As I was talking
with some Central Africans who are working with a humanitarian aid project
recently and one commented that it is not good to just give people things
because then they expect to get more later and aren’t willing to help. Wow!
What an insightful comment! This
man is working in an area that was devastated by fighting 18 months ago. People fled, spent weeks in the bush, and
came back to burned out houses and destroyed crops. A humanitarian crisis of major proportions.
My friend reported
that a couple of the villages received monetary and food aid. (I don’t know the details and didn’t ask.) Now, he is working with Lutheran Disaster
Response and the Evangelical Lutheran Church - Central African Republic in an
accompaniment model project. That means
that the beneficiaries are actively involved in all aspects of the project –
from planning, to implementing, to evaluating.
Further, villagers are organized into teams who share tools and work
together to make mud bricks and build houses.
Later, as the rains come, they will work together to plant and harvest.
Most people are
thrilled to have the support and anxious to be involved. These are their villages, their lives. They like having some control and being
active participants. We hope that in
working together, they can rebuild peace and various groups be reconciled to a
life that includes respect for those who are different than they are. We hope, too, that they will all be less
willing to destroy houses in the future since they helped build them!
There are,
however, the one or two villages that received “free” aid some time ago. My friend says they now sit back with their
arms crossed and ask for more. Why
aren’t you feeding us as we work? Why
can’t we have houses with tin roofs instead of thatch? Why can’t you just give us the money?
They got once (or
often, who knows?) so now they sit with their hands (figuratively) out wanting
more. Those who want to do “drive-by”
giving often throw money at a problem or give what they think is needed because
it can be done quickly and the giver can feel good about having done
something. This is (often intentionally)
condescending and paternalistic. In the
long run, I believe it is also harmful to both the giver and the receiver. The receiver will, sooner or later, become
resentful and/or dependent.
I am pleased to
say that the people expecting handouts are the minority. (And, they don’t get what they ask for! They, too, have to participate to benefit.) But I think their attitude shows the huge
advantage of accompaniment projects as opposed to those which bring materials
or food or money and just leave it.
This situation
makes me think of a great poem by Shel Silverstein, “Helping.” The first examples are
accompaniment (not that
he would have called them that). The
teams work together to complete the task and then benefit together. And then there is Zachary Zugg.
Accompaniment is
needed in many situations, not just CAR or strife-torn regions. How can those of us who have more work with
those in need in ways that are respectful, inclusive, and based on the true
needs of the “beneficiaries”? We can
also learn and grow, but it demands some time and effort on our parts. And, initially, we may be viewed as hard-hearted
or mean that we won’t just give
what we have. It is worth insisting on
accompaniment.
Well stated, Susan! Thanks for your sharing and insight. Peace from Fargo, ND...Tiffany Sundeen
ReplyDelete