West undermines efforts of some countries to develop for selfish reasons

A section of Kibera slums, Nairobi. [Elvis Ogina, Standard]

Global realignment is questioning the hegemonic tendencies of some powers. In the process, clear distinction has emerged that separates countries that are moving forward from those that are sliding backward.

Those moving forward are developing and creating wealth and self-confidence and are largely self-reliant. Those sliding backwards become poorer than before, routinely create poverty instead of generating wealth and are excessively dependent and under-developed.

Some countries are developing while others are under-developing as part of geo-political realignment which questions the tendencies of some powers to dominate others.

Although for about 500 years, the conceptual West was dominant, it is losing credibility, trust and ability to deliver on promises and is sliding backwards despite military and technological might. Signals of sliding include increasing inability to look after people in terms of food security, education, good health, handling crises and effective use of its human and natural resources.

Kenya, for instance, is creating poverty instead of wealth and is therefore under-developing because it is failing to provide food, health, and education. Its officials admit to being corrupt, wasteful, clueless, and they insult the public with baseless arrogance. Its organised incompetence destroys education, discourages productivity, promotes desperation, and ensures the country is under-developing.

In contrast, developing countries show upward trajectories in their ability to meet crises, create confidence instead of despair, and inspire people to produce wealth instead of pampering a few in the midst of multiplying poverty. They increase the level of self-reliance, reduce material and policy dependency and avoid being proxies for others.

Despite being highly developed, for instance, China insists that it is a developing country that works hard to avoid under-developing and thus seemingly succeeds in escaping under-development. The Sahel countries of Niger and Mali appear to be developing countries because they generate confidence among their people by instituting change that aims at restructuring exploitative externally controlled political economic system.

They seemingly started their economies around which involved transformation of the mind to change not just the personal figurehead called 'president' but the entire structure of exploitation. The economies in those countries are improving, thereby making them 'developing' rather than 'under-developing'.

The reasons for under-developing are many; self-induced and externally manipulated. First, the incompetence of the leadership is a major factor in under-developing because policymakers have little clue of what they do, engage in grandiosity, rely on cronies and lack capacity to use available material and intellectual resources to 'develop' the country. Such policymakers show ignorance of the countries they supposedly run, become willing proxies to external forces, and enjoy outsourcing what is easily available in their countries.

Second, besides the incompetence of policymakers, there are external forces that orchestrate external assault on a country's wellbeing to ensure that it remains under-developing rather than developing. Haiti and Libya, more than two centuries apart, are good examples of created poverty and instability to ensure they remain under-developing mainly because they were bad examples that challenged existing order.

Third, there often are forces of calamities that are beyond the capacity of particular states. The calamities can be natural or manufactured for geopolitical reasons or probably a combination of both. Irrespective of the source of the calamity, the effect is to retard development and make the country under-developing.

Wars under-develop countries. Ukraine, for instance, is under-developing because of bombs destroying infrastructure and ability to be productive and self-reliant.

Lacking strategic capacity to assess core interests properly, Ukraine fell to conceptual West's persuasion to provoke Russia into probable self-destruction. Since Russia was not destroyed, after more than a year, the same conceptual West is abandoning Ukraine to its unfortunate under-developing fate.