CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
by A. Limbion, Congo-Brazzaville, December 1999
THEME = DEVELOPMENT
The plight of developing countries, particularly those in the
sub-Saharan region,
is not caused just by the burden of their external debts,
but also from their military expenditure to which they assign the larger part of their
revenues
"It's good that the NGOs, under the banner of the Jubilee 2000 Campaign, are working towards the er-adication of the debt of the poor countries, but it remains to be seen if the debt is the only cause of misfortune in these countries." These remarks were made by an assistant lecturer at the University of Brazzaville, and vis à vis Africa's long-term after debt reduction, are rather pessimistic. But facts can't be ignored.
Even if there's little chance that such and such a country will go to war with a neighbouring country, it's sad to note that these countries invest much more in the military sector than in the social one. But on-going problems relating to a dramatic increase in population, malnutrition, AIDS, malaria, cholera, tuberculosis, illiteracy and deteriorating economies, all go to prove that these countries need doctors, ed-ucators, qualified administrators, engineers and massive social aid rather than soldiers.
Today, the old way of gaining power through force, which seemed to have been on the way out with the advent of democracy, is once again rearing its ugly head in many of the countries we've been describing. Private militia, the military and the civil sector are all at each other's throats. In those countries which ought to be developing their economies, the imbalance between the military and the social budget, weighs heavily on the people, who need to be better cared for, better nourished, better educated.
In 1997, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) reported that the foreign debt of developing countries had reached US $2,066 billion dollars and that those countries had paid back US $272 billion dollars to their creditors and to the international financial institutions. The debt of sub-Saharan Africa alone reached US $330 billion dollars and the continent has to pay back each day US $33 million dollars just to service this debt. Ironically, however, the same foreign debt which is an obstacle for African countries putting their econimic house in order, does not seem to prevent them from allotting enormous expenditure to the military sector. All of which does nothing to help these same countries increase their production capacity on items which would really benefit them. According to a recent IMF study, a reduction in military expenditure would really be useful to the countries concerned, and encourage private investment.
In 1994, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) revealed in its report, that from 1960 to 1987, military expenditure in developing countries increased from US $24 billion to $145 billion, i.e. an increase of almost 7.5% per year as against 2.8% in industrialised countries. Between 1987 and 1991, military expenditure in the world decreased by 15% as against only 10% in developing countries, i.e. by US $145 billion as against $130 billion. In sub-Saharan Africa, it went from 0.7% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 1960, to 3% in 1991, i.e. armament expenditure estimated at 8 billion dollars per year. Among the countries which spent most on military expenditure were, Sudan, Ethiopia, Chad, Burkina Faso, Mozambique, Mali, Angola, Somalia, Congo RDC and Congo-Brazzaville.
Of course, one knows that when a country decides to increase or decrease its military force, there is no universal method that one can apply. Security requirements and budgetary constraints differ from country to country. Whenever a government considers a reduction or augmentation in its defence budget or expenditure on military personnel, it examines above all, its national security and the resources it has at its disposal before taking a decision. Nonetheless, in taking those decisions, it would seem that African leaders do not pay much attention to the civil sector which is, in fact, priority.
Between 1990 and 1991, Sudan allotted each year and per person, US $23 to military expenses; Ethiopia, where every year thousands of children die of innocuous illnesses - $15; Chad - more than $10; Mozambique - also more than $10 dollars. Angola allocated 20% of its GDP to the army and has 200 soldiers for one doctor.
Congo-Brazzaville, a country which presently has more than 100,000 cases of HIV, counts six private militia (Ninjas, Cocoyes, Mambas, Zulus, Aubévillois, Cobras) who are well armed and maintained. Moreover, it is not known where their leaders find the necessary funding to maintain them. After the war of June 1997, the military authorities discovered in November 1998, a major arms cache - 83 cases of Kalachnikov bullets, 19 cases of grenades and 6 cases of 82 mm. shells. This was in Makelele in the southern sector of Brazzaville, the old fiefdom of former prime minister Bernard Kolelas.
In 1994, the former Head of State, Mr Pascal Lissouba, was on an official visit to Israel. It seems he wanted to purchase Israeli arms in exchange for oil. This news was commented on in the foreign radio services. The presidential press office issued a denial but the fact remains, Mr. Benoit Koukebene, head of Congo- Brazzaville's hydrocarbons office, was a member of the delegation. Two and a half years later, the war of 5 June broke out.
In 1994, French military aid to Congo-Brazzaville amounted to 6 billion CFA francs. The agreement which went with it, stipulated that 100 Congolese military recruits would be accepted each year in French military academies, with France bearing the cost, and that 21 French military personnel should be put at the disposition of the Congolese authorities to guarantee the training and instruction of some components of the Congolese army.
If only these 6 billion had been allocated to the reconstruction of the Marien Ngouabi University, at present on the verge of bankruptcy, or to increase fresh water outlets or electrical installations in the areas which have none! If only those 100 Congolese military recruits and the 21 French military personnel had been teachers, doctors or engineers! This would have allowed the University to accept each year all the students applying for entry, and to improve their study conditions. There would have been more consumers buying water and electricity from the companies concerned and this would have ensured an increase in revenue - to everyone's benefit. Also, because of the availability of new funds, more medical or educational supplies could have been bought, thus breathing new life into the health and education sectors.
Those are the kinds of expenditure which, if channelled into the correct sectors, would add to an increase in production or to direct consumption - thus creating new revenue. So, the question must be asked: "To what does military expenditure contribute?" One old man gives a straight reply: "Today in Africa, arms contribute to nothing at all - except one thing: because of civil war, destruction of all that was built up yesterday at the cost of a thousand and one sacrifices."
The dawn of the year 1990 was a time for change. Military expenditure which came to the total of US $662 billion in 1992 diminished by almost 25% in relation to the total GDP in 1994. In the USA for example, the military budget decreased from 6.5% in 1986 to 5.2% of the GDP in 1992 and, according to IMF calculations, it should have decreased even further to 3.2% in 1998.
By 1994, military expenditure in developing countries, had not substantially changed. From US $110 billion in 1992, it diminished but slightly. In Africa, this represented 2.3% of the GDP with, however, important differences among the various countries. While Ghana, Nigeria and Mauritius presented a rate lower than 1%, the defence budget of many countries in the region went beyond even more that 4% of their GDP.
Some donor countries have, nonetheless, realised enormous efforts in reducing their military aid to sub-Saharan Africa. This is true for the United States. Their military aid to sub-Saharan Africa, which used to as much as US $150 million each year, was only about $12 million in 1994. The countries of what's left of the communist bloc, erstwhile great providers of military aid, give very little now in comparison to years gone by. But hope seems to be diminishing today. Governments are being overthrown by coups d'etat. Armed militia in the pay of those who are already being called in Africa, the "new dictators", are roaming around. What has happened or is presently taking place in Congo- Brazzaville, Angola, Congo RDC, Liberia, to mention only a few, are clear indicators of the failure of democracy in Africa.
Some people judge that the creditors of these developing countries, i.e. the international financial institutions and donor countries and agencies, make the reduction of military spending one of the basic conditions for the allocation of funds to those countries, so that they take on board policies aimed at true amicable development.
And what about the effects of reducing military personnel and defence budgets on the military themselves or on the country in general? It's clear that reducing such expenditure is all part of the democratic process, because democracy and development go hand in hand.
END
ENGLISH CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
PeaceLink 2000 - Reproduction authorised, with usual acknowledgement