Foreign financing and aid often weaken governments by undermining local accountability. It doesn’t just allow corruption, it facilitates and entrenches it. That’s why it’s no accident that the Puntland government, despite facing similar functionality issues as other FMS, is generally seen as less corrupt and more locally rooted.
Why? Because Puntland receives far less aid and relies more on mobilizing domestic revenue. When a government depends on its own people for resources, it naturally becomes more responsive and accountable.
Think of it like this: as a worker, you’re loyal to your employer because they pay your salary. They can promote you or fire you. Your performance is tied directly to their satisfaction.
Now replace the worker with a politician. If that politician is funded and elected by the people, he’s answerable to them. He has to deliver results or risk being removed. But if most of his funding comes from outside, foreign donors, aid agencies, then he’s effectively working for them, not his constituents. Worse yet, since that money is often handed out with minimal oversight, there’s little pressure to use it responsibly.
So when people ask why aid-dependent governments often become stagnant or corrupt, this is the reason. It severs the natural link between a government and its citizens , and without that link, there’s no real accountability.
It is very true, some NGOS are foreign political actors . American NGOS are even cov ops run by the CIA and with the main aim at influencing policies and government. They are not running simple charities.
