Western Sahara: Shame on the US, UN and Europe

Great Debates
41

I’m with you there sailor.

I agree, although I think in this case it’s bad presentation. It strikes me that it’s State which is driving the policy change, but it’s being badly sold. The referendum isn’t going to happen, so let’s find a way to move the ball forward.

To be fair I don’t think its a matter of a blind eye, its a matter of leverage, influence. The issue is fairly marginal --the land itself is marginal-- and in some respects the UN and EU have put substantial effort into trying to broker a solution. And James Baker did yoeman work in trying to get a solution, which both sides have pissed away.

Of course part of the problem now is the Bush Administration has managed to create --entirely unnecessarily-- a massive image problem such that even tactical changes to support a reasonably moral goal (trying to get a solution to improve lives) looks like either clumsiness or amoral idiocy. Bad salesmanship, bad diplomacy, possibly bad policy to boot.

True. Spanish decolonization at the time, like the Portuguese withdrawals at about the same time, was shamefully poorly done and scandalously screwed the poor bastards who they had colonized and been ripping off one more time.

And until around 1995, I would have largely agreed Polisario was a better deal than Morocco if only because Hassan II (and his interior minister Driss Basri, who in person is almost charming) was one mean, nasty bastard. But starting around say1995-1997 Hassan realized his absolute autocracy, while it has succeeded in preventing Morocco from become Algeria (which has some value on has to admit) had run its course. Since then they’ve been taking slow, but real steps to a true civil society.

These things don’t emerge overnight, but I for one am impressed with the changes I have seen from the late 1980s to the present. Real change. But many real problems and real threat of backsliding.

Not a pretty neighborhood sadly enough, but still, look to Algeria to see how bad it can get.

42

Arrogance? I get sick of the way “People Abroad” pile on my Government for looking out for American interests and I’m arrogant? Tired of “People Abroad” is closer to the truth. Much of the world hates everything about the US (aparently now me included)… except the aid we send them. I wasn’t making a judgment one way or another on the specifics of this situation, except to say we’re dammed if we do and dammed if we don’t. We’re not supposed to choose sides based on our interests, but we’re browbeaten for not dumping our money into it when it goes bad

43

No, but…

Is it then the job of the USA to play world nanny and feed and protect the downtrodden around the world as a result of ineffective and/or corrupt leadership?

Yes!

Pick something to hate us for, but the two are connected. “People Abroad” will hate us whether we stay home or get involved. All I was saying is we have a right to look out for our own interests if we’re expected to intervene later (and tell me you won’t be posting about the starving people in the WS if we don’t).

44

I got the “server not responding” screen and thought the 1st post didn’t go through. The second post was actually a revision of the first. (sorry)

45

Hello Sgt. J and welcome to the Straight Dope!

You may be interested to review the statistics for foreign aid. Calculated as a share of the total economy, the US has traditionally donated among the smallest amount of aid to the third world in the OECD.

Alas, I don’t have the GDP share figures, but I was able to find the aid per person figures for 1993. Source: http://www.unicef.org/pon95/aid-0004.html



		Aid given
		per person
Country		($) 1993
---------------	---------------
Denmark		259
Norway		236
Sweden		203
Netherlands	165
France		138
Luxembourg	127
Switzerland	112
Japan		 90
Germany		 86
Canada	 	 82
Belgium		 80
Finland		 70
	
Average		70
	
Austria		69
Australia	54
Italy		53
United Kingdom	50
*United States*	38
Spain		31
New Zealand	28
Portugal	25
Ireland		23

I hope you find this interesting.

46

I’ve read stats in the past that privately, Americans are the most generous people in the world when it comes to charity. I assume these figures presented above refer to official government aid, and completely ignore private funding of foreign aid through NGOs.

47

I don’t want to completely hijack Sailor’s thread into a GD on US Aid, I simply wanted to interject the idea that since the US (and lest I be the Arrogant American once again) and other world leaders will be expected to rectify the situation if it goes bad, those countries who will be expected to be involved in the region later have an interest in what happens now. I wasn’t refuting Sailor’s premise, just nitpicking the notion that we have no business there.

Flowbark
Thank you for the welcome and the civil retort. I am familiar with those statistics. IIRC the GDP share info has the US just short of 2%, well short of the 7% goal of the (UN ?), and well behind our western allies. I also see from the site you posted

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe this includes monies spent on things like “military campaigns freeing the oppressed”, or as Grienspace pointed out, private philanthropy. Just the same, I did in fact find it interesting.

This is what I was referring to, not per capita or GDP, actual money spent per nation. Also from the site you provided was a chart showing the largest percentage of aid (43%) going to Africa. I believe this justifies our involvement in the situation, and despite my new status as “Direct Impediment to the State Department” I believe the US would be called upon by our allies in the region to provide monetary or political influence if the situation deteriorates.

48

Sgt. J, if your neighbor’s house is on fire you might be expected to help put it out with your hose. The fact that you might be expected does not mean you are obligated and you are free to continue to watch the game on TV while the house burns. But it is very arrogant for you to say to your neighbor “you are not fucking building a house here because if it burns then I am expected to stop watching the game on TV and help you put out the fire”.

The idea that the USA has the right to intervene in the internal affairs of other countries just because it is a richer country is so arrogant it is insulting. Thankfully most Americans do not think like you.

49

I’m not saying we have the right to go willy-nilly around the globe fucking with other countries. We were invited into the situation by Morocco. You believe morocco’s claim to the area is unlawful, but that hasn’t been established as a proven fact here. If that’s your assertion fine, but since it’s not (yet) mine I am not willing to condemn the US Government’s actions.

For someone who has such a problem with arrogance you have no problem with insults and condescension. Can we discuss this without them? You may not like my opinion, but I haven’t directed any hostility towards you.

50

Ah, you mean military campaings serving our national interests and dressed up as serving some vague supposed ‘democratic interests’ – or are we talking about Somalia, wherein we massacre a large number of Somalis in Moqadishu?

Military campaigns are not aid, nor in large part do the ‘free the oppressed’ in senses meaningful to the locals. That is not to say I oppose them, but neither is there any reason to count them as “aid.” Apples and motherfucking oranges.

Now, in regards to Greeny’s point, that would be interesting, if one presented some evidence that:
(a) US private philanthropy directed overseas approaches some significant (as, say % of GDP)
(b) That EU private philanthropy directed overseas is itself not significant.

That is, once more, apples and oranges. If one wants to compares apples and oranges, they both should be in both baskets.

I have never seen comparative data on this, however I don’t recall ever reading that private philanthropy directed overseas rises to any significant % of GDP.

51

Well, although I think Morocco has as good a claim as anyone else, it’s 1975 “Green March” into Spanish Sahara was not conducted under very ‘regular’ circumstances. Then of course, form the POV of the natives, neither was the original Spanish invasion…

Lawful here is a tricky concept.

52

some info at http://www.brunel.ac.uk/depts/ecf/research/official.pdf where they list a chart of comparative data with regard to the ratio of official aid to private aid directed to developing countries.

It is clear that the US far outperforms all other countries privately, with private aid at .03 % of GNP, or about 1/3rd of official aid, while officially most generous Denmark donates about 2/3rds as much as individual Americans privately.

France and the Netherlands aren’t even on the board for private donations.

But alas, even with the impressive American private effort, the combined total of.13 percent of GNP pales in comparison to the total effort of other countries.

53

So the story is pretty much as I suspected, and in general in keeping with econometric observations on private giving versus government provision of the same – it generally falls well short. .03 ain’t moving us far.

54

Well, the US proposal was defeated in the UN. The UK and France voted for it and China and Spain and others against it. So it’s back to the drawing board. Of course, the more the issue is delayed, the stronger the position of Morocco.

So the possible solutions are:

a- Independence - extremely unlikely

b- Integration in Morocco - would have to be by sheer force as the Polisario will never accept it - - but it could happen.

c- Partition - Morocco keeps the good part and lets the Saharawis keep some piece of desert. It seems very unfair but I guess it beats living in refugee camps…

We’ll have to wait and see what happens… like we’ve been waiting 27 years already…

55

Rubbish. Polisario has not engaged in combat in decades, already there is de facto integration of all but a sliver of a no mans land along the Algerian border.

The Moroccans constructed a massive 100kms long berm in the desert parallel to the notional border.

The only real solution has been noted, semi-autonomous region. Allows face saving, if the Algerian generals allow it.

I’m not sure how I can get this across to you.

It is 100% desert. There is nothing but desert. Nada. Nothing, NADA. There is no “good” part, unless you are a nomad I suppose.

The “good parts” are then only in terms of capital intensive resource extraction. Bloody hell, buy a bloody ticket to Morocco and visit Dakhla.

56

I’m not sure to understand your point. Even if US private aid represents 1/3 of US public aid, US public aid in %age of GNP is so low as compared to other western countries that it doesn’t make much of a difference. 0,1% of GNP times 1,3 gives 0,13% which is still very low (and these figures are those appearing in your cite. According to the CIA’s factbook, foreign aid would be only 0,07% of GNP)
Certainly, given the large population and wealth of the US, private aid still represent a significant amount, but the poster you were responding to said that private aid doesn’t rise to any sigicant **% of GNP **. And indeed, it doesn’t.

57

In any case, aid, big or small, private or governmental, does not entitle a country to intervene in another country’s affairs. The argument is plain silly.