HOUSE OF THE WEEK
Refurbished twin-level apartment in Hlaing
TWO thousand and two hundred square feet split over two floors of freshly redecorated space for K90 million sounds like a pretty hot deal. more
Turning a corner on aid
(Volume 26, No. 513)
Source: OECD, IMF, UN
MYANMAR received a much-needed increase in development aid in 2008, with figures released by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development showing that total assistanc e rose by more than 170 percent.
However, the OECD figures show that the aid provided to Myanmar lags far behind assistance provided to other countries in the region.
Myanmar received US$533.5 million in Official Development Assistance (ODA) – or less than $11 a person – up from just $197.7 million in 2007.
However, Cyclone Nargis relief work accounted for most of the increase, with the “humanitarian” component of total ODA increasing from $43.3 million to $336.2 million in 2008.
Non-humanitarian contributions rose only modestly for the year; excluding humanitarian aid, total ODA rose about 28pc, from $154.4 million to $197.4 million.
The humanitarian proportion could be even higher, as not all donors report on the humanitarian assistance and it does not include food aid. A spokesperson from the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee, a grouping of 24 developed countries, said humanitarian aid from non-members and most multilateral sources would not have been listed in the humanitarian category.
Nevertheless, the OECD figures show Myanmar still receives a pitiful level of assistance from the international community.
Despite the 170pc increase in 2008, per person annual assistance was far below Cambodia ($51), Sri Lanka ($50), Laos ($48) and Vietnam ($43). Even Bangladesh, with a population of 160 million, received almost twice as much aid per capita as Myanmar, while donors gave $15 a person to Indonesia, which has a per capita gross domestic product four times higher than Myanmar, according to the International Monetary Fund.
Recently, though, there have been some signs that this imbalance is being redressed, and more funding is being allocated to Myanmar’s development needs. It will take a few years for this to be reflected in the OECD figures though, with the 2009 ODA totals not expected until the end of the year.
Last month, Australia, one of the largest donors to Myanmar, announced it would increase aid from A$30 million ($27 million) to A$50 million ($45 million) during the next three years, while the $100-million multi-donor Livelihoods and Food Security Trust Fund (LIFT) has already started funding programs in the Ayeyarwady delta.
The Global Fund board’s decision to approve all three of Myanmar’s Round 9 funding proposals, opening up the possibility for almost $300 million over five years from 2011, will also help to reduce the disparity in aid funding between Myanmar and its neighbours.
It is belated recognition of international donors’ neglect, which hurts the people of Myanmar now and also well into the future.
In announcing Australia’s funding increase, Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said that at “some stage into the future, the regional and international community will be asked to help in the rebuilding of Burma’s economic and social structures”.
“Burma’s capacity cannot be allowed to completely atrophy to the ultimate disadvantage and cost of its people,” Mr Smith said.
“Alleviating humanitarian needs will remain an important goal and focus of this expenditure. … But the government has decided that Australia’s program will also include capacity building elements, addressing the long-term challenges facing the Burmese people.”
It’s a message other Western donors should take heed of: Aid should be allocated based on needs, not politics.
And it seems to be gaining currency. The United States – the largest donor to Asia, disbursed some $8.87 billion to the region in 2008 – provided $17.7 million to Myanmar in the 2008 fiscal year. This doubled to $35.4 million in 2009 and the 2010 budget for humanitarian and health programs both in the country and along the Thai-Myanmar border is $38.6 million, according to the US embassy in Yangon.
Similarly, the budget of the British overseas aid agency, Department for International Development (DFID), has increased fourfold in as many years and now stands at $45 million, a spokesperson from the British embassy in Yangon said.
The argument – still thrown about in some quarters – that programs cannot effectively be administered in Myanmar has been shown up for the fallacy it is.
The successes of the Cyclone Nargis relief effort, as well as the excellent work of the Three Diseases Fund since 2006, are further evidence that there is no longer any excuse for neglecting the people of Myanmar.
“We have great appreciation for the Three Diseases Fund,” Dr Sun Gang, the head of UNAIDS in Myanmar, said in a recent interview. “This has provided solid ground for the Global Fund to come back [to Myanmar]. Because we had the Three Diseases Fund … it has proved these programs can work here.”
The next barrier, which Australia has already taken steps to break down, is to remove the widespread ban on development aid, which aims to eradicate poverty through programs focusing on sectors such as health and education.
While economic sanctions and the ban on investment are rightly blamed for stifling economic development, the ban on multilateral and bilateral development aid since 1988 has been undoubtedly more damaging.
Mr Derek Tonkin, a former ambassador to Vietnam and Thailand and the chairman of Network Myanmar, estimates it has cost the Myanmar people as much as $2 billion in lost ODA each year.
“[This is] far in excess of any loss caused through statutory sanctions,” Mr Tonkin told The Myanmar Times in an email. “But governments are unwilling to characterise their actions as ‘sanctions’ … [so as] to disguise the extent to which sanctions not only hit, but are directly targeted at the people who are denied the aid which the international community could provide, but decline to do so on political grounds because it would involve agreement at government level.”
