Should Japan Give Away Piles-o-Money?

[Taro Toporific]

Should Japan curtail ODA spending?
MATTERS OF OPINION / Yomiuri Shimbun / April 11
[Seiji Maehara of the leading opposition party Minshuto]:
Questions can be raised about Japanese ODA [oversea development aid] to certain major recipients. For example, China has received a hefty 3 trillion yen or so over the years, despite an annual decline in recent years. Today, the annual figure stands at about 160 billion yen. Disturbingly, however, China is an ODA recipient and donor. Beijing gives other developing countries the equivalent of one-third of the money it receives from Japan. Japanese taxpayers could well find this quite unreasonable.

[cstaylor]

Especially when the number one recipient is North Korea.

[jingai]

The money China gets from Japan is used for things like improving infrastructure, and cleaning up its environment. Technology transfers between rich and poor countries are really one of the most responsible ways for the world's largest economies- Japan and the US- to better the world around them. If China has the money or knowhow to help even poorer countries, that's great, but the idea that this demonstrates China doesn't need Japan's ODA is absurd.

ODA has been used as a way to strengthen ties between countries and to promote changes sought by the donor countries (not necessarily a good thing...) using aid as leverage. In the case of North Korea, dangling a carrot is a hell of a lot more sensible than threatening to attack them or otherwise provoking them. Some of the aid they're getting from Japan is in the form of oil and rice (heat and food). CSTaylor, how is that a bad thing?

[cstaylor]

When the aid goes to funding missile research instead of food, oil for tanks instead of light, nuclear power plants for weapons construction instead of power generation.

North Korea is probably the worst example of ODA funds going into the wrong hands.

[Captain Japan]

When the aid goes to funding missile research instead of food, oil for tanks instead of light, nuclear power plants for weapons construction instead of power generation.

North Korea is probably the worst example of ODA funds going into the wrong hands.

Very rarely is ODA put to good use. Officially, any money going to N. Korea would not be classified as ODA-proper. It would be something else. I am not positive about that though. Unless you are referring to pachinko revenue with the appropriate LDP kickbacks?

Generally, ODA projects through JICA require that they be designed by a Japanese consultant, built by a Japanese construction company, and supplied by Japanese material supply companies. Collectively, this is by far the biggest reason for ODA's existence. It is pure charity to these companies and keeps them afloat.

Budgets for the projects are ridiculously inflated. The entire bidding procedure is rigged each time. Kickbacks are routinely given to Japanese politicians. (Muneo Suzuki was really an interesting story in that someone bothered to arrest him.)

It is a highly corrupt and hopeless system. But should Japan give away piles of money? The answer is yes, I suppose. It keeps people in Japan employed. And provides foreign politicians monetary excuses for why they should vote for Japanese candidates come election time for various international positions, like, say, the World Health Organization. And Japan doesn't have an offensive military. Money talks in place of bullets.

The work done by JOCV volunteers, I believe also funneled throuh JICA, is highly commendable but overall ODA isn't directed at helping anyone but Japan.

Captain