February 1, 2008 | Read Time: 1 minute
Is it practical to support development projects in a nation as unsafe as Somalia, where relief trucks must be accompanied by armed soldiers, asks Emma Batha on the Reuters AlertNet blog.
The Eastern African nation is so dangerous that aid groups can’t even reach many of the people who’ve fled fighting among warlords, Islamic insurgents, and troops. Attacks in Mogadishu, the capital, killed more than 6,500 people last year, says Ms. Batha.
So wouldn’t it be unwise for donors to support long-term, expensive projects to develop the country and its infrastructure?
Guillermo Bettocchi, the United Nation’s country representative, doesn’t think so. Somalia is facing not just violence, but floods that create wide-scale humanitarian needs, writes Ms. Batha.
Mr. Bettocchi says that if a dam were built, the problem would be fixed. But because donors see the dam as a development project, they’re less likely to pay for it than they would efforts to meet immediate humanitarian needs.
Mr. Bettocchi says that while donors have put money into helping displaced people, they are too reluctant to pay for longer-term projects.
What do you think of Ms. Batha’s post? Is doing development work in countries as dangerous as Somalia a bad idea?
