Foreign aid coverage and information.
The Republic of Botswana, a Southern African nation of nearly three million people, is an incredibly stable country with one of the strongest democratic traditions on the continent. Multi-party elections every five years compound a booming economy that has grown by 5 percent annually, according to the World Bank. Today, it is an upper-middle-income nation. Despite these successes, Botswana faces a litany of challenges. Poverty remains high at 16 percent and an 18 percent unemployment rate harms growth. The 2018 USAID “Have It All” documentary states that HIV/AIDS is still a public health crisis that affects one in five people and infects 14,000 new individuals each year. U.S. foreign policy in Botswana focuses on safeguarding stability by tackling these challenges.
History of Cooperation
Botswana gained independence from the U.K. in 1966, but America did not become involved in the country until the 1980s. With the help of USAID, U.S.-Botswana relations developed into an amicable, bilateral partnership. A Department of Defense report indicates military cooperation characterized this partnership in the 1990s. The Botswana Defense Force worked with American forces in Operation Restore Hope, which sought to provide famine relief to starving people in Somalia in 1993.
In 2004, the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) started operating in the country. Botswana also signed a Trade, Investment and Development Cooperative Agreement (TIDCA) with the U.S. in 2008 to encourage free trade between the countries. Current U.S. foreign policy in Botswana intends to bolster past programs with these focuses:
1. Increase economic development with USAID’s Southern Africa Mission.
2. Sustain law enforcement cooperation with training at the ILEA.
3. Continue fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic with PEPFAR.
The Southern Africa Mission
The Southern Africa Mission is a regional program USAID runs that involves the Development Credit Authority (DCA) and the Southern Africa Trade and Investment Hub (SATIH). It works to solve issues with investment, business growth, agricultural development and trade in Southern Africa. Botswana is one of the six countries it actively works in.
Its mission is a vital part of U.S. foreign policy in Botswana. According to a USAID official, Botswana desperately requires business development in order to recover from years of dependency on government services. Banks’ unwillingness to grant credit to fledgling businesses poses problems for sustainable growth. The DCA remedies this problem by providing U.S. Treasury-backed loans to local businesses. With a financially grounded business, banks become less risk-averse and allow credit access.
The SATIH promotes necessary business growth as well. As of 2019, it has assisted 650 African firms with overcoming trade barriers and has brought about $129 million in investment. USAID told The Borgen Project that SATIH expands prospects for Botswana’s firms, particularly agricultural firms, by occasionally bringing them to trade shows in New York. These films and accompanying improvements in beef quality have helped grow Botswana’s U.S. market by 10 percent. More economic growth will speed Botswana’s progress against poverty.
The ILEA
The International Law Enforcement Academy (ILEA) started in the capital of Gaborone in 2000 and trains officials to combat transnational crime. In correspondence with The Borgen Project, a State Department spokesperson stated that over 9,000 African officials had trained there under instructors from more than 20 American federal agencies. Botswana obtains special relationships with these instructors by hosting the ILEA.
The aforementioned relationships provide a wealth of information to Botswana’s law enforcement officials. A 2019 training schedule showed various courses on human trafficking, crisis leadership, anti-terrorism and anti-corruption offered throughout the year. The ILEA’s anti-corruption training has a definite effect on the country’s well-being. Transparency International ranked Botswana as 34 out of 180 nations on its 2018 Corruption Perception Index, making it the least corrupt nation in Africa.
PEPFAR
PEPFAR provides funding to a variety of federal organizations that respond to the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Botswana. Programs work to increase testing for HIV, treat infected individuals immediately and reduce the stigma of infection. The U.S. has allocated $67.88 million for these purposes in FY 2020 according to the State Department.
With PEPFAR’s help, HIV testing reached 708,102 individuals in FY 2017 alone. A government report stated that it also covered 60 percent of the HIV testing kits used between April 2017 and 2018. This financial support can save lives since Botswana treats HIV-positive patients with antiretroviral medications (ARVs) immediately under the Treat All Program. USAID officials told The Borgen Project that these programs emphasize community engagement and encourage Botswana’s citizens receive testing and ARVs.
ARVs are powerful, suppressing the viral load to such an extent that they stop transmission. Maria and Edwin, an HIV-positive couple in USAID’s “Have It All” film, received immediate treatment and stopped the virus from passing to their three children. USAID even stated that ARVs stop transmission between sexual partners. Now, U.S. foreign policy in Botswana is shifting to normalizing AIDS treatment. “The [‘Have It All’] documentary,” one official said, “has been shown to social workers and adolescents . . . and now we are really moving into stigma reduction.”
U.S. foreign policy in Botswana continues building on the progress the nation has made since 1966. Despite the immense challenges, bilateral cooperation can assist in defeating economic stagnation, corruption and AIDS. There is more work to do, but American aid ensures Botswana’s renowned stability will continue into the future.
– Sean Galli
Photo: Flickr
U.S. foreign aid has come under fire in the past few years and the small percentage of the budget the U.S. commits to foreign aid is shrinking. Many economists and politicians criticize this trend in the federal government, citing the many benefits of investing in developing countries. Luckily, independent nonprofits, like The Borgen Project, have dedicated themselves to helping the developing world for years. People often wonder why The Borgen Project focusses on international aid when there are so many Americans in need of help.
The short answer is that improving conditions around the world is beneficial to the U.S. It is a little more nuanced than that though. Unpacking the many reasons can help people better understand The Borgen Project’s continued commitment to supporting and enriching the world’s developing countries and why U.S. foreign aid matters.
Global Economic Growth
The most direct impact is the economic enrichment the U.S. experiences when it aids other countries. One of the most compelling examples of this is the way developing countries affected global economic growth after the 2008 global recession. According to the World Bank, “Strong economic growth in developing countries became an engine for the global economy … accounting for roughly 50 percent of all global growth.” Economic growth for the world is economic growth in America. One can see further importance on the developing worlds in their dependence on U.S. imports. As of 2014, half of all U.S. exports went to markets in developing countries. The economic growth of America directly links to the continued economic prosperity of these developing countries. When one grows, so does the other.
The US’s Security
The U.S.’s security is another reason why U.S. foreign aid matters. Countries that have aid coming in from the U.S. are much more likely to work with America in its global initiatives. Additionally, it helps foster an all-around safer global community. The Sept. 11 attacks were a grim reminder of what can happen when people ignore the suffering of foreign people. While foreign aid does not directly prevent the rise of terrorism, people with more wealth and stability in their lives are less likely to fall prey to dangerous organizations or demagogues.
Finally, as the richest and most powerful nation in the world, it is the U.S.’s moral duty to help those in need. One study found that many Americans overestimate how much the government spends on foreign aid and would be willing to spend up to 14 times that amount. In 2016, the U.S. spent roughly $49 billion on foreign aid or about 1.2 percent of the federal budget. However, this number will likely continue to decrease under the Trump administration. The president stated many times that he wishes to make drastic cuts to foreign aid.
While it is tempting to forsake U.S. foreign aid in favor of more domestic endeavors, investing in other countries has incredible potential to help the continued growth and security of America for years to come. Investing in developing countries benefits Americans in several ways, and that is why U.S. foreign aid matters.
– Henry Burkert
Photo: Flickr
In recent decades there has been a debate regarding the importance of foreign aid in sub-Saharan Africa. Some have argued that foreign aid is not beneficial to developing countries, as it creates a dependence upon aid, rather than fostering growth. Empirical data does not support this view, which reveals that while there is much work necessary in developing countries, foreign aid has stimulated economic growth and positive results in the battle against poverty. The amount the United States spends on foreign aid represents a minuscule fraction of the federal budget, despite compelling evidence that foreign aid is mutually beneficial, serving the interests of the United States and other modern countries, as well as those of developing nations. One cannot overstate the importance of foreign aid in sub-Saharan Africa, and if anything, countries could benefit others by stepping it up.
Benefits of Foreign Aid
Foreign aid is useful for fostering economic development in impoverished nations. In 2015, a study that the University of Western Australia conducted concluded that foreign aid had a significant and long-term positive impact on GDP growth in the 25 countries it examined. It also found that economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa directly correlated with the increase in foreign aid from 1970 to 2012. Additionally, countries that received the largest amount of foreign aid also displayed the greatest amount of economic growth.
Foreign aid is also crucial for providing humanitarian aid and ameliorating suffering. In sub-Saharan Africa, the focus of foreign aid is often to reduce poverty and provide food. A 10-year case study that the Global Development Network conducted showed that Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) in Kenya had positive results on poverty reduction in the country between 1999 and 2009. The Global Development Network also found that foreign aid most largely benefits the poorest of the poor, who are most desperately in need of humanitarian aid.
US Involvement
The United States could benefit from increasing its contribution to foreign aid for sub-Saharan Africa. An increase in the budget allocated towards foreign aid would not carry any substantial financial burden, as the portion of the federal budget that the U.S. currently spends on foreign aid totals at less than one-fifth of 1 percent. Sub-Saharan Africa itself accounts for only about one-third of that minuscule amount. While the costs of increasing foreign aid to the country are insignificant, there are potentially heavy costs that one can associate with inaction. Poverty and state failure in Africa can lead to refugee crises and terrorist havens, which may pose a threat to the United States’ national security. Additionally, the provision of foreign aid cultivates favorable views of the United States worldwide. As a result of aid from other countries, sub-Saharan Africa perceives the United States very positively, as 80 percent of respondents report a positive view of the country. The potential benefits, coupled with insignificant costs show how the importance of foreign aid in sub-Saharan Africa extends also to the United States and other developed nations.
Following World War II, foreign aid to developing countries became a commonplace practice among wealthy nations. Foreign aid has been a successful strategy for promoting economic growth and lifting millions out of poverty in sub-Saharan Africa. Given the importance of foreign aid in sub-Saharan Africa, such aid programs should continue, and even expand.
– Karl Haider
Photo: Wikipedia Commons
Circulating the United States news cycle as of late is the migrant crisis at the border. From the conditions in which authorities hold migrants to the bills Congress is pushing, such as the Keeping Families Together Act and the Dignity for Detained Immigrants Act, migrants from Central America have captivated the news as well as the minds of most Americans. One might wonder why so many Central Americans are making their way to the border. This article will explore how increasing foreign aid may stop the migrant crisis.
The Migrant Crisis
The majority of migrants at the border are coming from Central America, specifically El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, or the Northern Triangle of Central America. These are some of the most dangerous countries, with each of them being on the top 10 list of most homicides in the world. People in these regions face violence, such as gender-based violence and gang violence, political instability and extreme poverty, which makes the perilous journey to the United States seem like the most optimistic of options.
These countries face factors that can help explain why people are fleeing their home countries at such a rate. Studies have found that for every 10 homicides in these all three countries, six children wish to enter the United States. In 2018, there were 51 homicides per 100,000, with around 3,340 homicides in El Salvador. Police attributed these murders to the two prominent gangs in El Salvador called MS13 and the Barrio 18. Guatemala had a homicide rate of 22.4 per 100,000 and Honduras had a homicide rate of 40 per 100,000, both being extremely high compared to the homicide rate of other Central and South American countries.
What Caused the Crisis?
One can possibly attribute the recent influx of migrants from these countries to the foreign aid cuts that the current administration has made. According to the State Department, the 2019 fiscal year cut nearly $700 million in funding to these countries. Some believe that these cuts would force people to stay in their countries while others believe that keeping the cuts would allow people to save their money and use it to immigrate to the United States.
The money the United States gave to Central America funds social programs in order to build these countries up and tackle the root causes of their problems. Some of these root causes are violence, lack of education, food insecurity and poverty. The money mainly funds social programs or government reform that would improve living conditions, incentivizing citizens to stay. These programs include after-school programs, programs to create jobs and programs that help strengthen police forces and the court systems.
How Foreign Aid Helps
In these cases, the foreign aid funding these programs and helping different social agencies and NGOs does in fact work. For example, in El Salvador, a United States funded program trains children for employment. The area that implemented this program saw that homicide rates lowered by 78 percent. The United States Global Leadership Commission also breaks down what the funding in each country does and the different programs it funds. In El Salvador, the commission focuses on improving the rule of law and citizen security. However, in Guatemala, funding focuses on fighting poverty, and in Honduras, funding goes towards fighting corruption. In all of these different endeavors, funding has made a positive difference and helped improve living conditions for citizens. This further shows that to stop the migrant crisis, the United States must increase foreign aid.
Conclusion
Using funding for these social programs allows Central Americans and their countries to grow, thrive and prosper. When a country succeeds and gives its citizens ample opportunities to be successful and live their life to the fullest, those citizens may want to stay in said country. Therefore, it seems that the only way to stop the migrant crisis would be an increase in foreign aid to give the Northern Triangle people a reason to stay in their homes and enjoy a better life in their own countries.
– Sydney Toy
Photo: Flickr
People helping people. Country helping country. Giving back to the world is not a strange concept and is a welcomed idea in most societies. A popular form of global help is foreign aid. The umbrella term commonly refers to monetary assistance provided by outlying or foreign governments. The funds are generally distributed through humanitarian organizations, non-profit groups or directly from a foreign government. As such, the aid is given to citizens in an abundance of forms, such as money, food or shelter. While some can afford to provide more than others on a purely numeric comparison, the amounts are measured or valued differently depending on the country’s economic standing. This list consists of five countries fighting global poverty who outshine the rest.
Top Five Countries Fighting Global Poverty
- Norway begins the list as it provides the largest amount of foreign aid in comparison to its GDP. The government put 1.11 percent of its GDP towards global humanitarian aid, spending NOK 455 million as of 2018. The country utilizes organizations such as the U.N.’s CERF (Central Emergency Response Fund), the Red Crescent Movement and the Red Cross. Recently, Norway channeled much of their funds into CERF in order to assist Venezuela in its growing refugee crisis. Norway’s contributions towards these programs effectively fight against global poverty and prove the nation should be in the top five, as its generosity in comparison to its national budget is the highest in the world.
- Luxembourg also contributes a significant portion of their GDP towards humanitarian and foreign affairs. Approximately 1 percent of their national budget, or about USD 413 million, is used for aid. Some of Luxembourg’s projects include poverty reduction through community development in Laos, education improvement in Burkina Faso and health care in Nicaragua. These countries receive specific help from various agencies and organizations like LuxDev and the Directorate for Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Affairs. These groups and projects, though just a few select examples, show how much effort Luxemborg puts in fighting poverty.
- Sweden comes forward as another example of a smaller country with a smaller budget who still makes a grand impact in the world. As about 1.04 percent of its GDP, or about USD 5.8 billion, is used for humanitarian and foreign aid, Sweden holds a top ranking. While the money touches on a broad range of topics, from civil rights to education, specific Swedish projects focus on poverty issues. For instance, Sweden recently provided aid to Somalia for drought relief through the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the Somalia Humanitarian Fund. Sweden makes a mark on the world by not only tackling larger, conceptual issues, but by also responding quickly to disasters and world events. Such assistance highlights the country’s proficiency in the fight against global poverty.
- The United States is a leader in fighting global poverty as it contributes the most money towards humanitarian and foreign aid. Within the past few years alone, the U.S. contributed USD 30 billion towards various forms of international aid. The nation utilizes several different federal agencies, non-profit groups and other organizations to distribute aid. The U.S. commonly works with popular organizations such as UNICEF or the Red Cross. A prime example of the U.S. effect on the world is with the sheer number of countries it provides for, as it touches nearly 40 different nations, including Pakistan and Mexico.
- Germany also provides a significant amount of aid with nearly USD 20 billion contributed towards humanitarian projects in recent years. This accounts for nearly 0.70 percent of the national budget. Popular organizations and agencies include the World Food Program, which Germany utilized to provide relief to Africa. In addition to such organizations, Germany is known to donate large amounts of money to other countries, a notable example being Syria in recent years due to their ongoing crisis. Germany’s monetary generosity also makes it the second-largest donor in the world to foreign aid, falling in just behind the U.S.
Whether it’s a natural disaster or political turmoil, when a country is in need, surrounding neighbors will often step up to help.
– Eleanora Kamerow
Photo: Flickr
Sweden is a Scandinavian country known for providing an impressive amount of humanitarian aid. Sweden’s foreign aid strategies are both similar and unique to the objectives of other countries. The Organisation for Economic Cooperative and Development (OECD) praises Sweden as a leader in foreign aid because of the nation’s “consistent generous levels of official development assistance” and for “its global development leadership on peace and conflict prevention.”
Sweden’s Foreign Aid Record
The Swedish government has long shown concern for humanitarian issues. In 1975, the country achieved the United Nations’ goal of providing 0.7 percent of the nation’s gross national income (GNI) on official development assistance (ODA). In 2008, Sweden contributed 1 percent of its GNI. This number has continued to escalate and is now at 1.4 percent.
In comparison to other countries, Sweden is the largest donor in proportion to the productivity of its economy. Countries that follow are the United Arab Emirates, which contributes 1.09 percent of its GNI, and Norway, which contributes 1.05 percent. These countries are the only three countries whose foreign aid agenda reserves more than one percent of their GNI.
Equality is a core tenant of the Swedish foreign aid mission. In 2014, Sweden was the first country to implement a Feminist Foreign Policy, a strategy that promotes gender equality and women’s rights. Socially, women in countries receiving aid have been provided with programs on how to prevent and resolve instances of discrimination and abuse. Legally, female representation in the government and in the private sector has improved in these countries as well.
Other long-term foreign aid objectives in Sweden focus on installing democracy, peace and security, health equity and efficient education systems in the countries that lack these necessities.
Sweden’s Foreign Aid Agency
Sweden’s most effective agency that works to downsize poverty and foster development is called Sida, or the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. The agency methodically establishes democracy throughout countries in order to achieve these two goals.
Sida provides impoverished countries with humanitarian aid for emergency relief and long-term aid for development. Long-term development is the more intricate of the programs. The Swedish government implements this long-term aid with two principles in mind. First, that varying policy areas need to work together to produce positive development; second, that humanitarian aid should be implemented with the perspective that people are capable and eager to accept change.
As of 2007, Sida has 33 partner countries to which they are currently providing aid. While this number has reduced from approximately 125 since the 80s, the extensive efforts put into individual projects illustrate why Sweden is a leader in foreign aid.
Sida’s Work in Syria
Most recently, Sweden has proven itself as a leader in foreign aid through its dedication to those suffering through the Syrian crisis. Due to the disastrous conflict, there are currently 11.7 million individuals in need of assistance. Many hospitals, schools and markets have been destroyed as well.
Sida has allocated more than SEK 367 million (approximately 37.2 million USD) to humanitarian relief in Syria in 2019. This aid goes directly toward life-saving interventions. Basic needs are given to the country’s most vulnerable individuals who live in refugee camps and other communities. Much of Sida’s aid has also gone to Syria’s neighboring countries who receive the most refugees such as Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon.
Lastly, Sida donates to United Nations organizations present in Syria. The Swedish foreign aid machine has worked closely with the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, as well as UNICEF, to improve the infrastructure required to fulfill the needs of Syrian refugees. These organizations have access to local partnerships scattered around the region that continue to provide health care, education and safe housing to displaced individuals.
What Does the Future Hold?
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs estimates that the number of refugees around the world will increase in the years to come. As this reality materializes, global leaders will only benefit from emulating the Swedish government’s extensive efforts to fund, provide and implement efficient humanitarian aid policies.
– Annie O’Connell
Photo: Flickr
In February, the U.N. declared that 109 million people were in critical circumstances. In other words, international assistance is more important than ever. Countries around the world are fighting to alleviate global poverty, but some are doing a better job than others. Read further to find out which nations make the list for the top 10 countries contributing to foreign aid.
Top 10 Countries Contributing to Foreign Aid
- Luxembourg – Even though it is one of the smallest countries in the world, Luxembourg is a world leader in foreign aid. In 1970, the U.N. urged wealthy nations to contribute 0.7 percent of their Gross National Income (GNI) to foreign aid. Luxembourg was the second country to achieve this goal. Today, the government invests 1.07 percent of its GNI to foreign aid.
- Sweden – Contributing 1.04 percent of its GNI to international development, Sweden landed itself at the top of this list in 1974. In 2018, it was still considered the largest donor when taking into account the size of its economy. The Swedish government expects to spend nearly $6 billion on foreign aid by the end of 2019. Primary concerns regarding foreign aid include agriculture, education, global health and nutrition.
- United Kingdom – In 2017, the U.K. spent more than 14 billion pounds on international assistance. The largest recipient of this aid was Pakistan followed by Ethiopia and Nigeria. The majority of funding is donated to humanitarian projects. Approximately 64 percent of aid is sent directly via bilateral organizations. The remaining percentage is distributed indirectly via organizations like the U.N.
- Norway – In 2018, Norway revised its foreign aid policies. In the new outline, the government mandates that at least 1 percent of its GNI is spent on international assistance. The proposal also focuses on health and education as its chief concerns.
- Ireland – In July 2018, Ireland relaunched a new foreign aid policy aptly named A Better World. One of the primary goals of this policy is to ensure that 0.7 percent of the GNI is spent on international development. It is estimated that this target will be met by 2030. Furthermore, the policy emphasizes climate action, gender equality and strengthened governance. For female education alone, the country has committed to spending 250 euros within the next five years.
- Japan – Japan is the largest contributor to foreign aid in Asia. In 2018, the country donated $14.2 billion. Japan has publicly committed to using the official development assistance (ODA) for guidance in future development.
- Canada – Unlike other countries, Canada has taken a unique feminist approach. Its foreign aid policy uses feminism as its core value. By promoting the success of women around the world, Canada hopes to create a more equal balance in power. The country believes that an increase in women’s rights would lead to other areas of progression, such as a more inclusive government and representation for minorities.
- France – Within the past year, France has committed to enhancing its foreign aid policy. Currently, the country donates 0.43 percent of its GNI to foreign aid. However, by the year 2022, the French government aims to increase this level to 0.55 percent. The primary objective of this increase is to aid in international stability.
- Finland – In just the first part of 2019, Finland has already administered 68.35 million euros in foreign assistance. The government distributes its finances through a process that includes evaluating the extent of a crisis, assessing how many deaths and illnesses have occurred and recording the percentage of the population affected by the issue. Finland also prioritizes its aid to countries that have formally submitted a request to the U.N.
- United States of America – Last but not least on the list for the top 10 countries contributing to foreign aid is the U.S. The current American aid system was created in 1961. However, disputes surrounding U.S. investment have increased in recent years. President Trump has repeatedly fought for cuts in the budget while others advocate for the amount to be raised. In 2016, the U.S. contributed approximately $49 billion in foreign assistance.
Ultimately, there is still a lot of work to be done. With millions of people in crisis, it is important that the wealthiest nations help combat the issues that plague the poorest. If not for humanitarian reasons, foreign aid can help elite nations by increasing the global economy and infrastructure. When looking at success stories like China (which once was a U.S. aid recipient but now a financial leader), one can understand the impact of international assistance.
Photo: Flickr
Bernie Sanders, a Senator from Vermont and a 2016 democratic presidential nominee, announced his candidacy for the 2020 presidential election on Feb 19, 2019. This popular candidate spoke to the younger generation with his ideas about healthcare, raising the minimum wage and free college education for students. However, Sanders’ stance on global poverty issues has not been as much in the forefront. Here are some facts about Bernie Sanders’ stance on foreign aid and global poverty.
Foreign Aid
In the past, Sanders has both supported and rejected bills relating to foreign aid. An example of Bernie Sander’s support is with the HR 5501 bill that involves providing funding to eliminate tuberculosis, AIDS and malaria. As a result of this bill, $48 billion was sent to the Global Fund to help developing countries eradicate HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis.
Another bill that Sanders has supported, in fact, co-sponsored, is the Harvest for Hunger bill, which provided relief to sub-Saharan Africa for famine victims. Overall, based on his voting history, Sanders supports foreign aid to developing countries in order to reduce conflict around the world. He has acknowledged that efficient foreign aid can be an effective national security defense.
In regards to his rejection of bills involving foreign aid, Sanders rejected the S Amdt 5077 bill, which would have reduced the HR 5501 bill to $35 billion. Sanders also rejected the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, which would have provided emergency foreign aid to countries in need. This act ended up providing $82.04 billion in emergency support to the Defense Department and tsunami relief.
Clean Water and Air
Sanders has consistently supported bills and other initiatives to protect the environment and ensure that clean water and air is available for all. One example of this would be the Water Resources Development Act of 2013. This act ensured increased research for health management and the sustainability of oceans around the world. In the past, Sanders has also spoken out against drilling in seas such as the Chukchi Sea, which could result in oil spills.
Overall, Sanders has supported several bills and initiatives that would help eradicate global poverty and other associated issues. He mostly addresses poverty in the United States by his policies on taxing the wealthiest 1 percent, raising the minimum wage and decreasing college debt for students. Sanders also advocates for foreign aid bills as an effective national security defense as this can help reduce conflict in developing countries.
Bernie Sanders’ stances on foreign aid and issues that impact global poverty prove that he could continue to be a powerful ally for the world’s poor if elected president in 2020. Only time will tell if Bernie Sanders is elected president, but his commitment to foreign aid will continue.
– Maddison Hines
Photo: Flickr
Every year Congress must approve the fiscal budget, which includes a request for foreign aid spending from the current Secretary of State. By examining the proposals for foreign aid spending through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) from 2008 to 2020, it highlights the United States’ international goals and concerns. A common thread amongst all three budgets is a concern of national security and instability within foreign nations.
The 2008 Congressional Budget Justification – Secretary Condoleezza Rice
In the 2008 Congressional Budget Justification, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice outlined the international concerns of the Bush Administration. As a whole, Secretary Rice requested $36.2 billion in funding from Congress for the 2008 fiscal year, as well as $6 billion in supplemental funding in 2007 for, as she details, additional expenses from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Secretary Rice stated that the overarching goal of this budget for foreign aid spending is to “mobilize our [the U.S.] democratic principles, our diplomacy, our development assistance and our compassion to win what will be a generational struggle.” As a result of this priority, much of the outlined spending in the report focused on the allocation of funds to programs that support democracy-building programs, peacekeeping, diplomacy and child-health programs. The United States, Secretary Rice details, ought to shift from a historically paternalistic relationship towards other nations in the world and, rather, act in partnership with foreign countries in the hope that it can establish positive and lasting change.
The 2016 Congressional Budget Justification – Secretary John Kerry
In the 2016 Congressional Budget Justification, Secretary of State John Kerry expressed concerns that were similar to those of Secretary Rice under the Bush Administration. In 2016, the international sphere continued to face uncertainty. He places emphasis on this by asking that Congress “begin by understanding what is at stake – by realizing that our overseas actions, the alliances and partnerships that we form, the cooperation we engender, and the investments we make have a direct bearing on the safety of our citizens and the quality of life enjoyed by our people.” The budget that Secretary Kerry requested $50.3 billion from Congress, a marked increase from the proposal of Secretary Rice in 2008.
Despite a change in the party — from Republican to Democrat — the concerns of each administration are the same. In the 2016 proposed budget for foreign aid spending, Secretary Kerry expresses concern on behalf of the Obama Administration for the stability of Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, as well as for the health, education and safety of families around the world. Secretary Kerry asked for the allocation of $7 billion to Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), which works to establish stable political environments in volatile regions in which the U.S. involves itself. Also included in this budget is $5.6 billion in humanitarian aid for Migration and Refugee Assistance, International Disaster Assistance and food assistance. On a similar note to the 2008 proposal, Secretary Kerry states that “the United States will continue to do its part to ease suffering and prepare the groundwork for recovery.”
The 2020 Congressional Budget Justification – Secretary Michael Pompeo
The 2020 Congressional Budget Justification from Secretary of State Michael Pompeo strikes a different note from the previous two administrations. While a concern towards international security remains, Secretary Pompeo focuses on foreign aid spending with a more exclusionary approach to international relations.
At the start of his proposal, Secretary Pompeo outlines the concerns for international security that lie in the denuclearization of North Korea as well as the “great-power competition against China and Russia.” Secretary Pompeo currently has requested $40 billion in foreign aid spending, a decrease from the amount requested in 2016. He states that the funds will be “to protect our diplomats and our borders, recruit and develop our workforce, and continue to modernize our IT infrastructure.” The funding for democracy strengthening programs as well as health and education in poor nations continues, but a tone of gradual withdrawal from direct involvement in global affairs persists in the language used by Secretary Pompeo throughout the proposal.
Funding to international organizations has faced cuts with a decrease of $141.46 billion to approximately $2.15 billion. Overseas programs have also faced cuts with a decrease of $69.33 billion to approximately $1.52 billion and requested funding for border security is $3.75 billion. To conclude his budget request, Secretary Pompeo states that “we must continue to put U.S. interests first and be a beacon of freedom to the world.”
Throughout all three administrations, a concern for the changing and uncertain status of the international sphere is present. Foreign aid spending peaked under the Obama administration, but both the Bush and Obama administrations focused on direct U.S. involvement in world affairs as a means of spreading peace and democracy, while the Trump administration appears to have turned its focus on protecting the U.S. from threats abroad.
– Anne Pietrow
Photo: Media Defense
