Johannesburg — STANDING in the customs and immigration queue at Lilongwe airport in Malawi, I was struck by the counter marked for "diplomats and international organisations".

There was some debate among the lesser mortals in the common or garden "visitors" queue as to what counted as an international organisation, and why the majority of us did not qualify seeing as we were involved in crossborder business.

But, of course, it is the queue reserved for, among others, Malawi's real power brokers -- donors and representatives of foreign countries providing much of their funding. These are the people who bring "free" advice, money and, occasionally, food.

Beyond the airport their presence is felt in the sheer numbers of top-of-the-range four-wheel drive vehicles that ply the quiet streets of Lilongwe. The top hotels are full of donor-run workshops. The flights in and out of the country are packed with Malawians heading to international conferences, new donor representatives coming in or old hands heading off to another "basket-case" posting, and international nongovernmental organisations rushing in to help Africans, building their funding on the back of Malawi's woes.

Malawi has become an "AIDS stopover" along with Botswana and other countries in the region as students from universities in the developed world travel around Africa to study the problem first hand.

The more international donors and others pump money into Malawi, the less it is able to get on its feet.

Donor funding provides more than 40% of budgetary support and 80% of Malawi's development budget. Millions of dollars have been poured into the country for years and yet Malawi remains near the bottom of United Nations Human Development Index.

The government, to an extent, contributes to the country's impoverishment via this dependency. Officials complain donor schemes are not implemented effectively because they are not owned by government. But where are the government's schemes? Where is its determination to do the right thing regardless of donor pressures?

The private sector, already weak, is hamstrung by too little policy support and the effect on the market of donor activities, particularly in agriculture.

Nonetheless, the government of Bingu wa Mutharika seems to be some sort of force for good, reforming policies, pushing the performance of public servants and trying to clean up the mess left by president Bakili Muluzi. It is well placed to take advantage of the shift in approach by donors from one of prescription to one of consultation.

But much of the damage has been done. It will take time for the mindset to change, on both sides.

It took some time for the country to recover from the strong government control of every facet of life experienced under the dictatorship of Kamuzu Banda, the first post-independence leader. Although his policy of self-sufficiency was largely achieved, entrepreneurial drive and individual creativity was stifled in the process, leaving the country unprepared for integration into regional processes, let alone globalisation.

His successor, Muluzi, left a legacy of corruption and inefficiency. While on some levels he is an inspiration -- a village boy who worked his way up to the top job in the land -- many Malawians wish they had had a better-quality leader in this crucial post-Banda period. In a year of emergency feeding programmes and massive imports of staple food, Malawians remember Banda's focus on self-reliance.

A Malawian working for a donor organisation told me: "At least Kamuzu taught us how to fish. Now we have lost our fishing skills and until we relearn them, we will continue to be dependent on handouts."

The donor community has loomed large over Malawi for decades -- and there are no exist strategies. In fact, budgetary assistance is increasing. As a result, there is no motivation for the government to become more self-sufficient and no pressure for donors to start working themselves out of a job. Of course, the donors mean well but there are other issues to consider.

Last year the donors suspended their budgetary support because of the Muluzi administration's corruption and wasteful spending. But instead of finding ways to kick-start sustainable, long-term growth, the government implemented emergency funding mechanisms, such as radical income tax increases, to hold the line until the donors could be courted back, all in the knowledge that if their people starved, the international community would move in with food aid.

Malawians have become hostage to the "do-gooders" of the world. It is time to take their welfare into their own hands. It is not a question of survival. It is a matter of self-respect.

Games is director of Africa @ Work.