Aid that compromises our security is not worth it

Editor, Refer to Kenneth Agutamba’s article, “Security more important than foreign aid” (Sunday Times, June 22).

Monday, June 23, 2014

Editor,

Refer to Kenneth Agutamba’s article, "Security more important than foreign aid” (Sunday Times, June 22).

At the end of the day, we engage in magical thinking and lead ourselves into serious miscalculation when we believe donor support is altruistic and free of base interest.

Like all giving, it is made with expectations that the one who receives will be in the giver's debt and that the receiver should be prepared to give something in return when called upon to do so: support of the giver's international positions or candidates for international posts, if it becomes needed, preference for the giver's corporations in the receiver's procurements and award of mining concessions or major infrastructure contracts, and the expectation that the giver will be listened to attentively when the receiver is formulating its own policies—whether domestic or foreign.

No giving is ever without different degrees of these calculations. Those who think otherwise are fantasising. Which is why poverty and therefore dependence, whether at the personal or collective level—such as the national—represents a serious loss of freedom of choice, and why we must strive extra hard to emancipate ourselves from that position if we ever want to have greater freedom of choice to make decisions about our own affairs without undue interference from our benefactors.

That said there is one area on which it must be made clear we shall never compromise; on which we are prepared to contemplate doing without any donor support whatsoever if that is the price we must pay: our security.

You can't develop or enjoy foreign donor support when you are dead. We have sufficient experience with foreign total unconcern where our security, safety and lives are in play. We must never ever again trust our safety to them.

This must be a deal-breaker as far as their financial support is concerned. It must be made clear we will neither outsource our security to anyone else nor allow their interests to determine our actions in this area.

Otherwise what good would it do us to earn their ephemeral goodwill even as we lose our security, lives and the existence of our nation?

Mwene Kalinda, Rwanda