The Effects of Aid in Zimbabwe

Over a month ago, I wrote on the massive turmoil in Zimbabwe. Yet even now, as we sit on the upward swing of the conflict with dual leadership hopefully on the horizon, I remain angry and broken hearted. Recent articles have been published about the ramifications of Mugabe’s rule. Their topics are extremely broad in scope, covering issues in health care, hunger, political angst and inflation. One that I found extremely egregious relates to the abuse that young women—or maybe I should say girls—are experiencing as they flee to South Africa in attempt to find work and send money home. Countless unreported rapes occur each day during this passage. As most of these women cross the border at night, they frequently stumble upon men that have predicted their arrival. They are robed and abused in exchange for passage. Furthermore, once the women arrive in South Africa, the only work that many are able to find is in prostitution.

I am sure that I am not alone in my vehement anger and sadness about Zimbabwe. I desperately want someone to blame for how out of control this situation has become. Clearly, Mugabe is the ultimate culprit, but what about us? Have we been incompetent in being unable to prevent such suffering? I have written about policies and their effects in previous blogs, and I am now interested in their role in Zimbabwe. Currently, NGOs, state aid and humanitarian organizations are vital to the survival of many Zimbabweans. In December of 2008, the United States and the United Nations were responsible for feeding half of the population of Zimbabwe. My first impression is sincere gratitude that these people are being helped. On the other hand, I wonder if in the attempt to help, people are in fact enabling Mugabe’s brutality to reign. As he can rely on others to feed his people, he feels no political or moral obligation to feed them himself. As his people do not need to fight for their own self-preservation, they are not forcing him out. The New York Times quoted an employee of an aid agency who reiterated this idea: "'You’re acting to save lives, knowing that by doing so you are sustaining this government,' said one aid agency manager, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals. 'And unfortunately, ZANU-PF is good at exploiting this humanitarian imperative.'”

This issue I find to be extremely tough. My gut tells me that it would be incredibly wrong to act as Mugabe’s educators while watching his country implode. On the other hand, my mind tells me that it is potentially our willingness to clean up after him that enabled his power to be sustained for so long. In the end, I would rather be blameworthy for enabling Mugabe in attempt to relieve the suffering of his people than blameless at the expense of human life. Regardless, we will never be able to juxtapose and judge the outcomes of the two scenarios to get a clear response as to which one would have been best. This means that we are left with our imperfect, real-time responses.

For more recent news articles on Zimbabwe...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/22/world/africa/22zimbabwe.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123332129713033159.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/world/africa/31zimbabwe.html?ref=world
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/24/world/africa/24zimbabwe.html