Mbd,
On one hand you say “of course they are as capable, that goes without saying” but then continue with western MultiNats and governments have pressured these governments, or have leverage because of aid and debt relief with conditions. Why would that be?
Why has Asia been different to Africa in development?
Resources do not move countries so governments must utilise the MultiNats which will be vying for a slice of the action for the best of the country (good governance). If they line their pockets or buy the latest weaponry for “defence” but health & education suffer. (bad governance)

As to the arms dealing. If I buy a gun from a store because a sales men said I need it when I do not and then I use it later against neighbours or, god forbid, family who should the jury convict? I suppose I believe in taking responsibility for one actions. Some errors can be forgiven as nobody is perfect but what we seeing in Africa are endemic.

The US spending much more on defence? They can afford it.

As to that tragic Shell and Chevron scenarios you mention. Either the government was bullied (bad governance but since we agree African people are just as capable as any other race, therefore unlikely) or the government wants the job done no matter the cost to the people it is meant to serve (bad, sorry, evil governance).
Interesting to note that just recently Venezuelan government has taken some MultiNats to task (legal raiding offices etc) about unpaid taxes – Good governance.

As to your comment “it seems you are falling into that category mentioned in the article - "Africans need to fix these problems before rich countries can do anything"
Please tell me where I said that?
Please read what people write not what you THINK they write.
Developed nations should help, but what is the most effective way for Africans to improve the success of any aid? See Terje posts for an interesting insight on that?

g'day Bigfish, I do read what other people write, and very carefully. Plenty of good points have been raised, and I'm simply taking the position I have to avoid repeating the valid and important points made by other posters, including yourself, on issues such as bad governance and corruption. I also agree that these are important points that need to be dealt with.

I never said you are actually part of "that category mentioned in the article - Africans need to fix these problems before rich countries can do anything". That's simply the impression I got from your previous postings, not a direct quote from them. I said "IT SEEMS you are falling into that category...." not that you are actually part of it, or said that you are part of it. Big difference. Please read what people write not what you THINK they write.

cont'd...

"...but then continue with western MultiNats and governments have pressured these governments, or have leverage because of aid and debt relief with conditions. Why would that be?"

I've already explained why I think that would be. But I'll reiterate once again. Have a look at what the G8 have actually said and the various documents they have produced concerning aid and debt relief. To qualify, these governments have to meet certain conditions before they receive anything. Much publicised was the conditions for good governance and democratic reforms - fair enough - but what passed virtually silently were the conditions demanding the opening up of the economies of these countries as well as increased liberalisation and privatisation of public services. It has been well documented that such conditions and policies (in tandem with local problems of corruption, warfare, etc) keep local populations in a cycle of poverty and despair. Once services such as health, education, and water are privatised, prices go up and people can no longer afford them. With privatisation, more and more power is sold off to multinationals, away from the hands of the people (so much for promoting democracy), while a handful of local elites get filthy rich. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but it just seems that the relationship between corrupt local elites and multinationals (and their respective governments) is just too cosy and convenient to give up.

Tell me, why do you think developing countries should have to compete on such an unequal playing field? It doesn't seem fair to me.

We all know the US can afford to spend what it likes on defence, that wasn't my point. Why can't it afford to increase its spending on foreign aid to a measly 0.7% of its GDP?

And finally, what if there were no gun stores in the first place? C'mon, where's the morality in profiting from selling arms to governments we know are involved in long running conflicts? Can’t you see the hypocrisy in promoting aid and good governance while at the same time supplying arms that contribute to poverty and suffering?

Mdb, wiggle wiggle, my previous postS. When untruths start to creep in I start wondering. One post actually on this forum, and if that single post gave the impression you say, (honestly, really) I suppose I will say sorry !!?

I thought the last paragraph said that Africa couldn’t influence external factors eg. developed countries aid, as greatly as its internal factors? Any way what ever you seem to think.
Have you noticed that I have not disagreed with you on the non-level playing field? Or the presence of evil MultiNats, Or the unfair conditions on aid? Developed countries can START DOING SOMETHING THERE! I hope that is clear.

I suppose a last comment or two from me for this forum since I have lost my passion for honest discussion on this. What is the true worth of all the aid given if governments do not utilise it and their precious budgets responsibly. And again I ask why has Asia and Africa development over the last 50 years been so different?

Bigfish, apologies if i'm the reason you've lost your passion for honest debate, only continued with my viewpoint because you again asked "why would that be?" not because i thought you disagreed with me outright, although there were some uncertainties on my part up until your last post, which perhaps informed my posts more than they should have. - which i guess highlights the difficulties of debating online, eg. lack of nuances in speech, long turn around time, lack of space, etc - which force you to form impressions based on scant info for the sake of an angle or viewpoint. thanks for picking me up on the plural, got carried away i guess. oops, blame youthful exuberance.

"What is the true worth of all the aid given if governments do not utilise it and their precious budgets responsibly?"

Not much. And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, I would ask:

What is the true worth of all the aid given if the conditions attached negate much of its good intentions before it even reaches these government's coffers?

At least we agree that both issues need to be tackled.

As for Asia/Africa disparities - good question that would require a complex answer. But I would start with differences in agricultural production - 'green revolution' in asia but not africa - and in climate conditions. Perhaps greater infrastructure and more entrenched political systems left over by colonial powers in Asia than in Africa?

Africa will remain doomed until African leaders stop playing ploitics with the fundamentally important issues of starvation, AIDS, and economic links with the west.
My father was born in Rhodesia in 1948, and watched as the world handed power to Robert Mugabe in 1980. He never wholly supported Ian Smith's politics, and truly believed that Zimbabwe had a bright multicultural future. However blind freddy could have predicted disaster. Mugabe was a terrorist not a freedom fighter. His Chinese trained ZANLA organisation murdered women, children, black and white with impunity. He pursued a program of mass murder against the Matabele whom had largely supported Joshua Nkomo's Russian backed ZIPRA.But still he was elevated as a prime candidate to lead the country ahead of many worthy candidates.
Today Mugabe commits the same attrocities against his people daily. Thabo Mbeki stands by as South Africa pursues appeasement with thugs in Burundi, Diamond Thieves in the Congo, and Angola's hardliners. All while most African leaders continue to maintain a fleet of mercedes, and deny that AIDS even exist-until recently the official line in Africa was that HIV was a 'white mans'ploy' to stop Africans breeding!
Yes MNC's actively court these corrupt relationships, and do relatively little to improve the plight of the average African. However what good could they do if African leaders continue to be whimps, thugs, and worms? It would be wonderful to see Sir Geldoff, and the WTO protesters banging on the gates of Robert Mugabes palacial estate in Harare...