Should the West intervene with more aid and peacekeeping forces to stem the stream of young men leaving their homelands?

Much of that comes under what is termed “international aid” and we know what has happened to that.

Not a popular concept on GN

The steady stream of mostly young men seeking asylum across Europe is becoming a headache for all Governments.

Surely it makes sense to tackle the problem at source.

Helping to make their lives better so they can remain and thrive in their homeland must be better than lining criminal gangs pockets for a better future in a foreign land?

Whitewavemark2

Much of that comes under what is termed “international aid” and we know what has happened to that.

Not a popular concept on GN

My thought exactly, Wwmk2

I absolutely agree that we (i.e first world countries) should be helping poorer countries but most seem to see them as sources of wealth to be exploited.

It doesn't take long to find articles which explain the problem. this looks as good as any, One might not agree with all the proposed solutions, but the factors are real

medium.com/@jrcoleman97/why-poverty-persists-9-structural-traps-that-keep-developing-countries-poor-and-how-to-break-them-359595cf63ab

Didn’t the previous Labour government write off a lot of third world debt for this very reason? And yet now the electorate complain about us giving world aid, not realising that it has long term repercussions. They also don’t realise that giving aid to poorer countries is soft power, something that China is very good at.

The UN can only send in peacekeeping forces if the parties in a war agree, I think.

For Western powers to intervene could cause more problems than we have at present.

Sudan could be a rich country but its gold is being used to fund the civil war.

This is something I’ve pondered on as well, whether it’s possible for European countries to intervene in a constructive way. The colonial history in much of Africa, recent criticism of white saviour complex and the corruption around aid delivered by charities doesn’t paint a picture that would encourage western governments to invest financially. Peace keeping forces would need to be welcomed. The blood bath in Sudan makes that unlikely

Sorry to be a negative Nellie

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Thanks MaixieD. I responded after reading about Sudan on another thread

I would echo what others have said- overseas aid budget has been cut to the bone and mostly this is approved of by the electorate.

MaizieD

I don't think that GG13 is talking specifically about Sudan here. Have you accidentally posted on the wrong thread, Allira?

I have asked Gnet to remove this, though as it does respond to the thread title.

I don't think that 'aid' alone is going to do much to solve the problems of poorer countries. It's just tinkering at the edges,

If people don't want to follow the link I posted shall I try to condense it down to post here?

I think the underlying issues are often due to the political instability, and civil wars in the name of religion which rage constantly in many countries. I’m not sure that it is ever going to be possible to resolve them, as even with peacekeeping forces in place some people will be persecuted and seek to escape to a better life.

Sorry for not being precise, the OP was just a jumble of my thoughts to what is a growing issue for many people and countries.

Sudan is an even bigger problem than Gaza/Israel.

African countries are ripe for China to pop in and exert influence and pressure more so than it already has/is.

The solution if there is one is way above my paygrade

Allira

The UN can only send in peacekeeping forces if the parties in a war agree, I think.

For Western powers to intervene could cause more problems than we have at present.

Sudan could be a rich country but its gold is being used to fund the civil war.

I haven't a clue what the solution is in Sudan, but the West avoids it at its peril. China already has a huge influence in Sudan and is likely to become even stronger.

Sudan has natural resources including gold, iron ore and other resources. It also has areas which could be used for arable farming. As you say, it has huge potential.

Snap GG13. I agree with you that Sudan is globally a huge problem. I suspect that in fifty years, spheres of influence are going to look very different from today and Sudan will be somewhere in the centre of the changes.

Can't we keep this thread a bit more general than just Sudan?

I thought it was an interesting topic about all poor countries and what could be done to help them. Sudan has its very own thread.

OTOH, talking about the global economy,, debt and the pervading influence of neoliberalism might be profoundly boring for most...

Is so complex, some countries do need help financially having been destroyed by war and resources plundered by western governments or other interested players, others like Iran have been crippled by sanctions and have a ruthless regime so is not straightforward.
I think the best thing to do would be to give free scholarships to some young men or women over here to study civil engineering, medicine, and other useful professions, on the proviso they return with their new skills and hopefully help rebuild their homeland.
Sadly there has been such a brain drain from third world countries which makes it even harder for countries to recover.
And of course more aid should be available so this army of infrastructure engineers, surgeons/docs, and other professionals can hit the ground running.
Is a dream but if there were less self interested governments and more philanthropy I believe it could work and would benefit all of us.

MaizieD

Can't we keep this thread a bit more general than just Sudan?

I thought it was an interesting topic about all poor countries and what could be done to help them. Sudan has its very own thread.

OTOH, talking about the global economy,, debt and the pervading influence of neoliberalism might be profoundly boring for most...

Yes I was thinking of all of the poorer countries, along with those who have brutal regimes governing them leading to what is becoming a mass exodus of young men.

Afghanistan where women and girls have been erased from everyday life, reduced to nothing more than human incubators.

Radical religious leaders and beliefs, corrupt government and exploitative politicians.

Young children sold into slavery and forced to mine for minerals in order for the west to become green energy efficient.

All of this happening whilst the multi billionaires get richer often through exploitation.

(I mean the mega billionaires, not those who have reached millionaire status by their own means, SME’s and professionals, if you see what I mean 🤞🏻)

(And yes I know I have odd opinions for a Conservative)

Personally, you must be joking.

Bankrupt the "West" before end of next year.

MaizieD

Whitewavemark2

Much of that comes under what is termed “international aid” and we know what has happened to that.

Not a popular concept on GN

My thought exactly, Wwmk2

I absolutely agree that we (i.e first world countries) should be helping poorer countries but most seem to see them as sources of wealth to be exploited.

It doesn't take long to find articles which explain the problem. this looks as good as any, One might not agree with all the proposed solutions, but the factors are real

medium.com/@jrcoleman97/why-poverty-persists-9-structural-traps-that-keep-developing-countries-poor-and-how-to-break-them-359595cf63ab

Quite happy to do that.

The connection is that currently Sudan is in the top five source countries for asylum seekers in the UK. I know that there are still those who think asylum seekers re ne'er do wells. I just happen top know from my personal connection that the situation is dire. Anybody with any sense and the means to leave the country would go. I'm not sure that more aid and forces would help, but there certainly needs to be investment in diplomacy in Sudan (and other countries) - for the sake of the people living there and for the sake of the West in the long-term. If it weren't for the civil wars, violence, poverty and religious intolerance in these countries, it's certain that fewer people would want to leave.

On the surface it is an attractive idea and makes sense but .....
- western "interference" internationally does not have a good track record ... Israel/Palestine, India/Pakistan/Vietnam.
- without a true understanding of another culture it is hard to intervene in positive ways. Rory Stewart talks eloquently of this.
- some countries' governments have the means to solve the problems but choose to line their pockets instead.
- how to decide what form that intervention might take and to get western consensus?

It is a minefield the has no simple solution. Global media has let the cat out of the bag that there are more affluent lives to be led elsewhere and noone can be blamed for seeking better for themselves and their families. That tide is well and truly flowing and any approach aimed at prevention would take time, research, negotiation etc. and in the meantime the tide will keep flowing. Those leading miserable lives know that the chances of any such solution will be too slow for their needs.

fancythat

Personally, you must be joking.

Bankrupt the "West" before end of next year.

The "West" will be bankrupt anyway, if it's not proactive. Our children and grandchildren will be cursing us for not doing enough.

Nothing will change until the countries from which these young men come put their own houses in order.

Over the last 50-60 years western countries have poured billions, if not trillions of £/$ into these countries to no effect. A significant amount of the money has gone into a black hole called 'corruption'. Most of themembers of the ruling groups in these countries are obscenely rich with billions of $s tucked away in Swiss and arab bank accounts.

In fact I would go so far as to say that one of the reason we have with immigration is BECAUSE of all the aid western countries have poured into these failing states.

The desire to give aid seems to be more involved with assuaging the sensitive consciences of European people than anything to do with what the people in these countries actually need.

I am going to suggest that the best thing we can do at present is stop all aid, withdraw all aid workers and allow the people and governments of these countries to work out solutions to their problems for themselves. Showrining countries with aid to assuage our consciences is selfish and develops a dependency culture that has only destroyed more than it has helped.

Oh GrannyGravy, this is such a sad thread. Good on you, having a go.
It's sad because either Posters, like myself, have only wishes, and not much else, but will persist, and might learn,
and because other Posters could be completely against the whole concept of helping 'others', and will say so.