Politikere og analytikere i det fattige Himalaya-land, som aldrig er kommet sig over den lange borgerkrig, sætter i stigende grad spørgsmålstegn ved de internationale donorers prioriteter og nogle anklager dem for at tage parti eller direkte omgå regeringen.
KATHMANDU, 26 February 2013 (IRIN): Dissent (uenighed) in Nepal over the role of ethnicity (etnisk tilhørsforhold) in a post-conflict state has put donor agencies under increased scrutiny (granskning), with politicians and analysts accusing them of meddling, taking sides and circumventing (omgå) the government to push an agenda of “social cohesion (sammenhængskraft)”.
“We got a lot of criticism from all sides. We took the brunt from all sections of society including marginalized groups, citizens, media and political parties, all saying we interfered or did not do enough,” said the director of the UK government’s aid arm, Department for International Development (DFID), in Nepal, Dominic O’Neill.
DFID is Nepal’s largest bilateral donor, recently increasing its annual spending by 60 million US dollar to some 150 million in 2013.
The national debate surrounding an ethnic identity-based federalism – where power is devolved (uddelegeres) from the national government to local units determined largely along ethnic lines – has been at the core of Nepal’s transition to post-war stability.
But some politicians, analysts and journalists paint Nepal’s international donors as instigators (anspore) of ethnic tension.
Seven years after the war: Not better off to day
Almost seven years since the country ended a decade-long civil war with a peace deal, efforts to birth a post-war constitution and new government are still stalled amid political infighting, which has only worsened the Himalayan country’s ills.
Nepal is one of world’s poorest countries with 25 percent of its 30 million people living below the poverty line, according to the World Bank.
Pockets of chronic under-nutrition, especially in the country’s Far West mountainous region, exceed emergency levels, and access to safe sanitation remains perilously inaccessible for 20 million people.
“Changes are drastically needed in this country, but did not happen at the pace they were supposed to. Aid agencies got too involved in the peace process, political transition and democratization issues rather than development,” political analyst and professor Krishna Khanal told IRIN.
Aid agencies should have been focusing, instead, on building up national institutions rather than duplicating (overlappe) efforts and competing among themselves, Khanal added.
Checks and balances
Læs videre på
http://www.irinnews.org/Report/97551/Analysis-Politicians-donors-question-donor-neutrality-in-Nepal
