2With steadily declining growth rates, escalating poverty levels, and unchanged anti-democratic3practices, several African developing countries have unmasked that the way in which the 4international community deploys foreign aid needs to be altered. As internationally outlooking 5liberals, we have a solemn obligation to take action when foreign countries are in dire need for 6assistance to boost one’s development rates, but we owe ourselves as well as the recipients of 7foreign aid to make the system more efficient and thereby more humane.
8Noting that: 9There is a sharp distinction between emergency aid and foreign aid, where the former
9There is a sharp distinction between emergency aid and foreign aid, where the former10covers immediate assistance in the aftermath of e.g. natural disasters, while the latter 11seeks to solve structural and societal issues of economic, social and/or institutional 12character.
13The iconic words of Martin Luther King jr. remain as relevant as a guiding star today as14they did decades ago; “A threat to justice anywhere, is a threat to justice everywhere.”
15Believing that: 16Foreign aid is not a concept that can be globally revoked overnight and will require a long
16Foreign aid is not a concept that can be globally revoked overnight and will require a long17process of global, political reformation. Hence therefore, a significantly more disciplinary 18distribution of aid constitute the first step on the way.
19As an exemplifying case the Danish response towards recipient country, Tanzania, of20withholding aid donations until the Tanzanian government would abolish its legislation on 21making homosexuality a criminal act proved rather successful in 2018.
22Donor countries tend to execute and evaluate their foreign aid-operations based on the23‘shampoo-method’, where pre-development is compared to post-development, which 24hinders any legitimate evaluation, since initial, domestic plans for schools, hospitals etc. 25are left out of the equation.
26The ‘shampoo effect’ has managed to blindfold the debate about the legitimacy of27foreign aid in cases where specific investments are made despite the fact that these were 28already funded before donors interfered.
29No foreign aid should be provided without appropriate plans of development as well as30specific aims, such as literacy rates, percentage of children enrolled at primary school, 31and number of doctors educated, utilising foreign aid as a motivational driver for 32development to a much larger extent.
33Lymec calls upon: 1.
33Lymec calls upon:
1.34All donor countries to restructure their foreign aid programmes to be solely based on 35discipline and conditionalities following the examples of e.g. Danish-Tanzanian relations.
2.36A tougher discipline of recipient countries in accordance with the liberal values which 37constitute the backbone of Western democracy in the forms of e.g. freedom of press, 38freedom of assembly and LGBTQIA-rights.
Attention: This is a preview! The official text is printed in the proposal book for Autumn Congress 08 - 09 November 2019.