book1

ecipient in giving and taking foreign aid. First, according to eastern
philosophy, dona� on is a benevolent ac� on. The donor should not expect
even a thanks or gree� ng for the dona� on from the recipients. Donors
should not show any concern how the recipients use that donated money.
But in case of foreign aid, donor agencies are providing the money of
taxpayers of their ci� zen. Hence, donors are always concerned with the use
of that money in recipient countries because they are accountable to their
taxpayers. Moreover, donors are believed to provide foreign aid with some
hidden agendas or their own commercial, poli� cal or strategic interests.
Second, foreign aid is a temporary solu� on that is supposed to be provided
for a couple of years, especially during trying � mes. So that, in long run,
the recipient countries recover and become self-dependent. But in reality,
in case of Nepal, it never came true. Even, a� er six decades of con� nuous
fl ow of foreign aid, Nepal is there where it was in the beginning. Moreover,
the dependency syndrome has increased in such a way that even day-to-day
ac� vi� es have been unthinkable to run without foreign aid. Foreign aid has
been an easy way for the rulers to stay in power and to suppress dissen� ng
voices. Foreign grants are not to be paid back while future genera� on pays
the foreign loan. So foreign aid has been the “Ulphatko Dhan Phupuko
Shraddha means money in aid, the devil send them down the drain for the
rulers of Nepal.
Mo� ve of aid: Are Marxist nearer to the reality?
Since the beginning of 1950s, there is a big discourse in the development
of third world with the help of foreign aid. The capitalists were in favor that
foreign aid is not only helpful but essen� al for the development of third
world. Along with great success of Marshal Plan, neoclassical structural
model emphasize the role of capital accumula� on in transferring the
tradi� onal subsistence economy to self-sustaining growth whereas foreign
aid, for them, is the best solu� on to provide the scarce resources. Even for
the modern economic case, foreign aid is the solu� on for the problem of
developing countries.
But, the Marxists think that it is not only impossible to develop a country
through foreign aid but it is even counterproduc� ve. For them, the centre
(rich countries) is actually inimical to the development of peripheral (poor)
countries. The rela� onship between the centre and the peripheral is
necessarily one of exploita� on. Similarly, mul� na� onal corpora� ons work
as the power units of modern imperialism, while the role of state of the
imperialist country is suppor� ng them. Further, a small elite ruling class
in the developing countries enjoys high income, social status and poli� cal
power and this group tries their best to perpetuate the interna� onal
capitalist system of inequality and conformity by which they are rewarded.
In addi� on to this, Third World’s underdevelopment is the result of faulty
and inappropriate advice provided by well-meaning but o� en uninformed
interna� onal experts from developed countries, assistance agencies and
mul� na� onal donor organiza� ons. These experts off er sophis� cated elegant
134
Changing paradigms of aid eff ec� veness in Nepal