One of the people I met in the TV2 Tabloid debate last Tuesday (5th of March) was Petter Eide, Secretary General of the Norwegian People’s Aid.

I had seen him earlier that morning, when he publicly vouched for the professionalism and the good intentions of the large aid organizations.

I was sitting a few rooms away as he went live on television that morning, and I was appalled by his lack of reference to the Nigerien people. I was also shocked that he was allowed to go on and on with references that had no foundation. One of the things he claimed - which related directly to Niger, was the picture of the large aid organizations rushing to Niger after the emotionally powerful reports from the BBC as portrayed in the TV2 Documentary Sultbløffen was entirely wrong. According to him, all the large aid organizations were present in all countries in the world and could predict major catastrophes even before they actually happened. Wow! After twenty years in living in Niger, I know exactly what projects and organisations I have seen on the field - and which ones I haven’t. And the list of organizations that showed up in somewhere between 2005 and 2007 (!) is far longer than the one of organizations that were active in the area anywhere between 1986-2006. And it worth mentioning that the Norwegian People’s Aid does not even list Niger as a country of intervention on their homepage. What happened to “being everywhere doing everything” as Eide made it sound on national television?

But then again, we live in a world where the UN need only sponsor a new pavilion (built in 2005) at a rundown local state hospital to call the entire complex a “UNICEF-sponsored hospital“. To that I can only say that I highly doubt UNICEF would want to take credit for the state hospital if they knew the state it was in, but it sure sounds good on paper.

Back to Petter Eide, he recently accepted the position as secretary general of the Norwegian People’s Aid, saying:

NPA is an organisation with solid political roots to the left. I have a good portion of political energy that I look forward to live out. I do hope I will have much to add to the organisation through my knowledge about leadership, international work and running finances.

And I am left wondering why aid and politics go hand in hand?

This whole thing shouldn’t really be about politics, money, careers or any of the sort. It should be about the future of the people we claim to be working for, and helping them achieve a sustainable life.

Copyright Eden Foundation 2006

But all too often, it is not.

In Africa, there is a strong peer pressure from the majority of aid organizations that we must all do the same thing, something Eden has no interest in doing, as all our efforts are directed towards the Nigerien population. But the thing I see is that there is a lot of money to be squeezed out of this business, and as long as we all stand together, we can not only make people on the other side of the river believe that the sky is red, but perhaps we can also - eventually - start believing it ourselves. And that is why we do not want anyone else to stand out, because as long as there someone going another way, we can never claim that we didn’t know any better.

Even in the studio, there was a gentleman’s rule to make friends off camera, even though you just came from a heated debate.

Eide and I in the makeup room before appearing on Tabloid

But like I told MSF’s Henrik Glette, I am only saddened by the fact that I can get to know people in Niger as well as behind the cameras and have really interesting conversations where everybody’s best interest seems to be to help the poor, but as soon as the cameras start rolling or the press releases come out, then it’s a whole different story.

I don’t care for the smooching “pussigullgull” (as I’d say in Swedish) of the aid world - I just want the real thing. I want the world to react to a situation they know something about, and I want those involved to play with open cards. And if they have no interest in doing that, then I suggest they play with no cards as all.

If you care for the best interest of the local population of whatever place you’re trying to help, you will look for a solution that will turn them into independent, self-confident individuals - even though that would be bad for your “business”. After all, the goal should not be to build larger and larger organizations, but to actually “run out of clients”. Now that would make one fine idealistic world in my eyes!