RSS« Bangingly silly | A Collounsbury Lesson on Business in MENA »
January 26, 2006
Development & Means
The Pratike responds to my half-meant statement, "Assistance is political. Now, if the US process can't distinguish between long term and short term objectives, having some bizarro wall between the diplos and the assistance people is not going to help much overall. In any case, I rather suspect Bishop is the sound of comfy sinecures being gored":
Maybe so. I don't know anything about InterAction or the Center for Global Development. But it seems to me that if you want to "depoliticize foreign aid," you ought to advocate that the U.S. funnel more money through international organizations rather than via the U.S. AID pipeline, which is about as political as it gets.
I am at a loss to think of an international organisation where the spending of money is not political as well.
Nor would I think it would depoliticise foreign aid, it would merely politicise the financing of that organisation.
Posted by The Lounsbury at January 26, 2006 01:16 AM
Filed Under:
Biz - Policy & Development
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/2316
