Tsunami aid 'spent on politics'

Angel Heart

Conservative Hippie
Jul 6, 2007
2,057
342
48
Portland, Oregon
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22974796-2702,00.html
Tsunami aid 'spent on politics'
Ean Higgins | December 27, 2007

THREE years after Australians donated $400 million to rebuild Asian lives devastated by the 2004 tsunami, aid groups are under attack for spending much of the money on social and political engineering.

A survey by The Australian of the contributions by non-government organisations to the relief effort found the donations had been spent on politically correct projects promoting left-wing Western values over traditional Asian culture.

The activities - listed as tsunami relief - include a "travelling Oxfam gender justice show" in Indonesia to change rural male attitudes towards women.

Another Oxfam project, reminiscent of the ACTU's Your Rights at Work campaign, instructs Thai workers in Australian-style industrial activism and encourages them to set up trade unions.

A World Vision tsunami relief project in the Indonesian province of Aceh includes a lobbying campaign to advance land reform to promote gender equity, as well as educating women in "democratic processes" and encouraging them to enter politics.

Also in Aceh, the Catholic aid group Caritas funds an Islamic learning centre to promote "the importance of the Koran". This is seen as recognition of the importance of Islam in a province that has been the scene of a long-running and bloody independence struggle against the secular central Government.

The earthquake on December26, 2004, created the most powerful tsunami in 40 years, killing about 230,000 people in 12 Indian Ocean nations, just under half of them in Aceh.

Critics say the aid agencies have exceeded the mandate provided to them by mum-and-dad donors from middle Australia who thought they were giving money to rebuild houses and lives shattered by the tsunami, rather than forcing the ideological views of the Australian Left on traditional Asians.

One critic, Don D'Cruz, wrote at the outset of the relief operation that Indonesian claims of "foreign interference" through Australian NGOs were too often brushed aside.

Mr D'Cruz, then a research fellow with the right-wing think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, wrote "it would be a mistake to ignore the substance of these claims, especially when it comes to the activities of Western aid groups operating in Indonesia. The trend among aid organisations has been to become more involved in politics, although this activism has been largely masked."
Going beyond humanitarian and development aid, he wrote, risked alienating Asian governments, which could deny access.

Looking through their websites, the aid groups ventured farbeyond standard aid and development.

The Oxfam website describes how $18,690 of its tsunami relief fund is being spent on a theatre production to "help change attitudes toward women in Acehnese society".

"In one scene, Apa Kaoy, who cannot cook, grumbles when his wife, exhausted from working in the rice field, has not prepared supper," Oxfam says of the play.

"In another, he disapproves of his daughter's ambition to study at university. Instead, holding a newspaper upside down because he cannot read, Apa Kaoy tells his daughter it is important that she learn to cook, clean, marry and have children.

"Eventually, though, his attitude towards women softens as other more enlightened men point out the error of his ways."

Oxfam Australia chief executive Andrew Hewett yesterday said his organisation initially concentrated on immediate humanitarian relief, including providing food, shelter and medicine to those affected by the tsunami.

It had since then turned to reconstruction, and rebuilding the ability of those affected to earn a living.

But Mr Hewett said Oxfam "did not shy away" from its concentration on those less well off and less empowered, including women, indigenous groups and the low caste, saying it was a practical issue of delivering aid for maximum effect.

"Women, like it or not, fare least well when it comes to resources and political power, including within a village community, and those who are disadvantaged often suffer most when disaster hits," he said.
 
Are the basic needs of these people being filled? Is this just the excess after getting them back up on their feet after loosing everything? If so, then they should go back to their donors and see what they wish to be done with the money.
 
Is it a bad thing to encourage gender equality in Asian countries where women face horrible obstacles?

I don't think anyone is contending it is a bad thing, but when you have people donating money to a cause, then the money should be spent on the cause represented. If it is to be used for other purposes, then the donors should have been told that at the time they donated, so they could decide whether they wish to support that cause or not.
 
I figure the money was intended to benefit the people it serves. I don't have an issue with women being helped, particularly if so much money is going into reubuilding agriculture and business. Kind of like when Federal money is given to a school, they can't do certain things or they risk losing the money. Certainly wouldn't trouble me at all. Frankly, I can't imagine any of the donors being too put out that girls are being helped. Not exactly an issue where there should be two "sides".
 
That's a hard argument to make when the charities hold the "purpose" out as Tsunami relief. If the money were represented generally as going to make lives better in the region, then I'd support your argument. But when you get people to donate for "Tsunami relief" then the money should be spent on problems that are related to the Tsunami and not on other things. The status of gender justice in the region has no reasonable relationship to the Tsunami, so I think it is a misrepresentation to prompt people to donate to it on the basis of "Tsunami relief." I don't agree with misrepresenting things or deceiving people, even if the ends that you're trying to further are ones I agree with.
 
That's a hard argument to make when the charities hold the "purpose" out as Tsunami relief. If the money were represented generally as going to make lives better in the region, then I'd support your argument. But when you get people to donate for "Tsunami relief" then the money should be spent on problems that are related to the Tsunami and not on other things. The status of gender justice in the region has no reasonable relationship to the Tsunami, so I think it is a misrepresentation to prompt people to donate to it on the basis of "Tsunami relief." I don't agree with misrepresenting things or deceiving people, even if the ends that you're trying to further are ones I agree with.

I understand your point, certainly. And, for the most part, I agree. I suppose I just can't get too worked up over it being done for something so very necessary. Also, the whole concept that it advances "politically correct projects promoting left-wing Western values over traditional Asian culture" as stated in the OP didn't sit particularly well with me. Why is gender justice "left wing". Isn't it a shared value?
 
"Gender justice" doesn't strike me as a left-wing concept, although I suppose if you are dealing with a rigid and entrenched patriarchy where women are second-class citizens, then a lot of what seems like a shared value to us (and what should be a shared value) may be considered left-wing in those areas. From the original post, though, I got the impression that the Australians complaining viewed the program as 'left-wing,' which does seem somewhat odd.

I would certainly like to see improvements for women in many parts of the world (Asia and the Middle East, for example)!
 
"Gender justice" doesn't strike me as a left-wing concept, although I suppose if you are dealing with a rigid and entrenched patriarchy where women are second-class citizens, then a lot of what seems like a shared value to us (and what should be a shared value) may be considered left-wing in those areas. From the original post, though, I got the impression that the Australians complaining viewed the program as 'left-wing,' which does seem somewhat odd.

I would certainly like to see improvements for women in many parts of the world (Asia and the Middle East, for example)!

Well, maybe some of our Aussies on the board will tell us what kind of paper The Australian is, might help explain why they called it a "left-wing value". On whole, I think money should be used for what it's collected for. And I could certainly understand some Asians not liking the concept, but westerners who donated the money??? I'd think they'd be thrilled to have money used that way, but there ya go.

Agreed on Asia and the mid-east.
 

Forum List

Back
Top