Archive for category: Foreign Aid

Foreign aid coverage and information.

,

How the US Benefits from Foreign Aid to Sri Lanka

U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Sri LankaThe small South Asian country of Sri Lanka has been supported by the United States since the 1950s through U.S.-led programs that have invested in the island nation. Programs over the years have focused on a variety of causes, including health, education, business development, trade and good governance, just to name a few.

Since the tsunami of 2004, more assistance has come to this country of 21 million residents to help it continue to grow its economy as the U.S. pursues its goal of widening and accelerating economic growth as well as reconciling the ethnic and religious tensions within Sri Lanka.

However, the foreign aid cut proposed by President Trump will directly affect the amount of aid the U.S. can donate to this country, which is still trying to recover from a series of natural disasters and civil conflicts. In light of these recent developments, it is important to examine how the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Sri Lanka.

The Realities of Foreign Aid

Trump’s proposal intends to cut foreign aid by an estimated 28 percent from last year, a significant amount that can no longer be used to continue to aid the world’s poor. A common assumption is that the U.S. spends a large portion of its federal budget on foreign aid, but this is a misconception.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, on average, Americans believe that roughly a quarter of the U.S. federal budget is spent on foreign aid, when, in reality, the U.S. government has only allocated roughly 1 percent of its annual budget to be spent on foreign aid.

In the case of a nation like Sri Lanka, foreign aid from the U.S. has not only helped citizens rebuild their lives after natural disasters and civil conflicts, but in turn, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Sri Lanka by receiving returns on its business relations with the country, due to the support the U.S. has given the Sri Lankan economy.

Bilateral Business Relations

The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Sri Lanka through its continued participation in bilateral trade with the country, by exporting products such as industrial machinery, medical instruments, aircraft parts, lentils, paper, food, garment fabrics and pharmaceuticals.

This bilateral trade agreement between the U.S. and Sri Lanka has helped the U.S. economy over the years. In 2017 alone, the U.S. sent $335.7 million in exports to the nation, while imports from Sri Lanka totaled $2.86 billion.

Sri Lanka currently desires to uplift its citizens out of poverty and develop the nation into an upper middle-income economy. The nation’s gross domestic product was an estimated $81.3 billion in 2016, and is expected to increase by 7 percent by the year 2020.

Growth Opportunities in Sri Lanka

Unlike many of its Asian counterparts, Sri Lanka is looking to arrange more foreign investment deals, which is an arena the U.S. can take advantage of with investments. U.S. investment in Sri Lanka will generate more annual revenue for both countries, especially in tourism, a thriving industry that serves as an example of how the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Sri Lanka.

This potential revenue will help strengthen the U.S. economy while helping to provide local jobs for Sri Lankan citizens. Sri Lanka also has other advantageous policies to offer the U.S., such as a relatively open financial system, a moderately stable monetary policy, improved infrastructure and world-class local companies.

If the U.S. continues to aid the citizens of Sri Lanka in resolving the country’s economic challenges, it will also find itself generating more revenue for its own economy, Time will tell what effects the current circumstances will have on both nations.

– Lois Charm

Photo: Flickr

, ,

The Fight For Aid to Puerto Rico

The Fight For Aid to Puerto RicoThe island of Puerto Rico has yet to recover from Hurricane Maria’s landfall in September 2017. Power outages, food shortages and a lack of coordination from disaster relief organizations have jeopardized an entire island inhabited by U.S. citizens. Timely aid to Puerto Rico has become detrimental to the island and as the U.S. government’s funding shrinks, so do many of the people’s chances of prosperity.

Insufficient Funding

Puerto Rican Governor Ricardo Rossello requested approximately $94.4 billion from the U.S. federal government: $31 billion for housing and $17 billion to reestablish power. The federal government initially offered only around $4.7 billion in loans, but the offer has since shrunk. The aid to Puerto Rico from the U.S. has been cut in half, now at around $2.2 billion.

Congress’ plan allocated a total of $90 billion in disaster relief for Texas, Florida and California, combined with Puerto Rico’s aid. In comparison, Hurricane Sandy garnered around $37 billion in aid to New Jersey alone. Needless to say, $90 billion is an insufficient amount to counter the enormous wreckage these four U.S. territories endured in the past year. Aid to Puerto Rico is the most crucial concerning total loss, yet it is the least prioritized based on governmental decisions for funding placement.

One reason aid to Puerto Rico is scarce is due to the U.S. Treasury Department’s unwillingness to help, suspecting the small island of having a central cash balance that isn’t low enough, despite the island’s debt of $74 billion.

FEMA explains the $2.2 billion is divvied up between housing repairs, at around only $620 million, and other needs at $510 million. This funding, along with other FEMA programs, has helped 130,000 Puerto Ricans and housed fewer than 10,000. These numbers fall short of what’s needed to supply appropriate aid to Puerto Rico.

Misplaced Trust

The federal government and FEMA have also given enormous funds to small, often understaffed or simply untrustworthy organizations to supply help.

One example is Bronze Star, LLC, a Florida company that was granted 30 million to supply tarps and plastic sheets for temporary roof repairs for those without proper shelter. By November of the same year, the contract was nulled and funding was withdrawn as the company did nothing to deliver. The entire process of approval and cancellation took four crucial weeks.

Another example is Tribute Contracting, LLC, whose sole employee was awarded a lofty $156 million as part of a plan to disperse nearly 30 million meals. The contract and funding were withdrawn after the company served only 50,000 people, failing over 18 million others who requested the nutritional aid in Puerto Rico. Since the cancellation, the owner has publicly accused the U.S. government of making her a scapegoat for FEMA’s decision-making.

Looking Ahead

Aid to Puerto Rico is improving, but there’s still much to do. With FEMA’s teetering funding, much of the island is being repaired by its inhabitants and some private investors looking to help. Still, 16 percent of the island is without electricity, leaving 200,000 U.S. citizens without it for 6 months.

Locals and visitors to the island have already made tremendous improvements and repairs since the hurricane hit, but much more work still needs to be done. Most Puerto Ricans don’t have the luxury of waiting for help to come and are forced to do what they can.

– Toni Paz

Photo: Flickr

,

5 Countries That Provide the Largest Foreign Aid

Five Countries That Give the Largest Foreign AidAccording to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) report, in 2016, 30 countries in Development Assistance Committee (DAC) contributed a total of $142.6 billion as financial assistance to poorer countries, with the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Japan and France giving the largest foreign aid.

On average, the United States’ government has given approximately one percent of its federal budget — about $34 billion — each year over the past decade to countries in need of foreign aid.

Out of the aid amounts from all donor countries, U.S. foreign aid ranked at the top of the list. Non-DAC countries, like China, are also responsible for a significant part of the total aid amount.

Each year, developing countries receive aid in tens of billions of dollars from governments in other countries. From obtaining diplomatic approval to business access, this aid can serve various purposes for the donor countries. From agriculture, to education and public health, recipient countries use aid towards a wide variety of issues and projects.

Here is a rundown of the five countries that offered the largest foreign aid and how that aid was spent by its intended nations. Due to the lack of detailed information for 2017 fiscal year, the list will be based on previous-year statistics.

1. China

A surprise to many, the winner on the “aid list” is China rather than the United States. As a non-DAC country, China has not officially disclosed its aid information; however, in a recent publication, researchers from AidData at William & Mary claimed that during the year between 2000 and 2014, China offered $350 billion-worth of aid to 140 countries and territories, sponsoring more than 4000 projects – the largest foreign aid program in the world.

In 2009, China’s total financial commitment to development aid reached a whopping $69.9 billion, two times that of the U.S. foreign aid in the same year.

A large chunk of China’s aid is categorized by AidData as “Other Official Flows,” indicating that though counted as foreign aid, these financial assistances are primarily intended for commercial access rather than for development and welfare.

Top recipients of Chinese aid are largely members of the One Belt One Road Initiative, a program by President Xi that aims to reinforce trading routes across continents.

As a result, almost half of the aid was spent on infrastructure sectors including energy generation and supply, transportation, storage and communication. The spending on agriculture, forestry and fishing only took up 3 percent of the aid.

2. The United States

From 2002, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has gradually boosted the total foreign aid budget to a steady amount that rests around $32 billion. With the Department of State and USAID as the nation’s main donors, the U.S. government distributed — not counting fiscal worth of military assistance — $34 billion official development aid (ODA) to over 100 foreign governments during the 2016 fiscal year.

Such an amount makes the U.S. the largest foreign aid donor among DAC countries.

Israel, Afghanistan and Egypt are the largest recipients of the U.S. foreign aid, receiving $3.10 billion, $1.51 billion and $1.46 billion of assistance, respectively. More than one-third of the U.S. budget is spent on long-term projects that promote economic growth and public health programs.

About 23 percent of such aid is used as humanitarian aid, and aims to fund short-term disaster relief programs.

3. Germany

With a volume of $24.67 billion in 2016, Germany’s foreign aid ranked the second largest in OECD’s report. Compared to 2015, Germany’s aid budget experienced an impressive 36.1 percent increase, making Germany’s ODA to gross national income (GNI) ratio hit the 0.7 percent mark.

An important factor in accounting for this major boost is the wide-ranging social benefits provided to the large influx of refugees.

Starting from 2016, the German government reclassified this in-house spending on refugee assistance as international development aid, aiming to hit United Nations’ 0.7 percent ODA/GNI target.

4. The United Kingdom

Before it was made a legal obligation by the U.N., the U.K. hit the 0.7 percent ODA/GNI mark in 2013 and has since maintained this ratio very well.

In fiscal year 2016, the U.K. spent a total of $18.01 billion in development aid, thus becoming the third largest foreign aid donor among DAC countries.

Pakistan, Ethiopia and Afghanistan each received more than $300 million in U.K. aid, and Nigeria, Syria, Sierra Leone, South Sudan and Tanzania all received more than $200 million. The aid is largely used for humanitarian programs and other crisis-relief projects in nations close to the European Union.

5. Japan

As the third-largest economy in the world, Japan contributes the fourth-largest ODA among DAC countries. Though Japan ranked high on the list of total aid volume, its $10.37 billion aid in fiscal year 2016 merely took up 0.2 percent of its GNI compared to the United States’ criticized 0.18 percent.

As a close tie to China in overall economy, Japan also engages in competition with China for potential markets in developing countries by giving out development aid. While China desires more of natural resources in recipient countries of its aid, Japan wants cheap land and labor so that it can compete with the world’s leading manufacturing industry in China.

Humanitarian Aid is on the Rise

As OECD’s report indicates, the world’s total development aid is on the rise. This trend is so prominent that DAC Chair Charlotte Petri Gornitzka expressed her delight in the ever-increasing trend and the generous contributions of the largest foreign aid donors.

With an increasing amount of ODA being spent on short-term humanitarian and refugee aid, Gornitzka urged countries to also focus on long-term development programs.

Regardless of the purposes of aids, this healthy trend of increasing aid showcases the collective efforts of the world in reaching the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals

– Chaorong Wang

Photo: Google

, ,

Ways the US Benefits From Foreign Aid to Bhutan

U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan
Bhutan is a small country sandwiched between India and China and the only country in the world that is carbon negative. The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan in more ways than one can imagine. Although the U.S. and Bhutan never established formal diplomatic relations, the two countries maintain warm, informal relations via the U.S. embassy situated in New Delhi, India and Bhutan’s mission to the U.N., New York.

Both countries are members of many global financial institutions such as the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.

Bhutan and the U.S.

The U.S. is one of the major indirect foreign sponsors of development of the fledgling economy of Bhutan. Yet, viewing it as an investment and not aid is more accurate as the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan.

The World Bank granted a $9 million interest-free loan to help Bhutan develop a calcium carbide plant near Phuntsholing. As of 1990, total Asian Development Bank loans to Bhutan amounted to $30 million.

Bank Loans

In 1987 and 1988 alone, the Asian Development Bank approved loans amounting to around $6.9 million to cover the costs of industrial estates modernization and to provide foreign currency for the Bhutan Development Finance Corporation, which in turn provided credit for agricultural projects and private-sector businesses.

Asian Development Bank loans to Bhutan for 1990-93 were projected at $35 million, plus a grant of more than $4.85 million; the aid was for technical assistance.

How the U.S. Benefits from Foreign Aid to Bhutan

Naturally, these plans have emboldened Bhutan; however, it is essential to note how the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan. The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan by opening up numerous opportunities of an untapped market. Although, these may not be visible at first. The following points may bring about a new perspective:

  1. In 2015, foreign exports from the United States to Bhutan totaled $213,126 — a significant economic benefit to the U.S. from its foreign aid to Bhutan.
  2. Bhutan is the only country in the world whose major export is a clean energy – hydropower. The U.S., meanwhile, is striving to become a major exporter of renewable energy technology.
  3. To this day, there are still no chain establishments such as McDonald’s, Starbucks, 7-11, Baskin Robbins, Subway, etc. Bhutan remains almost untouched by the outside world.
  4. There only two airlines that fly to Bhutan, which are Druk Air and Royal Bhutan.
  5. There is only one escalator in the whole country located in a shopping mall in Thimpu.

As Governor Tom Ridge rightly states, “By building new markets overseas, for American products, the International Affairs budget creates jobs and boosts the economy here at home.” The opportunities in developing Bhutan could be endless!

– Himja Sethi

Photo: Flickr

, ,

Paving the Way: New Models of Development in Somalia

The debate over the efficacy of humanitarian aid in impoverished countries has been a hot topic in recent years. Some people believe that humanitarian aid breeds dependence, while others argue that it can exploit some of the most vulnerable people in impoverished countries. To provide better and longer-lasting aid, the U.N., the U.N.’s International Children’s Emergency Fund and the World Health Organization, among others, are taking a new approach to humanitarian aid. The new method, dubbed “A New Way of Working,” combines the short-term aid for emergency relief with long-term development efforts. The organizations are testing this model for development in Somalia, one of the more embattled nations on Earth.

Finding a Solution

Whether it’s disaster relief or funding for infrastructure projects, foreign aid does help people who need it. Despite the horror stories in the news concerning corruption, mishandled aid only accounts for an estimated 9 percent. Not perfect, but not as bad as some purport.

Many issues still plague not only the development in Somalia but in humanitarian aid and global investment around the world. One reason is modern humanitarian assistance finds its roots as a disaster response mechanism, whether it’s man-made or natural, and funds need to be spent within 18 months. Conversely, developmental aid sprung up as a result of colonialism and seeks long-term solutions such as education and agriculture, with funding plans structured in three to five years cycles. So, the projects needed to accomplish these varying goals are often very different.

Development in Somalia: A Guide for Others

Somalia is a country recovering from a two-decade civil war and a 2011 drought that killed over 260,000 people. With the government declaring 2017’s drought another national emergency, aid organizations realized a different approach was necessary.

In January 2018, the U.N.’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and the U.N.’s Development Program (UNDP) set out to provide immediate assistance to those in desperate need of water. It also tried to identify the root of the emergency and establish projects that will allow everyday people to tackle the problem on their own when the next drought inevitably comes along.

While this sounds great in theory, there needs to be a practical element for improving development in Somalia. The current drought has lasted three growing seasons and is killing crops and livestock at alarming rates, which precipitates into a nationwide famine. In response, the OCHA-UNDP project built a sand dam in Bandarbeyla.

This dam allowed farmers to maintain their livestock, a vital resource for the agricultural economy in Somalia. Farmers say they can now save up the money they used to have to spend on water. Finally, these aid groups no longer have to focus solely on subsistence and can invest their energy and resources on education and security projects that will make Somalia stronger and more stable as it progresses as a nation.

Where Will It Be Seen Next?

The success of this project for development in Somalia is giving hope for other nations dealing with similar environmental and security-related emergencies.

  • South Sudan:
    The world’s youngest nation has over 1 million people at risk of famine. Luckily, the massive humanitarian response has kept the situation from getting worse.
  • Nigeria (Northeast region):
    Due to the Boko Haram insurgency, more than 5 million people need housing and food assistance.
  • Yemen:
    A brutal civil war has left more than 75 percent of the population in need of humanitarian aid.

These three nations face similar problems to Somalia in that they endure a vicious cycle of drought and insecurity. The UNDP and other organizations are hoping to implement strategies similar to what is occurring in Somalia with the goal that “A New Way of Working” will allow these countries to flourish on their own.

– David Jaques

Photo: Flickr

, , ,

How Chinese Foreign Aid Boosts African Development

Chinese foreign aid boosts African developmentIn 15 years, China has built invested over $350 billion in Africa. Chinese foreign aid boosts African development and covers 140 African countries and territories.

China has been engaging with African countries since 1955, with the Bandung Conference. From the first efforts in Egypt to the TAZARA Railway, the most remarkable project China has in Africa, Chinese foreign aid boosts African development mainly in infrastructure, education, agriculture and energy generation.

Energy Generation

China spent $134.1 billion on energy generation and supply from 2000 to 2014. In August 2017, China-Africa Renewable Energy Cooperation and Innovation Alliance and Africa Renewable Energy Initiative (AREI) signed a Memorandum of Understanding to consolidate a cooperative relationship. This project includes building micro-grids for which Chinese providers and core renewable energy manufacturers will provide technological and financial support. This project shows prominent progress in renewable energy.

In addition, China has been increasingly engaging in the wind and solar PV industries under South Africa’s Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers’ Procurement Program, which focuses more on Chinese investors and companies’ investments, technology supply and manufacturing. Renewable energy generation is a win-win strategy, protecting the global environment and building the China-Africa connection.

Agriculture

Until 2014, China spent $10 billion on agriculture, forestry and fishing projects. In 2015, Chinese President Jinping Xi announced a $60 billion funding for 10 comprehensive plans to strengthen China-African cooperation. China-Africa agricultural industrial chains are one of the top priorities in these plans.

Additionally, China has been introducing agricultural technology and new breeds into Africa and has been sending agricultural experts to train African farmers. From 2000 to 2013, Chinese foreign aid to Africa in the agricultural sector has grown from $25 million to $325 million. The remarkable growth has brought African citizens an alternative way to improve their lives.

Infrastructure

Infrastructure investment has dominated Chinese foreign aid to Africa for more than a decade. The most significant project is the TAZARA railway in East Africa. The TAZARA railway was designed and built from 1968 to 1976. This 1,860 km railway stretches from Tanzania’s largest city, Dar es Salaam, to New Kapiri Mposhi in Zambia, which eliminates Zambia’s economic dependence on Rhodesia and South Africa.

This railway benefits the many rural regions along the route. There are thriving marketplaces at every train platform, providing a valuable method for rural residents and farmers to trade daily necessities. China invested more than $400 million in this project, along with technical assistance.

TAZARA railway is only one example of the many infrastructure projects China has worked on in Africa. From 2000 to 2014, China invested $88.8 million in transport and storage. The infrastructure aid has helped to stabilize African economic development.

Overall, Chinese foreign aid boosts African development mainly in infrastructure, agriculture and energy generation. Even though Chinese foreign aid to Africa is controversial, its investment has motivated African development on a large scale.

– Judy Lu

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

, ,

How the US Benefits from Foreign Aid to Macedonia

U.S. benefits from foreign aid to MacedoniaSince it gained independence from Yugoslavia in 1991, Macedonia has worked to become a stable democratic nation with a strong trade economy. Macedonia often struggles with being recognized or treated as an independent nation, a recent example being Greece’s demands for its constitutional name to be changed. Surrounded by more powerful countries, Macedonia requires steadfast support from its allies, which often comes in the form of foreign aid to help the country grow as a nation both politically and economically. The U.S. is one of these allies and has been supporting the country since it gained independence. Although America is keen on supporting countries moving towards democratic systems of government in general, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Macedonia as well.

One of the main goals of U.S. aid is to support Macedonia’s transition towards a market-oriented economy as well as its integration into the global trade economy, especially in the Euro-Atlantic. Trade between the U.S. and Macedonia in 2016 was around $276 million and is increasing every year. Electrical machinery and equipment have been the most popular U.S. exports to Macedonia, while imports from Macedonia to the U.S. focus on tobacco, apparel and metals such as iron and steel. The U.S. benefits not only from direct trade to Macedonia, but also through investment in its developing trade economy with other countries.

U.S. aid only helps to further bolster Macedonia’s improving trade economy through funding economic reforms and development, which not only improves direct trade to the U.S. but also increases the success of investments in the economy itself.

Trade is not the only improving economy in Macedonia. Recently, tourism has started to develop. Although in its infancy, contributing to 6.7 percent of the country’s GDP and employing only 1.6 percent of the country’s workers as of 2016, these numbers are expected to rise slowly but steadily. Tourism is also a very open market for foreign aid investment, with only about 2.4 percent of investment being in tourism. Considering that the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Macedonia going to other sectors, this could be yet another way to make aid more valuable to both countries by helping to better tourism in Macedonia, and in turn, providing profits for U.S. companies.

Lastly, keeping Macedonia as an ally gives the U.S. a valuable strategic partner for foreign policies and interests. Macedonia has often lent its airspace and provided troops to aid the U.S. as well as other countries in the U.N., such as for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. In general, the location of Macedonia is strategic to many of the conflicts the U.S. is involved in as well as for the stability of the region.

With a stabilizing government growing more democratic through reforms as well as a growing economy, there are many ways in which the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Macedonia financially, and with continued support, these benefits will increase for both countries. If the U.S. continues to be a dependable and helpful ally to Macedonia, it will return the favor as it has throughout its relationship by helping the U.S. and U.N. create stability in the region.

– Keegan Struble

Photo: Flickr

,

How the US Benefits From Foreign Aid to Somalia

The East African country of Somalia is one which faces many hardships. Violence, poverty and human rights violations are some of the highest-ranking issues, but the major focus of late has been the severe, ongoing drought that has impacted the nation since 2015.

The lack of water has inflicted suffering upon the entire region; however, conditions are improving since this time last year, largely due to U.S. humanitarian assistance in the region. In addition to supporting the nation, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia.

A National Disaster

In February of 2017, Somali President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed declared a national disaster due to the onset of an extreme drought in the country.

In a meeting with the National Drought Committee, Prime Minister Hassan Ali Khaire remarked, “my estimation is that half the country has felt the impact of this drought.” Millions of people were in desperate need of food, and Somalia was on the verge of famine.

Famine is a constant fear among the Somali people, as such an incident occurs often and has devastating consequences on the community. The last famine in Somalia occurred from 2010 to 2012 and was brought on by the East Africa Drought — a natural occurrence that resulted in nearly 260,000 deaths by starvation in the region.

This was considered the worst famine in a quarter century, but many more have taken place before, including one in 1992 which left approximately 300,000 dead.

U.S. Humanitarian Aid

To prevent the situation from becoming this severe again, the U.S. stepped up its humanitarian efforts in the country. USAID provided $187.77 million of foreign aid to Somalia in the 2017 fiscal year that included emergency assistance to approximately 2.7 million people per month from July to December.

These operations consisted of large donations of food, provision of food vouchers, access to safe drinking water, vocational training, medical assistance and employment opportunities in local marketplaces.

According to the most recent report on conditions in Somalia from USAID, this help significantly reduced the risk of famine. Between July of 2017 and February 2018, there has been a 17 percent decline in the acutely malnourished population — a major accomplishment considering the relatively short amount of time over which intervention has taken place.

U.S. Benefits from Foreign Aid to Somalia

There are many ways from which the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia. According to a report by the World Food Program, food insecurity is a “threat and impact multiplier for violent conflict.” When people are starving and looking for any way out, they may engage in violent activities if a terrorist organization promises food or money in exchange.

Somalia is one of the most unstable countries in the world, especially with the terrorist group al-Shabaab on the rise. It is important for the U.S. to take any measure possible to prevent the spread of violent conflict, and reducing food insecurity is a small way to aid in that effort.

By contributing to solving Somalia’s famine crisis, the U.S. actively takes steps to ensure its own national security.

Another way the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia is that by extending a helping hand to a country in need, the U.S. simultaneously establishes a friendship between itself and the Somali government. This collaboration may advance our foreign policy agenda in the future.

According to political science expert Clair Apodaca, foreign aid “allows the donor state access and influence in the domestic and foreign affairs of other states.”

Mutual Benefits in Times of Crisis

By offering humanitarian assistance in times of crisis, the U.S. gains leverage over the way Somalia governs its country. With this influence, the nation may be able to achieve its objectives to strengthen democratic institutions and improve stability in the region.

Lastly, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia because providing helpful programs and funding to people who are suffering improves our image as a leader in the global community.

Such actions demonstrate that the U.S. is an ethical and reliable partner, which can improve our favorability in the eyes of foreign leaders and ultimately help our diplomatic and trade relations.

Still Work To Do

Though U.S. foreign aid has helped Somalia avoid falling into a full-fledged famine, the country is by no means out of harm’s way. Rainfall is expected to be below average from April to June again this year, and around 5.4 million people are still experiencing either “stressed” or “crisis” level food insecurity.

It is important that the U.S. continue its humanitarian assistance programs in Somalia throughout 2018, and for as long as it takes to restore the country to a relatively stable state because by doing so, the nation is not only promoting the interests of Somalia, but of the U.S. as well.

– Maddi Roy

Photo: Flickr

, ,

How the US Benefits from Foreign Aid to Ukraine

How the US Benefits from Foreign Aid to UkraineUkraine has faced ferocious political turmoil and civilian unrest in recent years, marked by war and corruption. Currently, it is crucial for Ukraine to continue its path to democracy. Congress must recognize how the U.S. benefits from humanitarian aid to Ukraine now more than ever. In the wake of recent cuts to foreign assistance in the 2018 and 2019 budget proposal, Ukraine’s stability depends on its American partnership.

For more than two-thirds of the twentieth century, Ukraine endured the oppressiveness of the Soviet Union. In 1991, Ukraine gained its independence, but it was plagued by deep-seated political corruption. This stronghold-tainted governance in Ukraine resulted in the imprisonment of its first female prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko in 2011 and the exiling of its fourth president Viktor Yanukovich in 2014.

Not only has Ukraine suffered instability and corruption in its political arena, but dirty politics have bled through its microeconomics as well. For example, patients may have access to medical treatment, but they oftentimes must bribe doctors in order to get the treatment they really need. This deep-rooted corruption that permeates all levels of society and government in Ukraine has historically threatened foreign aid and investment.

Unfortunately, foreign interest is tightening its grip on the power of the purse. In a recent breakthrough, Ukraine’s largest foreign backers, including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Union (E.U.), announced they will not lend to Ukraine without serious progress on key reforms, including the fight against corruption. The IMF is comprised of 189 countries working to promote sustainable economic growth, trade and global poverty reduction.

The upside is that corruption levels have actually begun to decrease. In recent years, Ukraine has taken long-term steps to fight against corruption, including implementing anti-corruption agencies in the judiciary, public procurement and state-owned enterprises. These are some incentives that Congress can rely on when weighing in on how the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Ukraine.

The U.S. has been the world’s only superpower since the fall of the Soviet Union. America as a superpower holds great influence, characterized by its far-reaching ability to exert influence on a global scale. So what are the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Ukraine?

The U.S. has much to gain from coordinating with donors to Ukraine. Undeniably, foreign aid has been historically used in policymaking as a means to gain international leverage. Assisting Ukraine with humanitarian and foreign aid helps promote U.S. policy objectives. Ukraine is situated between Russia and the NATO-affiliated European countries, a geostrategic location for both the U.S. and the E.U.

Foreign aid to Ukraine will also support nuclear security, a strong interest to global safety, despite much of Ukraine’s energy resources now coming from Europe. Establishing Ukraine’s own energy supplies will prevent Russia from making weapons of Ukraine’s energy resources in the future.

Additionally, remedying Ukraine’s medical industry under the Global Health Initiative (GHI) will significantly improve disease containment. GHI aims to improve public health and strengthen U.S. national security through detecting, preventing and controlling global disease. Agencies such as PEPFAR provide direct service and assistance in Ukraine to maximize the medical quality and coverage of the national HIV/AIDS response.

Lastly, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Ukraine by assisting Ukrainians who suffer from the War in Donbass. In March of 2014, Russia responded to Ukraine’s distressed political state by invading and annexing Crimea, an Eastern Ukrainian territory, which has caused war and hurt Ukraine’s economic growth. This has created political, economic and social conflict, and is a direct result of the War in Donbas, home to Ukraine’s major mining industry.

The Trump administration recently approved a sale of lethal weapons to Ukraine. Political analysts believe that the public will see the sales as a principled signal that the United States will support its allies. This type of political leverage is a clear way the U.S. can benefit from its support to Ukraine. The move was made in light of ongoing requests by Ukrainian advocates as a result of the War in Donbass and supported by the fact that Ukraine was not the aggressor.

The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Aid in Ukraine (OCHA) has calculated that nearly 4.4 million Ukrainians are affected by the conflict in Donbas and 3.4 million are in need of humanitarian aid and protection. Now, more than ever, Ukraine needs humanitarian aid.

Because funding for humanitarian aid has been cut in 2018 and is projected to be cut again in 2019, the World Food Bank can only assist those affected by the War in Donbass. Yet, the rest of Ukraine suffers, as 23 percent of households will go without adequate food. Despite this, people in Eastern Ukraine are suffering the most from displacement, lack of medical care and food and subjectivity to war.

As the world’s only superpower since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which left Ukraine in disarray, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Ukraine because it will help build confidence in the people suffering in Ukraine and promote the democracy Ukraine has struggled to achieve. When democracy is encouraged in the world, it is always an interest of the U.S.

– Alex Galante 

Photo: Flickr

, , ,

Foreign Aid Is Getting Better

Foreign Aid Is Getting BetterGovernment-funded aid and development programs do not benefit from the free market pressures generating growth and improved efficiency in the private sector. However, since the emergence of the international aid system following World War II, many countries’ philanthropic expenditures have become more transparent, sustainable and effective. This upward trend continues to this day; foreign aid is getting better, thanks to several improvements in their methods and philosophies.

Data Science

The first step in solving a problem is identifying it. This cliche is rarely more relevant than in the world of foreign aid, where economists and data scientists have spent years trying to measure, model and tailor solutions to the world’s most intractable problems. Good data are essential for development initiatives to establish baselines, set goals and targets, track progress and evaluate results.

Since the Marrakech Action Plan for Statistics was agreed to in 2004, more than 86 percent of International Development Association countries have completed or begun developing national strategies for gathering statistics. To carry this progress forward, organizations like the World Bank and the Committee on Data of the International Council for Science offer training on data practices to members of developing countries.

The science continues to improve. In 2014, Jesse Berns, a veteran of war and disaster zones, developed the Dharma Platform, an innovative new software designed for the rapid collection, sharing, and analysis of data in chaotic situations. Already adopted by Doctors Without Borders in 22 countries, Dharma is one example of how foreign aid is getting better.

Technology

The Dharma platform, made possible by the ubiquity of mobile phones, dovetails with another accelerator of foreign aid efficacy, technology. Recognizing the need to harness new technologies in order to meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, in 2014, USAID established the U.S. Global Development Lab (USGDL) “to produce breakthrough development innovations by sourcing, testing and scaling proven solutions to reach hundreds of millions of people.” USGDL is comprised of scientists and experts from a range of private-sector partners and works with labs in universities across the country. Leadership has set ambitious goals, hoping to provide digitized agricultural data by mobile phone to 42 million small farmers in Africa within five years and standalone energy solutions to 40 million people.

While most of the impact of technological innovation occurs outside of the context of development assistance, the USGDL illustrates an essential way that foreign aid is getting better, by harnessing technology as an indispensable development tool. Since 2012, the program has expanded internet access to approximately 20 million new mobile and internet users around the globe, and directly supported USAID health and education programs by connecting 56 schools and 39 hospitals to the web.

Foreign Aid Is Getting Better by Shifting Its Approach

While improving the material lives of recipients is an essential goal of foreign aid, material donations have a limited to negative impact when they are misaligned with a country’s development needs. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development‘s Working Party on Aid Effectiveness recognized at the beginning of the 21st century that “promoting widespread and sustainable development was not only about amounts of aid given, but also about how aid was given.” Learning from the lessons of decades of misalignment and waste, foreign aid organizations are shifting away from dollars-and-cents inputs to an emphasis on self-sufficiency and building donor-recipient coordination.

Foreign aid is a young enterprise. Most of the organizations that come to mind with respect to foreign aid did not exist until the second half of the 20th century. While much progress has been made in improving foreign aid initiatives, from improving accountability to investing in sustainable, bottom-up solutions, foreign aid is getting better. Providing effective assistance to those in need is undeniably difficult, but it is getting easier. 

– Whiting Tennis

Photo: Flickr