NN42, June 2009
A Safari Towards Aid Effectiveness?
The New Geopolitics of Educational Aid: From Cold Wars to Holy Wars?
By Mario Novelli, AMIDST, University of Amsterdam
Email: m.novelli@uva.nlKeywords
Educational Aid; Geopolitics; USAID; Afghanistan
Summary
Using examples from USAID?s involvement in Muslim majority countries, this piece looks at that the relationship between education aid and the new geopolitics of the war on terror.
Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s development aid to education in low-income countries was often provided on condition that recipient governments implemented a string of neo-liberal education reforms linked to structural adjustment policies and fiscal austerity. Many critics challenged the overemphasis on economics that was driving these reforms, both in the terms of the effects of fiscal austerity on already under-funded education systems and also the reliance on human capital theory to calculate estimated rates of return to education. They argued that education was much more than ?human capital? and that the World Bank and others driving these reforms should go beyond this narrow understanding of the value of education, and recognise the positive social, political and cultural effects that education can potentially produce.
Today, that narrow focus of the major international donors and international NGOs appears to have been superseded by a much broader recognition of the role of education which recognises its central importance in the socialisation, citizenship and nation building process. While for some this may seem like a welcome return to earlier rationales, and a retreat from the harsh economism of the past, there are also dangers. One area where this switch of focus is manifestly clear is with aid to education in conflict and post-conflict countries, particularly those countries with large Islamic populations. While this might be a shift to a curriculum where peace and human rights education are emphasised, it can also lead to an increased focus on merging the security agendas of powerful bi-lateral donors and the policies and practices that they support in the field of education.
In the examples below I will focus on USAID, but many of the arguments can be extended to other key bilateral donors. During the Bush administration, education was increasingly seen as a key sector where the ?war on terror? could be waged, and while the language has changed under the Obama administration, the central thrust of linking development aid to national security objectives has remained intact. In June 2008, USAID released their new ?civil military cooperation policy? (2008), explaining their 3-D approach, incorporating Defence, Diplomacy and Development and stating that ?Development is also recognized as a key element of any successful whole-of-government counterterrorism and counter-insurgency effort? (USAID, 2008:1). This whole-of-government approach is an illustration of the merging of security and development issues, leading aid agencies and the NGOs that receive funding to become embroiled more centrally in the politics of ?US national security?. While few would argue against the strengthening of basic and vocational education and training (wherever it takes place), the dangers of the politicisation of aid to education are everywhere, and many NGOs are increasingly concerned that they are becoming adjuncts and auxiliaries to the military adventures of the major Western Powers and their ?War on Terror?. International Development workers? status as ?force multipliers? (a phrase used by Colin Powell) finds its mirror image in being labelled as enemy combatants and the effects of this are reflected in the increasing number of humanitarian workers that have been killed in conflict zones, including education workers.
On August 13th, 2008, my friend Jackie Kirk was murdered by Taliban militants in Afghanistan along with three other aid workers from the International Rescue Committee (a US-based NGO working on issues of refugees and internally displaced peoples). They were attacked whilst travelling on the road to Kabul in a clearly marked ?IRC? car. Jackie was a brilliant Canadian gender, education and conflict specialist. The Taliban argued that Jackie and her colleagues were part of the ?illegal occupation forces?. She saw herself as neither ?force multiplier? nor ?enemy combatant? and her tragic death, and that of many other humanitarian workers that have died in Afghanistan and elsewhere reflect the much deeper and ongoing problem of the increased blurring of the lines between military and humanitarian operations in contexts of war and conflict. More specifically, education itself is being hailed by the US led coalition as one of the major gains of the war in Afghanistan (and women?s education in particular) and thus a clear target for those that seek to undermine the occupation. Similarly in Pakistan, aid to education has become a means to undermine ?Madrasa? type religious schooling that is blamed for fuelling anti-Western sentiment, and such aid is focused particularly on those regions where Taliban influence is strongest.
Furthermore, the relationship between education and the new geopolitics of the war on terror do not stop in the direct theatre of operations. Increasingly, as aid is being targeted at strategic locations in the post-Cold War world, education is seen as a vital mechanism in the battle of hearts and minds in the Muslim world (Indonesia, Yemen, etc). Investment in low-income education systems can also serve as a sweetener for cooperation in other domains. The increase in aid flows to Kyrgyzstan in Central Asia, and Djibouti in Africa represent examples of flows of aid to education Post 9/11 that occur in parallel with the development of US military bases used as launching pads for military activities in Afghanistan and Somalia respectively.
There is a narrative over the history of aid to education that goes something like this: During the Cold War aid to education was seen as being highly politicized, often lacking development principles at its heart, and directed instead at allies in the war against communism. The post 1990 collapse of the Soviet Union led finally to the possibility of focusing aid on poverty and of pooling resources towards those objectives. The MDGs, SWAPS and the Paris Declaration all reflect this aspiration. However there is a potential challenge/rupture to this narrative. The post 9/11 world has produced another common agenda to focus the concentration and attention of many Western powers. It remains to be seen whether the objectives of poverty eradication and counter-terror are mutually complementary, whether they will be given equal priority and focus, or whether the military and national security interests will, as in the Cold War, once again trump poverty and development objectives.
References
USAID (2008) Civil Military Cooperation Policy, USAID: Washington
Action Aid et al (2009) Caught in the Conflict Civilians and the international security strategy in Afghanistan, A briefing paper by eleven NGOs operating in Afghanistan for the NATO Heads of State and Government Summit, 3-4 April 2009.
Full contents of NORRAG NEWS 42.
Download the full issue of NORRAG NEWS 42 in pdf.
Not already a NORRAG member? Sign up for free here.