The Australian 13/5/02

Foreign aid bodies need closer scrutiny 

By Don D'Cruz

IT'S probably just as well the proposed anti-terrorism laws have been scuttled by the Senate. Otherwise, most of Australia's foreign-aid non-government organisations would probably be out
of business. Of particular concern would be the provisions that give the power to proscribe organisations where, in the opinion of the Attorney-General, that organisation affects the integrity
of another country. Some would view this as proof that there is something wrong with the anti-terrorism bill. But this tends to prove my suspicion that there is something wrong with many of our foreign-aid NGOs.

It seems that Australia's foreign-aid NGOs are increasingly being drawn into the politics of the countries in which they operate. The notion of non-politicised humanitarian aid seems to be
unfashionable in foreign-aid circles. A recent edition of Australian Story contained the revelations that the wife of East Timor's President used her paid position in an Australian foreign-aid NGO to support her activism against the Indonesian government, which included spying. While I have sympathy for that cause, I was stunned by the lack of reaction to these revelations. Australia's foreign-aid peak body, the Australian Council of Foreign and Overseas Aid, has no reference to
this incident on its website or announcement of an investigation. One would have to think that there is a point where this politicisation degrades the capacity of aid agencies to discharge their core function of delivering aid.

This has serious implications for the foreign policy of countries such as Australia. Because, increasingly, foreign aid budgets are not being administered directly by governments, but through foreign-aid NGOs. So these NGOs may be viewed as agents of the governments funding them.

During his last trip to Indonesia, John Howard received a frosty reception from several senior Indonesian political leaders. Indonesia's powerful parliamentary Speaker, Amien Rais, snubbed
Howard, citing in part Australia's alleged support for the independence of West Papua. The Howard Government has never challenged Indonesia's sovereignty on West Papua. Deputy Speaker Soetardjo Soerjogoeritno claimed that Australia was helping fund NGOs that backed independence for Papua and Aceh.

Just as it has been hard for Australians to accept President George W. Bush's free trade rhetoric, when confronted by the reality of massive subsidies in the latest Farm Bill, it is probably hard for
the Indonesians to reconcile the words of reassurance from Howard over Indonesian sovereignty over its troubled provinces while at the same time being faced with activities of Australian
government-funded NGOs actively supporting independence. Addressing the problems caused by the activities of our foreign-aid NGOs is a problem that the Howard Government doesn't want to confront. But it is one that it must not shirk if it wants to improve its relations with countries
such as Indonesia.

Labor is in no position to enjoy the Government's discomfort. This is a bipartisan problem. Its situation is even worse. Only last year, the ACTU passed a resolution supporting independence for West Papua. Engagement with Asia has to be problematic for Labor when 60 per cent of your delegates support the separatist movements in your neighbours' backyards. Clearly, the anti-terrorism bill was in need of revision and needs to be drafted with greater clarity and precision. As it stands now, the bill would endanger many activities that could easily be argued as quite lawful and legitimate. Governments have no business in interfering with such activities.

But any anti-terrorism bill has to deal with what Bush described as the terrorist tendency to "oftentimes use nice-sounding, non-governmental organisations as fronts for their activities". Bush's remarks occurred after Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil's investigation into the September 11 attack found that Osama bin Laden used a number of NGOs to feed his terrorist network. NGOs were chosen because they are often "above" suspicion, but more importantly have minimal standards of reporting and unlike government or business have no one scrutinising them.

While Canberra revisits its anti-terrorism bill, it should re-examine the activities of Australian foreign-aid NGOs before other countries do it for us. Don D'Cruz is editor of NGO Watch Digest at the Institute of Public Affairs  in Melbourne.