> I guess at stake is not as much seducing the natives (the ordinary
> armstwisting works just fine), but the prevention of theft and
> mismanagement mentioned in the original Doug's posting.
I believe the reverse is true: the money is given with the intent that it be stolen. I saw this kind of collusion with my own eyes in Russia. How else do you rpepare a country for plunder? You create a rotten oligarchy which fears its own people and is universally despised in turn. You turn a natural resource base into a debt-ridden beggar; and you bind a country into underdevelopment duress forever. That's what they planned to do in Russia and that's just exactly how they did it. The loans sit in Swiss banks and their very sequestration from global capital circulation wipes them out as a burden on the lender; but the debtor is bound into a usurious relationship with the West: what else do you call 150% interest rates on Russian GKOs (state bonds) but usury?
Corruption among recipient kleptocracies is not a perverse by product of aid, it's the heart of it, and designedly so.
-- Mark Jones http://www.geocities.com/~comparty