| |
Contributions from
the Column
Studies and reports
Poor outlook for transatlantic policy
Forced labour: the underside of globalisation
Military budgets: ploughshares into swords
The legitimacy of international taxation
Food aid: local purchases more cost efficient
06/2005 |
|
[ Military budgets ]
Ploughshares into swords
Chad’s oil pipeline was intended to be a showpiece. The earnings from oil production were to fund education, health and water supply rather than to disappear into bottomless pits. At least, this was the intention of the World Bank, which helped to finance the 1070 kilometer long pipeline’s construction stretching from landlocked Chad to Cameroon’s Atlantic coast. However, that was not how it turned out. According to civil society organisations, Chad’s government used the first proceeds from oil sales to buy weapons.
It is a development politician’s worst nightmare when money for development is used for arms. Christine Toetzke, Head of the Peacebuilding and Crisis Prevention Division of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Co-operation and Development, acknowledges that the possibility of indirectly financing military budgets in developing countries cannot be ruled out. This risk exists irrespective of whether the funds are provided as budget aid, program financing or project financing. Stephan Klingebiel of the German Development Institute (DIE) explains the problem of so-called “fungibility”: “If we build five primary schools in a country, we are taking the pressure off the government to do so, and it can then use the money for gold-plated taps, health care units or for a new tank.”
Nonetheless, the German Development Ministry is tackling the problem, Toetzke says. Caution is certainly needed. Toetzke points out that both partner countries and implementation agencies oppose the Ministry’s getting involved in arms budgets and that there are no simple solutions. She says that, in principle, the demand for greater transparency in national budgets makes sense. However, it also can aggravate sneakiness. In Uganda, for example, the government does not account for part of its defense spending as such and is, instead, hiding the sums away in the budgets of other departments. International donors, therefore, have the impression that Uganda’s level of defense spending is lower than it actually is. This was the conclusion of an assessment made by the Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC) concerning the defense expenditures in five East African countries. The report was presented at a symposium held in Bonn in late April by the KfW development bank, BICC and Germany’s international broadcaster Deutsche Welle.
Michael Brzoska, the principal author of the BICC assessment, says that there are paramilitary groups in Uganda which are not shown in the defense budget. What’s more, he also reports that activities in neighbouring Congo serve to generate income and that shadow budgets result from the military’s own business enterprises.
The example of Chile similarly proves the dimensions of hidden military budgets. The country commands one of the most modern armies in South America. A national “Copper Law” provides that 10 per cent of the total copper revenues of the government-run copper corporation CODELCO will go to the armed forces. This provides several hundred million dollars to the Chilean army each year.
Experts agree that defense expenditure cannot be opposed in general. After all, security is an issue of public action just as education or health. Volker Riehl of the Catholic aid organisation Misereor says it does not matter much that development aid can ultimately end up in defense budgets. According to him, illegal activities are the real problem. He believes, however, that international development agents should in general pay more attention to the consequences military expenditure has on human rights and the fight against poverty. Riehl points to Angola as a bad example. The country has built up a massive arsenal using oil revenues. According to the BICC, Angola invested approximately US$ 800 million in its military in 2002, which is eight times more than Mozambique, an equally poor country.
Johannes Beck
|
