Budget cuts in international development aid are unprecedented in scale. According to Cameroonian economist Célestin Monga, such assistance has often shackled Africa rather than liberated it. “No self-respecting nation should beg for small amounts of money for sixty or seventy years.”
Célestin Monga, a Cameroonian economist, professor at Harvard, former Vice President of the African Development Bank, and former economic advisor to the World Bank.
“He who feeds you, controls you.”
For the people of Burkina Faso, the memory remains vivid. In the early 1980s, pan-African revolutionary and President Thomas Sankara delivered an iconic six-word message to the tumultuous continent: “Celui qui vous nourrit, vous contrôle”—He who feeds you, controls you.
Four decades later, as international aid budgets shrink at an alarming pace, the words of the revolutionary echo as a bitter reality.
Célestin Monga argues that leaders in the Global South have mistaken charity for strategy when entrusting their nations’ futures to Western generosity. In a video interview, Monga highlights an uncomfortable truth: “Aid is rarely neutral.”
Now that the illusion of partnership is fading, this reality is starker than ever. The U.S. has halted all major USAID programs, and European governments—driven by a surge of right-wing populism—are also scaling back their aid. The Netherlands is cutting aid by 30%, while the United Kingdom by 40%, Germany by 50%, France and Belgium by 25% each.
“The brutality of these cuts is undeniable,” says Monga, interpreting them as further proof that “moral principles simply do not exist” in international relations. As a former advisor at the World Bank and vice president of the African Development Bank (AfDB), Monga witnessed these realities firsthand. He finds Sankara’s warnings about dependency, the hidden costs of Western loans, and the illusion of generosity more relevant than ever.
Grappling with debt, unemployment, and global market pressures, Africa seems abandoned. Yet, where some see inevitable decline, Monga sees a turning point: Africa is now forced to redefine its own future.
Breaking free from aid
If Africa wants to take control of its destiny, argues Monga, the first step isn’t more aid – it’s liberation from it. To control their own development, African countries must invest in industrialization, infrastructure, and local entrepreneurship.
See also: Africa struggles to rise to the challenge as USAID funding freeze spurs innovation and self-reliance
To Monga, this is not merely a fiancial crisis, but an ideological one. “People in Sudan, Cameroon, or Kenya should direct their frustration at their own leaders. Trump was president for four years; his temperament, judgment, and worldview were clear to everyone. This was predictable. As an African leader, you prepare for such realities. You must have a Plan B, a Plan C.”
Why has African independence never truly materialized?
“The aid system, established by the West shortly after the wave of independence in the late 1950s, created dependency. I call it a kind of ‘aid addiction,’ where countries overly rely on foreign support. Wealthy nations knew this and maintained influence through financial institutions, tying aid budgets and loans to conditions: ‘You mismanaged your country, so we’ll give you money—but you must adopt our policies.’”
Mango went on to say that “Colonial powers also strategically placed leaders who resisted genuine independence”. “Many West African countries remained tied to the French currency and were led by pro-French, anti-independence figures.”
Meanwhile, he noted, other nationalist leaders made economic mistakes, and failed to acknowledge what countries like China and Vietnam realized later: development begins with labor-intensive industries. One exception was Habib Bourguiba in Tunisia, who understood the importance of national currency and detached his country from the French currency. External and internal control prevents genuine economic independence.
“Today, the net effect of aid is negligible. Africa receives around $50 billion annually in aid. That’s less than 10% of its exports, which amount to about $610 billion annually. Each year, the African diaspora sends home more money than Western governments provide in so-called aid. Personally, I send 20 to 30% of my own income back to my community. Imagine that. These informal support networks mean more to Africa than official development assistance ever has.”
But hasn’t aid provided education for children, crucial healthcare, and saved lives?
“That’s true, but aid indirectly legitimizes poor governance. If a country has a $1 million budget and receives $200,000 in aid, they’ll boast about building a school or hospital. But what happens to the remaining $800,000? Often, it’s lost to corruption, military expenses, or other ‘priorities.”
See also: U.S. foreign aid freeze threatens critical programs in Africa
Suppose a country has ten people in need, and Dutch aid saves three through healthcare and education. Wonderful. But if that same aid perpetuates dependency and we lose the other seven, have we truly accomplished anything?”
So, should African countries thank Donald Trump and others for ruthlessly cutting development aid?
“In theory, yes. Aid is no longer provided, African leaders will have no choice but become increasingly more self-reliant. Unfortunately, most current leaders lack legitimacy and vision. Instead of seeing this as an opportunity, they’re probably begging behind the scenes to keep aid coming. Right now, Africans are angry, and Westerners are aid-weary. Western taxpayers have sent money for years without seeing real progress. It’s hard to sustain solidarity when frustration dominates.”
Isn’t the real issue that wealthy countries are failing to pursue genuine economic justice?
“Absolutely. History proves that waiting for Western benevolence is futile. The real problem with the current system is how international institutions maintain intellectual control over African policymaking. The World Bank and IMF impose policies on struggling countries, claiming these measures guarantee loan repayments and prevent future crises. But these measures have repeatedly failed.
“Another problem is simply bad ideas. Imagine someone from Washington, who knows little about an African country, spends two weeks there and then dictates economic policy. Reading World Bank and IMF reports from 10, 20, even 50 years ago, you’ll notice the same recommendations: privatization, austerity, shrinking labor markets—which have never been fulfilled. Look at Ghana, often praised as a success story; it signed seventeen structural adjustment programs with the IMF. Seventeen! And yet it still defaulted in 2020.”
Do institutions like the World Bank and IMF perpetuate Africa’s debt crisis and dependency?
“There’s a degree of cynicism. The influence of the World Bank is tangible at the African Development Bank (AfDB). As vice president and chief economist [2016-2019], I was shocked by their influence. Whenever I tried proposing policies different from the World Bank’s ones, Western board representatives systematically rejected them. One board member even said, ‘I don’t see why we need a chief economist here. You should simply copy the IMF and World Bank.’
These institutions decide where money goes, often based on political considerations rather than economic necessity. There’s zero self-reflection. Nobody steps back to ask: shouldn’t we let African countries determine their own path?”
Does the AfDB have the potential to replace institutions like the IMF and World Bank in Africa?
“With the right ideas, yes. Currently, the AfDB is a pale imitation of the World Bank, with less financial power and influence.
But the real issue isn’t money—it’s knowledge. The AfDB can’t outspend the World Bank but it could outthink it, leading with ideas tailored specifically for Africa. ”
If dependency is a choice, how does Africa finally choose itself?
“If African leaders don’t assert their own agendas at the IMF and World Bank, they’ll remain dependent on external decision makers.. No self-respecting nation should beg for small amounts for sixty or seventy years.
“In the past, colonial powers could literally choose their leaders in Africa. Today, that degree of political control is no longer a given. Countries like Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and Chad are asserting their independence. African leaders do have power—they just need credible strategies to match it.”
But isn’t it naive to think that African leaders can break free from a system designed to keep them down?
“No, I don’t think so. Criticism of the West means nothing without tangible improvements. If leaders show no vision, dependency will persist. Imagine if just ten African leaders presented a well-grounded policy paper to world leaders, explaining how the current system harms both Africa and the West. That alone could change the narrative. The African Union should take the lead in this effort.
“The truth is that Western countries don’t benefit from Africa’s underdevelopment. Problems in Africa, such as terrorism, conflicts, and diseases, inevitably spill over into Europe and beyond. Ebola doesn’t need a visa to travel. Numerous studies show that wealthy countries would gain significantly from investments in Africa through equipment sales, technology transfer, and economic growth. The problem isn’t that these ideas are naive; the problem is that there’s no political will to implement them.”
So African leaders don’t realize what power they have?
“Exactly, they don’t. Strong leadership can challenge this system. But they get consumed by short-term challenges. Many African leaders waste their first years in office on symbolic battles, political settlement of accounts, and dismantling policies of previous governments instead of addressing urgent economic issues.
“In at least 18 African countries, high defense budgets consume 30 to 40% of the total expenditures. In some countries, it’s even more than half! Instead, they should focus on job creation, which generates political support and ensures stability. African leaders also fail to learn from history. Chile and China flourished because they prioritized economic stability.”
But strong African leadership alone isn’t enough, right?
“Yes, it’s not. Western policymakers should acknowledge that there is mutual dependency and understand that opening their markets to African goods is in their own interest. Africa needs access to global markets.
“If Western countries really want to help Africa, opening their markets would be transformative. China understands this and is already considering trade agreements to facilitate African exports. If the G7 did the same, the economic and security benefits would be enormous. Today’s leaders should ask themselves: what really matters? What benefits everyone?”
