With debt relief for poor countries shaping up as a focal issue at next month's G8 summit in Scotland, it is a shame that so few people appreciate what a farce such measures could turn out to be.
Unfortunately, most of the public, egged on by well-meaning rock stars, religious leaders and other popular figures, seem brainwashed into believing that debt relief is a giant step on the road to ending world poverty. But forgiving poor countries' debts without agreeing on a better framework for future aid is an empty gesture.
At first glance, it seems incredibly generous and statesmanlike for G8 leaders to endorse debt relief for the world's poorest nations. But no one really expects the debts to be paid anyway. Indeed, thanks to ongoing grants and future loans from national aid agencies and multilateral lenders like the World Bank, most of the poor "debtor" countries look set to receive considerably more money than they pay back, with no end in sight.
ILLUSTRATION: YUSHA
Citizens of rich countries may be self-centered and self-indulgent, but things are not quite as horrible as some would have us believe. True, the ultra-rich US does only give a pathetic 0.2 percent of its income in aid. But at least it doesn't tax poor countries, as rich-country imperialists did until well into the 20th century.
Besides, it is not like there is huge profit for G8 leaders in trying to collect coins from impoverished peoples living on a dollar a day. What would the G8 leaders do, station troops in Africa to seize coffee beans and peanuts? Recolonize Africa? Debt collection from poor nations is an absurdity, now and into the distant future.
The real issue is how much money rich-country governments will be giving poor-country governments, not vice versa. Third-world debt burdens are little more than a scorecard for past development failures.
Generously interpreted, past loans reflected naive optimism that with a bit of seed money, politically and economically backward countries would generate majestic growth and effortlessly repay their loans. A not-so-generous interpretation of modern aid history is that the rich countries' legislatures were too cheap to give outright grants to the poorest countries, and could be persuaded to help out only if they were told that the money would be repaid.
Of course, I am focusing mainly on official loans, but private-sector lending to the world's poorest countries is generally a relatively minor issue. So now rich countries want to feel magnanimous for "forgiving" debts that should have been given as outright grants in the first place.
As all but the most belligerent critics of US President George W. Bush will acknowledge, the US has taken an important lead in trying to make things marginally better. The Bush administration has put outright grants at the center of its foreign-assistance policy, a commitment that is embodied in its new aid agency, the Millennium Challenge Account.
Moreover, following recent changes at the World Bank, the US is aiming to follow the classic doctor's dictum: "First, do no harm." It is increasing aid, but it is trying to focus the benefits on countries that are reasonably well governed. The aim is praiseworthy: to ensure that aid will be unambiguously beneficial, and won't merely be exploited by bad governments to extend their hold on power.
Admittedly, there is still a fierce debate over the right way to assist poor countries, and this will play out behind the scenes at the G8 summit. Many Europeans believe that aid agencies like the World Bank will shrivel and die if left to depend on grants for income. But I believe that the problem could easily be solved by, say, giving the World Bank an endowment of rich-country bonds and permitting it to expend the interest.
The UN Development Program has championed the position that all countries should get significant aid, regardless of how they are governed, on the grounds that thousands of children die every day and there is no room for sanctimonious extremism. I beg to differ; my reading of the evidence suggests that donors really do need to take extreme care not to make things worse, and that this is far more difficult to achieve in corrupt countries than the UN suggests.
In short, the fundamental problem with the debt-relief mantra is that it looks backward rather than forward. If the G8 leaders are serious about helping poor countries, finding a reliable way to support grant aid and promote accountability for donors and recipients, not debt relief, is the place to start. If the political will were there, it would be neither difficult nor expensive to restructure aid agencies like the World Bank and the regional development banks as grants-only agencies.
For example, Jeremy Bulow of Stanford University and I have shown that by endowing the World Bank with US$100 billion, it could carry out the tasks that it performs best more effectively and with greater transparency than it does today through borrowing and lending. Given today's exceptionally low long-term interest rates, the annual cost would be, well, peanuts.
Kenneth Rogoff is professor of economics and public policy at Harvard University, and was formerly chief economist at the IMF. Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs