• Print
• E-Mail
• Feedback

01/29/2010

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Mr. Kaberuka, this summer the World Cup football championships will take place in South Africa and there have been concerns in Germany that the country might be too dangerous. Is South Africa ready to organize such an event?

Donald Kaberuka: This again is the typical view the world has of Africa. South Africa has organized many events of international significance. I hope that the event will bring an economic boost to the region. More than that, the world should gain a new image of the continent.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: What would you like people to see?

Kaberuka: People still look at Africa primarily as a place of charity. A place you give aid to, or a place you get minerals or oil from. From an economic point of view, many people think Africa is a risky place, riskier than Iceland. But in this crisis, much more money has been lost on Wall Street than in the whole of Africa. By contrast, our banking system has proved quite solid. And before the financial crisis, the continent had been the fastest growing region, after Asia, with growth rates of five or six percent.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: How hard has the continent been hit by the worldwide recession? In the beginning of 2009, the World Bank warned that up to 30 million African people would become impoverished and 700,000 children could die. Did this nightmare become reality?

Kaberuka: When the crisis came, there was a falling demand for our commodities, from oil to minerals, from timber to diamonds. That interrupted somewhat the momentum of growth. The investment flows slipped and the transfers from migrants abroad, which are quite important for some countries, declined. The growth rate fell to 3 percent. But the consequences weren't as bad as we thought they would be. I think this year we will again see a growth rate of 5 percent. Next year, I even expect to see growth of 6.5 percent.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Recently China has discovered Africa. The country has transfered more than $50 billion in investment and credits to the continent, experts say, with a particular focus on your raw materials. Many Western countries are concerned about such intense Chinese involvement.

Kaberuka: Imagine a copper mine that has been closed for 20 years. And suddenly news arrives that it will re-open; people in the surrounding area are happy. You cannot tell them that these Chinese investments are bad. And if the Chinese come and build a railway because they want to do business in the area, you cannot say that this is bad either.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Even some African labor organizations are concerned that China only wants to gain influence over the continent's natural resources and that Africa, on the long term, will be ruthlessly exploited.

Kaberuka: But before the Chinese came, those materials were under the soil doing nothing. Many copper mines in Congo, for example, were closed. When an investor comes and says, "I want to do business here and I will also build infrastructure," what is bad about it? Nothing -- as long as you can get a good deal, a good contract. We have therefore created the African legal support facility at the African Development Bank, which is meant to help countries negotiate such contracts.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Still, China is doing business with countries like Sudan and Guinea that completely disregard human rights and the principles of good governance. In Guinea last autumn, a €7 billion dollar contract was signed just one week after the army crushed an anti-government demonstration, costing the lives of 150 people.

Kaberuka: We should try to bring newcomers like China or India and others into the same framework of thinking as the OECD countries. But simply pointing fingers is not the best way to do that. We should set incentives to convince them. But if we stand on the pulpit, they can just as easily point back at the traditional donor nations. For a long time, many badly governed places, like the Mobutu regime (eds. note: a reference to Mobutu Sésé Seko, the heavy handed dictator of Zaire, now known as the Democratic Republic of Congo), were getting aid for strategical reasons. Aside from that, I think that good governance can only become anchored in a country when it is something that is owned by the citizens themselves.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: In other words, making aid conditional doesn't help?

Kaberuka: Aid was conditional for a long time. But there was no local appropriation of the issues so you only had good governance for a certain time. But we can provide money on the basis of performance. Economic performance, government performance and the condition of state institutions. Good performers get more resources, poor performers less. That works.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: In times of crisis, the Western Hemisphere tends to become preoccupied with its own problems. Have you noticed a drop-off in aid?

Kaberuka: When thousands of people are losing their jobs and losing their homes, of course you have to look out for your own. Elections are always won at home. Until now there have been no sudden cuts. The traditional donors have really tried to respect their commitments. Still, there are many countries whose foreign aid budget is a percentage of their GDP. Even if they meet their commitment, it will mean less help.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Do you think that there is still a chance that the so-called Millennium Goals will be met?

Kaberuka: No. According to the Gleneagles-Goals, aid for Africa should have been doubled by 2010. That didn't happen. And trade barriers should have been taken down as well. That didn't happen either. In contrast there have been protectionist measures put in place in many countries to fight the current crisis.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: But the leader of the World Trade Organization, Pascal Lamy, has promised a breakthrough for the Doha-Round for 2010. Do you see any chance for a success?

Kaberuka: To me, it seems as if the momentum to reach an agreement is not there yet.