Why Does India Give and Receive Aid?

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by ajtr, Sep 18, 2010.

  1. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Oct 2, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Why Does India Give and Receive Aid?

    Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee was in Dhaka recently offering Bangladesh a $1 billion loan package. On arrival, he said, “we (India) are committed to assisting Bangladesh in addressing its priorities for development.”

    The loan is believed to be the largest ever Bangladesh has received in one agreement.The loan is intended for the development of railways and communications infrastructure which would allow the transportation of Indian exports to the Northeast via Bangladesh. Clearly this demonstrates that assisting Bangladesh, our neighbor, is not purely altruistic and India is not alone among countries in mixing benevolence and self-interest in its foreign assistance.

    By contrast, we gave a paltry sum of $5 million to Haiti after the devastating earthquake that struck the country earlier this year. ((())) Haiti is at least as needy as Bangladesh but obviously peripheral to India’s strategic and economic concerns, unlike Bangladesh and other neighbors.

    Rewind a few weeks prior to Mr.Mukherjee’s visit to Bangladesh in the days leading up to David Cameron’s visit to India. The Department for International Development, the U.K.’s bilateral aid agency, found itself responding to public criticism concerning the 250 million pounds that India receives annually as aid money from its coffers. This makes India the U.K.’s single largest aid recipient. Apart from seeing this as atonement for 200 years of British colonial rule, does it make sense in any other way?

    As the WSJ’s Paul Beckett points out in a recent article this is a paradox of India: “A giant country that both dispenses and receives aid, a nation touted as a commercial superpower that has more poor people than any other nation on Earth.”

    There are valid historical reasons why India has received aid and there are important strategic and economic reasons why we give aid. But their coincidence today is surely odd. It’s similar to receiving a loan from a bank and then giving away that money to charity.

    The objective for any country including India in providing aid and assistance to other countries has both strategic and economic dimensions. The ongoing crisis caused by the flooding in Pakistan – for which India has announced it will donate $25 million — has elicited large pledges of support both from multilateral agencies such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank and bilateral donors most notably the U.S.

    As a recent NYT article pointed out, the large U.S. assistance to Pakistan is at least as much about refurbishing the image of the U.S. in a strategically vital region.

    As for India, in a 2007 report by Canada’s International Development Research Center points out that we focus the vast bulk of our development assistance in our immediate neighborhood which includes Bhutan, Nepal and Afghanistan. In fact, Bhutan in the 15 years leading up to 2006, accounted for almost 30% of all Indian overseas aid. In addition, India is also a donor to several African countries with which we have long-standing ties.

    India’s aid programs have become more ambitious recently and are reaching out to regions where India wishes to exert more influence such as Central and Southeast Asia. India’s development assistance to these countries is typically not in the form of cash but is tied to areas such as infrastructure, capacity building, training, education and health. And often the money is used to pay for services and expertise coming from India itself.

    As to why we receive aid, this is really a hangover of the Cold War. India despite its non-alignment and friendly relations with the former Soviet Union was seen as basically well-disposed towards the West and as a bulwark against Communism in the region. Hence, it received massive amounts of aid from multilateral and bilateral donors.

    While no one will complain about being given “free” money, we have to ask ourselves in a country with a thriving economy, booming stock and property markets, a rising number of billionaires, a sophisticated space program that aims to put a probe on the moon in a few years, does it still make sense to receive substantial amounts of foreign assistance?

    With the exception of major disasters such as Haiti and Pakistan which generate new monies, aid budgets are typically fixed in advance and have to be allocated across countries. Therefore, the allocation of aid dollars is a zero-sum game. Every dollar we receive is a dollar not sent to a country that is truly in need such as in sub-Saharan Africa.

    As an aspiring superpower and major emerging economy, it’s a strange optic that we’re a large aid recipient. It’s as if Mukesh Ambani still received pocket money from his mother.

    In today’s world, development assistance is primarily a tool of foreign and economic policy. It is certainly used this way by countries such as the U.S., Russia and increasingly China. India, too, is now showing signs of savvy in doing this as well, especially in our region.

    But how effective can we be at this game if we ourselves are being used as a tool of someone’s else’s aid game?

    – Rupa Subramanya Dehejia is based in Mumbai and writes on the political economy of India. You can follow her on twitter @RupaSD.
  3. neo29

    neo29 Senior Member Senior Member

    Dec 1, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Giving Loan to countries is ok, But giving money just as a aid must be thought twice.

    We could have given more money to Haiti but we didnt coz it did not serve any political purpose. Bangladesh we gave money coz we need to keep neighbors close. But i wonder why did we give 25 million to Pakistan for floods.
  4. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    May 10, 2010
    Likes Received:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    To keep friends close and enemies closer I guess.
  5. thakur_ritesh

    thakur_ritesh Administrator Administrator

    Feb 19, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Land of the GODS - "Dev Bhomi".
    i hope before people coming to write articles like these understand the basic difference between aid program and a loan. what india gave to b'deah is a loan, the repay timeline of which is 20-25years, which includes accounting for default time-period, and in case of p'stan and haiti it was aid which when it comes to giving is bare minimum and when both these loans and aid are handed over all the sourcing generally happens from indian shores which means effectively the attempt it to generate goodwill in the country where such aid is given but in the process prop-up the local economy, and so will be the case most likely with cash money of 25m usd we have given to pakistan routed through WB (WB will look to buy stuff off that money and then india will act as the supplier).

    quite possible the aid we receive annually is routed to all the aid we hand over to these other countries because the aid we receive is not allowed to be monitored by any other agency other than the government departments themselves, otherwise the aid or loans are not taken at all, and all such agencies have this big grudge against us for they just cant monitor what all we are doing with that money and they have to rely on all such data that is fed to them by the GoI on the financials. quite possible that we are subsidizing the aid we give by the aid we receive so why not grab that money with both hands, i for one will be more than happy if countries were to double the aid they give to us annually.
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2010

Share This Page