by Cilas Kemedjio
Dr. Tarrósy’s piece brings to light interesting information, especially about the production of Western NGOs as well as Hungarian sensibilities. Hungary is a net receiver of European Union aid, and it is significant that its humanitarian vocation coincides with its admission as a full member of the EU. The EU has replaced the Soviet Bloc as Hungary’s ideological (and I suspect financial as well) patron. A question that arises is whether and how the EU patronage differs from the Soviet one? The bigger question is: How does a county that has to declare allegiance to a bigger (transnational) power manage to pass for humanitarian (a provider of aid)? What does humanitarianism add to such as country?
It does appear that the EU is an important force behind these “embedded” NGOs: the Foundation for Africa is working hard to secure funds from the EU, to become accredited in the EU department of Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection. And this raises another question: If the DRC is considered a “failed state”, are we to praise the EU for filling in the gaps, or are we allowed to look more deeply into what produced this “failure”? The very ideas of the “failed state” and the ready-made, one-size-fits-all humanitarian solution need to continue to be challenged.
In sum, the Hungarian NGO entry in full force into the aid industry in Africa is as fascinating as it is potentially questionable. Not having a history as a colonial power does not preclude socialization into hierarchical relationships or voyeurism. Both the child sponsorship efforts and the short-term aid project efforts, therefore, need sustained inquiry and critique. This post and commentary provide an important beginning.
Dr. Kemedjio is Director of the Frederick Douglass Institute for African and African-American Studies at the University of Rochester and co-editor of The CIHA Blog.