Political aid

Before somebody writes a letter talking about "aid", we have to make a point clear. It started a long time ago. Getting a hold in a country's affairs is one of the reasons "donors" keep channeling aid funds.

For example, the World Bank's plan to finance the Aswan Dam in Egypt was intended "to keep the Russians out of Africa". The World Bank loans on political rather than commercial basis were forced by the reason of "keep the Russians out of somewhere".

European countries happily jumped onto the "donation" bandwagon. The U.S. was "donating" to buy good behavior. The smaller European countries wanted to make new diplomatic and commercial friendships. And former colonial powers wanted to keep their commercial links with their old colonies.

The American masqueraded the build up of the military strength of allied countries as aid. The estimates for America's biggest aid recipients in 1989 follow: Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, El Salvador, Greece, the Philippines, Honduras and Guatemala. From the total aid budget, 40 percent went to Israel and Egypt, a reward for the Camp David agreement. This is pure buying of security and good behavior rather than aid for the betterment of these countries' populations.

Japan's target of doubling foreign aid in absolute terms over a seven-year period, like the aid programs of other countries, involves self-serving measures, such as soft loans, to underwrite the purchase of Japanese products. We are not talking altruism here.

OSVALDO COELHO

Bandung, West Java