THERE is something deeply unsettling about the image of Madonna, her son David Banda and his biological father Yohane meeting up in Malawi for the first time in two years.
I don't know if it's the polite but reserved way the toddler is holding out his hand towards the man he no longer recognises, the sight of Madonna's hands clamped tight around her son's waist as he sat on her lap, or the look of deference and gratitu
de on Yohane's face, but – like a still from The Black And White Minstrel Show – it seems to encapsulate all that is sinister about the wealthy West's obsession with, and contempt for, Africa and its inhabitants.
Back in the country to try to adopt a second child, Mercy James, the singer last week threw herself convincingly into her latest incarnation as a latter-day David Livingstone, offering succour to a benighted nation, while cherry-picking a couple of its cutest children to take home as souvenirs. For what is Madonna's fixation with adopting the country's "orphans", after all, but the embodiment of a 21st-century colonialism, where the rich and famous use their influence to strip a country of its most precious assets, while laying claim to civilising the natives?
Right up until the last minute, it looked as though Malawi would allow itself to be plundered again. Only days before the court hearing, the country's information minister Patricia Kaliati said the government supported her application because "very few rich and famous people can take time to fly all the way to Malawi to support our children", while President Bingu wa Mutharika said she should be encouraged to adopt even more.
But on Friday morning the court in Lilongwe ruled against her on the grounds that prospective adopters have to be resident in the country for 18 to 24 months (the same rules that were bent in order for her to adopt David). There are clearly elements within the county no longer willing to be treated as a spoiled star's pet; to be patted on the head and to roll over in exchange for crumbs off her table.
Madonna may aspire to be like Gandhi, Martin Luther King or even Bono; she may have made a documentary called Raising Malawi to try to establish her credentials as a missionary. But the arrogance with which she swept in last week, trailing stylists, publicists and security guards in her wake; the way she trampled over the concerns of human rights activists and the feelings of the girl's extended family gave the lie to her claims to have the best interests of the Aids-ravaged country at heart.
It was bad enough the first time round: the media circus that surrounded the adoption of David Banda was damaging for him, his father and the reputation of a country which looked as though it was prepared to doff its cap to any famous foreigner who waved a chequebook. This time, however, it was clear the singer's commitment to keeping David in touch with his roots didn't even extend to showing him a photograph of his father from time to time; and her fund-raising efforts were shown to be as altruistic as a supermarket chain investing in a local community centre to oil the wheels of a multi-million pound development.
There are those who believe that – in deciding to deprive Mercy James of a chance of a better life – Malawi is guilty of the worst kind of political correctness. It is their contention that a girl left to languish in an orphanage is likely to have a difficult childhood, fall pregnant, and be diagnosed with Aids before she is 20. But Yohane's report of the conversation between him and his son suggest there may be a psychological price to be paid for taking them out of their communities. "He asked me whether I ride horses," the farmer said. "I told him horses are for the rich and he asked me why I am poor."
Imagine the guilt David is going to have to carry with him when he is old enough to comprehend the gulf between his life and the lives of those who were not chosen to start a new life in New York.
The welfare of the children involved is, in any case, not the only thing at stake for the Malawi authorities. That was the point Save the Children was making when it accused Madonna of staging a "puppy parade" and when it pointed out high-profile foreign adoptions sometimes create a vicious circle by encouraging more poor families to place their children in orphanages in the hopes they too will be selected. If you truly wanted to do the best for the country as a whole you wouldn't transport a handful of its children to a better world, but try to create a better world for the majority of children.
I know there are many arguments against foreign aid: there are regular reports which suggest it can foster a culture of dependency. But at least if a child is nurtured and educated at home then Malawi gets the benefit of their improved health and knowledge. The Scottish charity Mary's Meals – which now provides 10% of primary schoolchildren in Malawi with one hot meal a day – shows how much can be achieved by those who are interested in providing a passport out of poverty to the many rather than the few. Last year, for the first time ever, 47 children graduated from a village school in Kachere and went on to senior school, virtually guaranteeing them a better standard of living.
Judge Esme Chombo's decision to refuse Madonna the right to adopt Mercy James will have come as a tremendous shock to the Material Girl – who is used to throwing a tantrum and getting her own way – but is unlikely to imbue her with fresh humility. Her unedifying adventures in Malawi could, however, serve as a modern fable for the rest of us, the moral being that too much money can be almost as corrosive as having none at all.
