh, but when it was discovered that factories in China were manufacturing pirated copies of software and music CD's, the big guns came out blazing: cease and desist or else! And China complied.
What is really bizarre about this whole debacle is that Americans, as people, are among the most generous in the world. On a personal basis, they tend to give a lot to charities, including charities that help poor nations over-seas. So while the average American citizen is moved by compassion when he or she sees pictures of starving children, his/her own government and banks are pimping away on a grand scale undoing all of the good that those well-meaning gifts would do.
The Jubilee 2000 initiative is an attempt, by churches, charities, and human rights organizations, to persuade Western Banks and governments to stop profiting from the misery of millions of people. It asks Western governments and banks to forgive most if not all of the massive debts that prevent any of these nations from pulling themselves out of poverty. It deserves your financial and political support.
Copyright © 1998 Bill Van Dyk All rights reserved.