Military Aid

In the development world, aid workers tend to sneer at soldiers to provide humanitarian assistance (that old hearts and minds). I've been thinking about it a lot lately, since delivering the funds to Help Afghan Kids, an all-volunteer outfit run by the soldiers at Camp Phoenix. When we dropped off the money, the soldiers explained that they weren't funding the orphanages any more because they were quite well stocked -- so well supplied that local parents were committing their children to them to make sure they were fed and clothed. To prevent that from happening, the soldiers decided to provide aid to the village children instead, and they do it quite efficiently. A medical check-up at one of their temporary medical tents only costs $1 per child.

Now I totally get the idea that if soldiers are delivering aid, people might be more hostile to non-soldiers delivering aid, confusing the two. However, the soldiers seem a lot more accountable than the average development worker, who gets handed grandiose schemes from some guy sitting in Washington. First, if they don't get public services out, they run the risk of people becoming more hostile and shooting at them (a good incentive). Second, the soldiers actually are looking around at what's happening in their little neighborhoods and delivering the goods - i.e., they're coming up with local solutions to local problems. That doesn't happen as often or as easily when aid workers are working off 5-year plans from DC.

So all in all, I guess I come down in favor of military aid. It may not change the world, but sometimes I wonder if our big USAID plans are doing any good either. And at least the soldiers are getting what's needed to folks who need it.