Do Cross Boundary NGOs Add Real Value to Societies?

There are tens of thousands cross boundary or international NGOs if my estimation is reasonable. These NOGs have presence, almost, in all underdeveloped and developing nations the minimum. But do they add significant value to the countries where they are?

It is true that the World’s highly branded (may be next to coca cola) NGO the International Red Cross and Red Crescent add value for money by primarily saving human life during disasters and wars. But I don’t think other NGOs add significant value to societies of countries they are located than making the victims of those countries dependent on assistance forever.

The strategy these NGOs use is temporary assistance rather than long lasting alleviation of the problem of target victims of poverty, disaster or war. In other words, the role they play is to create a culture of dependency and laziness. Of course, most of the NGOs have double or triple missions to accomplish in the host country from inception. Expansion of their religion and political interference are the key among others in addition to economic and humanitarian objectives. Well, whatever objectives they may have it would have been acceptable if they could add value and bring positive impact to societies problems. But in my observation, they don’t make any positive difference for the societies they claim helping.

Instead, a number of NGOs bring and impose cultures that are strange and unacceptable by the societies. I remember a foreigner NGO official in Ethiopia committing a gay sexuality on a young Ethiopian and accused of his deed. Imagine, is that the value NGOs add to the societies of the countries they aim to help? In my view most of the NGOs are sufficient only for themselves!