"We must focus much more on developing countries' own policies and priorities, and increase policy and operational coherence between national, regional and multilateral actors"
About this Quote
A diplomat’s plea disguised as a managerial sentence, Anna Lindh’s line smuggles a moral argument into the language of policy “coherence.” The surface intent is technocratic: align national, regional, and multilateral efforts so aid, trade, security, and development aren’t working at cross-purposes. The deeper intent is corrective. It pushes back against a longstanding donor reflex: treating “development” as something administered from abroad, with priorities set in European capitals or Washington conference rooms, then exported as programs.
The subtext is power. “Developing countries’ own policies and priorities” is a quiet rebuke to conditionality and one-size-fits-all reform packages. Lindh is insisting that legitimacy and effectiveness travel together: when strategies are authored locally, they’re harder to dismiss as foreign impositions and easier to sustain once the cameras, consultants, and short funding cycles move on. It also hints at an uncomfortable truth for wealthy states: their policies often undermine their stated development goals. You can fund schools while trade rules distort markets, or preach governance while propping up allies for security reasons.
Context matters. Lindh, a Swedish foreign minister in the post-Cold War, pre-9/11-to-Iraq era, spoke from a country associated with “good donor” ideals but embedded in EU and multilateral machinery. Her call for coherence reflects the late-1990s/early-2000s recognition that fragmented interventions and competing mandates weren’t just inefficient; they were destabilizing. The line works because it refuses the easy hero narrative of aid and replaces it with a harder demand: listen first, coordinate honestly, and accept that development is political before it is operational.
The subtext is power. “Developing countries’ own policies and priorities” is a quiet rebuke to conditionality and one-size-fits-all reform packages. Lindh is insisting that legitimacy and effectiveness travel together: when strategies are authored locally, they’re harder to dismiss as foreign impositions and easier to sustain once the cameras, consultants, and short funding cycles move on. It also hints at an uncomfortable truth for wealthy states: their policies often undermine their stated development goals. You can fund schools while trade rules distort markets, or preach governance while propping up allies for security reasons.
Context matters. Lindh, a Swedish foreign minister in the post-Cold War, pre-9/11-to-Iraq era, spoke from a country associated with “good donor” ideals but embedded in EU and multilateral machinery. Her call for coherence reflects the late-1990s/early-2000s recognition that fragmented interventions and competing mandates weren’t just inefficient; they were destabilizing. The line works because it refuses the easy hero narrative of aid and replaces it with a harder demand: listen first, coordinate honestly, and accept that development is political before it is operational.
Quote Details
| Topic | Justice |
|---|
More Quotes by Anna
Add to List
