Normalising the crisis in Africa

Abstract

Developmental relief has become the central doctrine of 'good practice' in humanitarian responses to complex political emergencies. This is despite the fact that a proliferation of such emergencies reflects a failure of development for people in those countries in crisis. Drawing on case study material from Sudan, Somalia, Rwanda and Uganda, this paper challenges assumptions made about the efficacy of developmental relief models in complex emergencies. The trend towards developmental relief practices coincides with an increasing acceptance of higher levels of humanitarian distress in Africa. Myths of aid dependency and the pursuit of sustainable programming in the midst of war are linked to a global reduction in aid. The mantra of 'local solutions to local problems' locates the causes of crises firmly within those societies in crisis. It provides a premise for international disengagement, and the denial of international responsibility for the genesis and prolongation of humanitarian crises in Africa. Assigning solutions to the poor, the marginalised and victimised through enhanced 'participation' and local financing of services sustains a myth that development is occurring, when in fact levels of distress are rising.