Information and stories about United States.

Humanitarian Use of Nuclear Technology
Signed in 1968 and implemented in 1970, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) has been a lasting, positive force in regulating nuclear weapons internationally and foregrounding the humanitarian use of nuclear technology. Since its conception, the U.S. has not only been committed to upholding the initial conditions of the treaty but also expanding its efforts through the support of organizations like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Civilian Research and Development Foundation (CRDF). Further development of nuclear techniques in agriculture, environmental preservation and medicine all contribute to improving living conditions and reducing poverty in less developed countries.

History of US Support

Since the treaty went into effect in 1970, the involved parties met every five years to discuss its renewal until it was extended indefinitely in the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference. It has been largely effective, with nuclear weapons stockpile falling by 88% in the U.S. and 80% globally since 1986.

However, it was not until more recently that the members of the NPT began working more vigorously in their efforts to aid in meeting the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Though humanitarian use of nuclear technology has been central to the NPT since its founding, in 2010 the IAEA introduced the Peaceful Use Initiative (PUI) as a way of generating even more funding in support of these goals. The U.S. is the leading contributor to the PUI, donating $395 million to the initiative since 2015 and pledging another $50 million over five years in November 2020.

Lastly, at the most recent NPT Conference in August 2022, the U.S. and 29 other countries gave $3.9 million to launch the “Sustained Dialogue on Peaceful Uses” and delegated its operations to the CRDF.

Success in Reducing Hunger and Improving Quality of Life

Nuclear technology can benefit humanity in a myriad of ways. Scientists have made great strides in increasing yields in agricultural production. Using various techniques, they have discovered ways of making hardier, more resistant crops, maximizing water use efficiency, reducing populations of invasive insect species that kill crops, cleaning crops through irradiation and diagnosing livestock with dangerous illnesses. It has also been very useful for understanding and protecting the environment and, of course, medicine.

Various governments and organizations across the world have been able to implement technologies like these because of U.S. funding. For example, more than $8.4 million that the U.S. provided to the PUI fund helped Vietnamese authorities combat a swine fever outbreak in their livestock using nuclear technology. Another instance is in 2017 when the IAEA used $6 million of U.S.-backed funds to develop more nutrient-rich crops as a means of reducing malnutrition in Sierra Leone. Additionally, in March 2019 $4.3 million in U.S. support went to the development of isotope hydrology, a cutting technique that “allow(s) national experts to identify and assess the availability of groundwater resources.” These are just a few of the ways that U.S. support has been instrumental in the proliferation of the humanitarian use of nuclear technology.

Looking Forward

International cooperation to further develop the peaceful use of nuclear technology is essential in the fight against poverty, and U.S. financial support is instrumental for organizations like the IAEA and CRDF to continue innovating and implementing these solutions.

– Xander Heiple
Photo: Flickr

Help Latin America
On April 26, 2022, Rep. Mark Green (R-TN-7) introduced the Western Hemisphere Nearshoring Act (H.R. 7579), a bipartisan bill that aims to accelerate economic development in Latin America through nearshoring. Using nearshoring to help Latin America and the Caribbean will also safeguard the interests of the U.S. Moving supply chains to Latin America, from China, will give many countries more sustainability. Decreasing dependency on China by establishing partnerships in the Western Hemisphere will bring a wide range of benefits, including poverty reduction in the region. By cosponsoring and advocating for the bill, U.S. legislators in both houses can support both the U.S. economy and the reduction of poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The Benefits of Nearshoring

  • Promotes economic stability and growth in Latin America and the Caribbean.
  • Reduces migration to other countries from Latin America and the Caribbean.
  • Reduces overdependence on China as a supply chain.
  • Greater “peace, security and democracy” in the region.

By importing goods from nearby countries instead of China, U.S. companies have a cheaper choice for international sourcing. This would help create jobs and rebuild the struggling economy in Latin America and the Caribbean, considering that the number of individuals enduring extreme poverty in the region increased to 86 million in 2021. Nearshoring would not only address the economic downturn but would also address job scarcity post-pandemic.

This nearshoring opportunity will benefit the region’s economy and everyday workers. Prospective deals could uplift multiple countries in the region and promote stability and growth. By helping its neighbors reverse poverty trends, the U.S. can also prevent dangerous journeys of migration by providing a solution in the home countries of potential migrants.

Poverty from the Source

U.S. companies would provide significant economic opportunities by using nearshoring to help Latin America and the Caribbean with benefits reaching rural and urban areas. One can understand poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean better by viewing the lack of job opportunities — the region has an unemployment rate of about 10% in 2021.

Whether it is rural people moving to urban cities where job opportunities are scarce or a lack of opportunity in rural areas themselves, private sector companies making deals in Latin America and the Caribbean would tackle the issue from its source. In the 2000 publication “Options for rural poverty reduction in Latin America and the Caribbean,” Rubén G. Echeverría from the Sustainable Development Department of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) confirmed that economic growth and GDP increases will help reduce extreme poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The IDB has outlined and supported private sector companies that have provided better wages in rural areas. Urban-based centers for economic development and nearshoring would provide the city with jobs for those from rural areas or those with a lack of higher education.

Long-term Capability

In October 2021, the U.S. Chamber’s Association of American Chambers of Commerce in Latin America and the Caribbean (AACCLA) held the 2021 Virtual Forecast on Latin America and the Caribbean Conference. Discussions included considering nearshoring to help Latin America and the Caribbean’s economic recovery from the pandemic.

During the conference, “panelists shared insights on how to create a resilient and sustainable global supply chain, the opportunities to revitalize certain nations and the role foreign policy plays in supporting the Latin American and Caribbean economies.”

The Panamanian government sees nearshoring as a strong economic development solution for Panama as “60% of the world’s commerce goes through the Panama Canal.” Furthermore, “more than 170 multinational companies” have bases in Panama, making Panama the ideal nation for nearshoring.

By providing proof that nearshoring can have positive effects on Latin America and the Caribbean, U.S. lawmakers have a great platform to support the U.S. economy while helping Latin America by providing economic opportunity and a way out of poverty.

– Karen Krosky
Photo: Flickr

Foreign Aid to Afghanistan
Some definitions of foreign aid provide a distorted vision of its purpose. This in turn drives citizens, government officials and donors away from supporting it. An accurate definition of foreign aid is one country helping to improve a recipient country’s standard of living through economic, military and various other services. Donors provide this type of support after war or natural disaster. The recent withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan is slowly concluding more than 40 years of conflict. However, foreign aid to Afghanistan remains necessary.

Afghanistan’s Violent Past

More than half of the population in Afghanistan lives on $1.90 a day. In headlines, history books and news stories, many do not see Afghanistan beyond the label of an economically developing country. This label often comes from a place of unfair judgment.

The longevity of the Afghan crisis is why aid is vital in transforming the country to work toward a better quality of life and future for the younger generations. The detrimental relationship between the state and citizens has damaged every part of what is necessary for a society to flourish. For example, the top-down monopoly with profiteers and warlords on top formed to control economic markets producing bottom-up violence is a significant barrier in the country flourishing. Understanding the nature of the conflict that has created a dystopian climate throughout the country is vital in producing foreign aid to Afghanistan because planning for the long term is what will produce change.

Antony Blinken’s Push for Reform

The U.S. is the world’s largest provider of foreign aid, but reform is necessary for providing quality aid for the future. During secretary of state Antony Blinken’s visit to Afghanistan on April 15, 2021, he spoke on several areas of reform to ensure the foreign aid sector continues to progress and attend to the needs of Afghanistan.

The U.S. is studying previous aid distribution models and methods to ensure that country receives the maximum amount of help. This also promotes other governments to continue the change. The U.S. plans on holding the Afghanistan government accountable to the pledge of acknowledging the basic human rights of their citizens. For example, traveling outside of the country has been nearly impossible for Afghan citizens. The U.S. will also hold the Taliban accountable for using Afghanistan as a base for formulating attacks on other countries. Neutralizing any form of threat prevents damage to other countries that would ultimately produce the need for more foreign aid and will push away allies.

The U.S. will ensure even aid distribution throughout the country. It will have clear communication with the Taliban in the coming years. The Taliban must allow aid groups to work on uninterrupted terms. Overall, the U.S. is enforcing long-term change through rectifying the relationship between the state and citizens that has been upholding the unlivable climate.

The Future of Foreign Aid to Afghanistan

The narrative of putting a stop to the current war or any war in the future is an unreachable goal. Foreign aid will not go towards a single issue. Instead, it will focus on changing the systemic problems that continue to produce wars. The U.S. often uses a militant approach, however, with the updated forms of foreign aid, it will not be using violence to overcome it. This includes $64 million in new humanitarian assistance which the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the World Health Organization (WHO) will distribute. This new surge of funding will provide a large range of assistance including shelter, essential health care, sanitation, food aid, hygiene services and more. These are forms of aid that will contribute to the overall building of a better livelihood for Afghan citizens.

The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC)

The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), which U.S. Congress introduced in 2004 is an agency separate from the State Department and USAID. It continues to abide by its mission statement of reducing poverty through economic growth by providing aid to countries like Afghanistan. The U.S. has also developed a range of grants and programs to assist Afghan women who the civil upheaval greatly impacted. USAID continues to provide grants in helping Afghan women gain access to universities through the Women’s Scholarship Endowment.

The US State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM)

The U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) funds several programs for Afghan women refugees and internally displaced persons. The programs include literacy training, gender-based violence prevention and mother-child health care. PRM works with various partners to ensure change including the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM).

In large groups, varying interests can prevent the proper allocation of funds to aid. However, the government and donors continue to work closely together. The impact that aid has extends beyond providing food and emergency medical assistance. It has the potential to provide a hopeful future for those who have only known living in a war zone. It reconciles individual relationships within the society. As aid strategies are revised to adhere to current needs the long-term quality of life for Afghan citizens will improve.

– Maggie Forte
Photo: Flickr

Medicaid Funding CrisisHundreds of thousands of Puerto Ricans risk losing their access to health care in the near future. In Puerto Rico, about 1.4 million or about half of its citizens live in poverty. Accordingly, Medicaid covers approximately 46% of Puerto Rico’s population. However, United States government leaders can and should take actions that would help Puerto Rico escape the Medicaid funding crisis.

Medicaid in Puerto Rico

Because Puerto Rico is a territory, Medicaid funding in Puerto Rico differs greatly from that in the United States. The U.S. government reimburses U.S. states for a specific portion of what they spend on health care for the poor. This reimbursement ranges from 50% to 83%. If the need grows, the federal government’s contribution to states will grow as well. On the other hand, as a territory, Puerto Rico has a cap of 55% reimbursement. Even if the need increases, that cap does not increase. The federal government would reimburse Puerto Rico 83% if it had state status.

On top of this, starting in 1968, the U.S. federal government capped total dollars to reimburse Puerto Rico for Medicaid expenses. In 2019, government funding only covered 15% of the total cost of Medicaid in Puerto Rico. Due to this, Puerto Rico is experiencing a Medicaid funding crisis.

Inadequate and Unreliable Funds

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress provided emergency funding to help Puerto Rico escape the Medicaid funding crisis. Puerto Rico’s Medicaid budget for 2021 is $2.7 billion, which is seven times more than what it would have been if Congress had not granted temporary funding. However, the issue is that this funding is only short-term.

Year after year, Puerto Rico has to ask Congress for additional funds. Then, Congress must determine whether or not it should provide it. For this reason, Puerto Rico is unable to establish long-term planning or negotiate contracts with health care providers. The bottom line is that this leaves Puerto Rico always uncertain of whether it will receive sufficient finances to deliver vital health care services.

This uncertainty combined with Puerto Rico’s low Medicaid rates has influenced doctors and other health care workers to emigrate from the island. In turn, that is limiting the treatment and care available to patients. As a result, 72 of Puerto Rico’s 78 cities and towns have insufficient medical care. In particular, Vieques and Culebra suffer from poor health care access.

Necessary Actions

Puerto Rican Health Secretary Carlos Mellado believes that Puerto Rico should have parity with states for Medicaid funding. This means removing the reimbursement caps and funding Puerto Rico at 83%, which is at the top of the range for states. He visited Congress over the summer to advocate for Puerto Rican parity.

Beyond the Medicaid funding crisis, the Center for American Progress advocates eight measures that the Biden administration could do to provide parity and support for Puerto Rico. These include parity in interstate trade and a specific focus on providing health care access to Vieques and Culebra.

In general, adequate federal funding is the most long-term answer to the Medicaid funding crisis and several other issues Puerto Rico faces. As Health Secretary Mellado said, “It would be ideal if Puerto Rico could have Medicaid funding parity. That would be the most permanent solution to this issue.”

– Anna Lovelace
Photo: Unsplash

Aid for Lebanon
At the beginning of the year, in January 2021, the World Bank approved and accepted the United States’ $249 million project proposal to bring aid into Lebanon. The social and economic situations in Lebanon over the past several months and years have become desperately dire, and the United States, the World Bank and its parent organization, the United Nations, are all seeking to meet the needs of the many suffering Lebanese people.

The Situation in Lebanon

Lebanon has been facing a prolonged financial crisis as well as economic upheaval, which, in 2020, resulted in severe inflation of the country’s currency, the Lebanese Pound (LBP), and led to a 19.2% drop in the GDP. As of September 2021, the U.N. reported that the multidimensional poverty rate in Lebanon has risen to 82%, with 32% of the Lebanese population living in extreme multidimensional poverty.

The Lebanese people are lacking in basic commodities and healthcare services, which has also exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic’s effect on Lebanon. Unable to reach treatment facilities or even get diagnoses, the Lebanese people have suffered greatly from the pandemic. The pandemic’s stifling effect on businesses in Lebanon has also further compounded the financial struggles that Lebanon is already facing.

The Emergency Crisis and COVID-19 Response Social Safety Net Project (ESSN)

The Emergency Crisis and COVID-19 Response Social Safety Net Project (ESSN) began official operations in February 2021, providing funds and services to those struggling under the combined crises of Lebanon’s dismal financial state, complicated geopolitical relations and poor COVID-19 response infrastructure. The ESSN will attempt to work with and bolster existing active programs within Lebanon; the goal is to complement other projects without collateral damage to the already fragile internal systems.

The ESSN has been working closely with social programs that are already established, and that both the Lebanese Social Development Centers of the Ministry of Social Affairs and the Ministry of Education run. Understanding the importance of using every available resource, the ESSN has also been working closely with other third-party projects, most notably Lebanon’s National Poverty Targeting Program (NPTP), which also runs through the U.N. and the World Bank to identify problem areas within the country and help codify response programs.

How the ESSN is Providing Aid for Lebanon

To try to get Lebanon back on its feet, there are two main fronts on which the ESSN is attempting to help revitalize economic growth and stem the tide of poverty. The first is basic aid packages in the form of cash deposits for families, individuals, and those with unfortunate circumstances. These are to provide immediate relief and bring some sense of stability to the people stranded in poverty. In order to accomplish this, the ESSN had been providing financial and technical support in order to greatly increase the capabilities and operations of the NPTP. Using the infrastructure already put in place through the NPTP, both projects hope to be able to proliferate aid quickly, effectively and fairly.

The second front that the ESSN is attempting to fight poverty on is that of human capital, specifically the promise of the young people of Lebanon. Recognizing that people are the most valuable resource, the ESSN’s work with the Lebanese Ministry of Education has begun to keep children in schools. Education is the key to opportunity, and ESSN is working to subsidize both the public school systems in Lebanon and also the schooling costs for individual students. By ensuring the quality of education and by granting students the socioeconomic stability to be able to continue attending school, the ESSN is attempting to assist Lebanon with investing in its future.

Becoming fully approved and operational in 2021, the ESSN will receive funding, and it will remain running for three years as it provides aid for Lebanon. Reports as recently as July 2021 have positive responses, and already, a large amount of aid has undergone disbursement to individuals, families and students alike. The ESSN has plans to continue to show support by investing in Lebanon and its people, a hearty show of humanity.

– John J. Lee
Photo: Flickr

There is a clear dichotomy between how the impoverished citizens of developed and developing countries feed their families. In wealthier nations, families living below the poverty line buy cheaper food options. In many packaged and overly-processed foods, the possibility of unhealthy food preservatives and a surplus of calories is common. As a result, negative health effects ensue. In developing countries, impoverished citizens rely on easily cultivated and cheap foods to feed themselves. These products often do not have sufficient nutritional value to ensure a healthy lifestyle. In order to increase the accessibility of healthy produce, understanding the causes of income disparity and food restriction is necessary. Through this awareness, finding a solution to supply nutritious foods to those in need is possible.

Income and Food in Developed Countries

How one budgets their income is an essential factor when learning the impact of economic resources or the lack thereof on one’s daily health. An observational study conducted by BMC Public Health in the United States focused on the relationship between income and health. “Compared to lower-income households, higher-income households had significantly higher total vegetable scores, respectively, higher dairy scores and lower proportion of grocery dollars spent on frozen desserts,” said French, Tangney et. al in the study.

Overall, families with lower incomes purchased fewer vegetables, fewer dairy products and more frozen desserts compared to families with higher incomes. Thus, according to this study, individuals with lower incomes in developed countries are more likely to choose high caloric, less nutritious foods than their higher-income counterparts as these foods are more economically accessible to them than fresher, more nutritious foods. By understanding the results of this study, it is evident that the accessibility of healthy produce is limited to the wealthy members of society who can afford it.

Can Health Be Bought?

Compared to developed countries, developing nations struggle to provide protein-rich foods for their people. In these areas of the world, one’s income also dictates one’s food options. In developed countries, high-calorie foods are often cheaper than low-calorie food, yet in many developing nations, high-calorie and high-protein foods are more expensive. This can make it very difficult for low-income individuals to access necessary high-protein foods, such as eggs.

In Niger, egg calories are 23.3 times more expensive than calories from staple foods. In contrast, egg calories in the United States are 1.6 times as expensive as staple food calories. Diversifying one’s calorie intake is seemingly difficult due to one’s economic position. Consequently, one’s likelihood of contracting type two diabetes, heart disease or cancer also rises with high consumption of low nutrient food. Thus, the higher the price, the lower the accessibility of healthy produce and the higher chance of life-threatening diseases.

Solutions

Despite these issues, there are ways to end global hunger and poverty. Organizations all over the world are finding ways to help those in need. One nonprofit organization, A Growing Culture, is currently working to support farmers globally. By giving them a voice in the agricultural industry, farmers are able to gain back power.

In addition, the organization promotes sustainable agricultural methods. Through these goals, A Growing Culture has encouraged communication between farmers around the world. These conversations inspire the use of environmentally safe techniques, discussion of common struggles and shared desire to nourish the world. Organizations like these can go a long way to helping combat world hunger and improve. With the popularity of their mission, fighting industrial farming and decreasing the prices of daily foods is possible.

– Kristen Quinonez
Photo: Flickr

Temporary Protected Status for YemenOn July 6, 2021, the Biden administration announced the extension of a program to support Yemeni individuals currently living in the U.S. as Yemen grapples with civil war and the most severe humanitarian crisis in the world. Even before the conflict, Yemen was the most impoverished nation in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), with a poverty rate of more than 50%. Today, more than three-quarters of Yemen grapples with poverty. The Biden administration has extended the Temporary Protected Status for Yemen nationals in the United States due to deteriorating conditions in Yemen.

The Situation in Yemen

Since the civil rights crisis began, Yemen’s economy has unarguably collapsed. The conditions exacerbated citizens’ vulnerabilities and destroyed critical infrastructure, while famine-level food insecurity ravaged the nation. The political crisis coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic led to Yemenis living in increased poverty.

The World Bank notes that “more than 40% of Yemeni households that find it difficult to buy even the minimum amount of food may have also lost their primary source of income.” Additionally, 19.9 million citizens live without access to sufficient healthcare services. Proper healthcare is more crucial than ever considering the impact of COVID-19 and Yemen’s recent outbreaks of “cholera, diphtheria, measles and dengue fever.” Experts argue that rebuilding Yemen’s economy and mending “Yemen’s social fabric” can only happen with an “eventual political reconciliation.”

Temporary Protected Status

Congress created the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) in the Immigration Act of 1990, where it provides “temporary immigration status” to nationals of countries grappling with extraordinary conditions, such as ongoing armed conflict and violence. Also, the Secretary of Homeland Security may grant TPS to a country suffering an ongoing environmental disaster or epidemic.

Once granting an individual TPS, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) cannot detain them based on their immigration status. TPS also does not impact an application for asylum or any other immigration benefits. Syria, El Salvador, Haiti and South Sudan are currently designated for TPS in addition to Yemen and several other countries. In the distant past, the U.S. granted TPS to countries like Lebanon, Kuwait and Rwanda.

The decision to extend the TPS of Yemeni nationals in the U.S. allows them to stay in the country without fear of deportation. Undoubtedly, the collapse of healthcare systems, sanitation and education services in Yemen bears influence on the decision. Furthermore, an unstable political transition compounded the need for this decision.

Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas announced the extended Temporary Protected Status for Yemen after consulting with interagency partners. Mayorkas stated that the U.S. has “decided to extend and re-designate Yemen for Temporary Protected Status. We will continue to protect and offer their individuals a place of residency temporarily in the United States.”

US Role in the Yemen Crisis

In February 2021, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced an end to U.S. support for offensive operations in the Yemen war, including relevant arms sales. The move contrasts the positions of Presidents Obama and Trump. President Trump backed arms deals with the Saudi coalition, citing benefits for the U.S. economy even though the weapons led to the harm of civilians. However, the outflow of arms to the Middle East initially started under the Obama administration.

Furthermore, on March 1, 2021, Secretary Blinken announced $191 million in humanitarian assistance to Yemen, making the U.S. one of the largest donors for relief to Yemen. To promote more aid, Blinken urged parties at the virtual 2021 High-Level Pledging Event for the Humanitarian Crisis in Yemen to follow in the footsteps of the U.S. by helping to “end the conflict in Yemen.” The Biden administration’s action to extend Temporary Protected Status for Yemen “will allow approximately 1,700 Yemenis to keep their status through 2023” and will also enable another 480 Yemenis to apply.

Overall, the TPS extension to Yemenis in the U.S. shows the United States’ commitment to safeguarding the well-being of vulnerable people whose lives would be at risk in their home countries.

– Alysha Mohamed

Photo: Flickr

U.S. Foreign Aid During COVID-19The year 2020’s sudden outbreak of COVID-19 caught many countries off guard. The U.S. is demonstrating its status as a global superpower by releasing economic, medical and other foreign aid during COVID-19.

5 Facts About US Foreign Aid During COVID-19

  1. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has given more than $1.5 billion to different governments and organizations during the pandemic. The government split the money among various humanitarian, developmental and economic programs and organizations. The aid aims to help sustain governments at risk during the pandemic. It also intends to make the public more aware of COVID-19 and how to combat it. Additionally, the aid from the U.S. will go toward improving health education and hospitals, funding quick response teams capable of inhibiting COVID-19’s spread. The U.S. Government has also planned a $4 billion relief fund to aid high-risk countries through COVAX, a program that provides vaccines to low-income countries.
  2. The U.S. State Department works alongside other organizations. USAID and the CDC help the U.S. Government provide the necessary aid to countries at high risk. Congress created an emergency fund of $2.4 billion with the purpose of supporting both humanitarian programs and security and stabilization programs for countries in need. For example, foreign aid helps countries create safe and secure ways for citizens to receive necessary medical care during the pandemic.
  3. The U.S. gave the most foreign aid in 2020. In 2020, the U.S. gave around $35 billion in aid, with Germany close behind at just shy of $30 billion. The global amount of money that has gone toward COVID-19 relief measures is equal to about $16 trillion. U.S. foreign aid during COVID-19 is only around 1% of that. The majority of foreign aid during COVID-19 went toward short-term solutions, such as the aforementioned public health education programs and hospital care programs.
  4. U.S. foreign aid programs help combat more than just COVID-19. Recently, the House of Representatives passed an $11 billion bill to support countries in need, including through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
  5. The U.S. has approved $1.9 trillion in COVID-19 aid. Of that $1.9 trillion, the U.S. has dedicated $11 billion to fight the global pandemic. That $11 billion includes $800 million for aid programs from the U.S. Agency for International Development as well as the CDC Global Fund. The remaining $10 billion will support global health, humanitarian aid and economic aid.

To conclude, the U.S. has provided more aid than any other nation to help countries combat the COVID-19 pandemic. This has allowed many at-risk countries to minimize or at least lessen the impact of the disease.

Jake Herbetko
Photo: Flickr

Haiti-United States RelationshipIn 1804, Haiti gained its independence from France, yet it took until 1862 for the U.S. to recognize Haiti as a nation. In the 20th century, U.S. military forces began a 19-year military intervention in Haiti that lasted until 1934. Despite being the “second-oldest republic in the Western Hemisphere after the United States,” Haiti has struggled to maintain a consistent and reliable democracy, according to the Office of the Historian. The Haiti-United States relationship has significantly strengthened over time, with the United States as a regular donor to Haiti. In an already unstable nation, the recent assassination of Haitian President Moïse in July 2021 has led to further instability in the nation, prompting urgent humanitarian assistance.

Contemporary Haiti-US Economic Relations

Following the 2010 earthquake that paralyzed Haiti, the United States provided more than $5 billion worth of aid aimed at supporting “longer-term recover, reconstruction and development programs,” according to the U.S. State Department. In the aftermath of the earthquake, U.S. economic efforts have allowed for:

  • The creation of close to 14,000 job opportunities in the apparel industry for local Haitians.
  • About 70,000 farmers were able to improve their crop yields with the introduction of “improved seeds, fertilizer, irrigation and other technologies.”
  • A stronger police force that has expanded to more than 15,300 members.
  • Progress in “child nutrition and mortality, improved access to maternal healthcare and the containment of the spread of HIV/AIDS.”
  • Greater access to basic healthcare services in more than 160 health centers across Haiti.

As “Haiti’s largest trading partner,” the U.S. is involved in Haitian sectors such as “banks, airlines, oil and agribusiness companies” as well as “U.S.-owned assembly plants,” according to the U.S. State Department. Tourism, medical supplies and equipment, modernization of Haitian infrastructure and clothing production are areas of opportunity for U.S. businesses.

Despite the successes of the Haiti-United States relationship, the World Bank estimates that, in 2020, almost 60% of the Haitian population lived in poverty. These statistics make Haiti the most impoverished nation in the Latin America and Caribbean region.

Political Unrest in Haiti

A shift from communism to democracy in Haiti has the ability to strengthen the Haiti-United States relationship and provide economic stability. Political and civil unrest has been ongoing since July 2018 and “violent protests” in the nation exacerbate Haiti’s plethora of issues. Among other issues, a growing unemployment rate, inflation rising to 20% and the Haitian currency depreciating by 30%, contribute to an ailing nation. Furthermore, the nation experiences regular fuel shortages and businesses struggle to keep their doors open. Due to the high poverty rate, about 33% of the population faces “crisis- or emergency-level food insecurity.”

While Haiti showed signs of promise when it held a democratic presidential election in 2017,  its “local and parliamentary elections” that were scheduled for October 2019 did not occur. Because democracy in Haiti is not consistent, this leads to nationwide instability and unrest.

The Assassination of President Jovenel Moïse

On July 7, 2021, Haitian President Jovenel Moïse and his wife, Martine, were attacked in their residence in the country’s capital, Port-au-Prince. The president was killed in the attack and his wife was severely injured but did not suffer any fatal wounds.

Moïse’s presidency, which began in February 2017 after winning an annulled 2015 election and a second election in 2016, “was marked by controversy.” His appointment sparked protests throughout the country, with citizens citing “economic underperformance and corruption” as the reason. Since the beginning of 2020, Moïse ruled by decree and allegedly attempted to grant himself and close confidants “immunity from prosecution” on several occasions. In 2020, human rights abuses connected to gang violence caused two members of Moïse’s government to be sanctioned by the U.S. government.

US Solidarity and Support

U.S. President Joe Biden has spoken on the future of the Haiti-United States relationship following Moïse’s assassination. Recently, Biden released a statement of mourning over Moïse’s assassination and uncertainty about the future of Haiti. “We condemn this heinous act and I am sending my sincere wishes for First Lady Moïse’s recovery. The United States offers condolences to the people of Haiti and we stand ready to assist as we continue to work for a safe and secure Haiti,” says Biden.

The instability in the aftermath of Moïse’s assassination leaves the future of the Haiti-United States relationship in question. However, by committing to democracy, the Haitian government can work toward a stronger economic partnership between the two nations.

International Aid to Haiti

UNICEF is working to provide aid to more than 1.5 million Haitian people experiencing “constrained access to clean water, health and nutrition, disrupted education and protection services” amid the political instability and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In July 2021, UNICEF reported that “Haiti is the only country in the Western Hemisphere where not a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine has been received.”

To address this, “UNICEF will support the distribution, transportation and storage of COVID-19 vaccines” to improve the vaccine rollout. Starting three years ago, UNICEF has provided 920 solar-operated fridges in Haiti, “to strengthen the cold chain, mainly in remote areas where electricity is unreliable.” Today, 96% of Haiti’s health centers possess solar fridges for medicinal cold storage.

By mitigating Haiti’s domestic hardships, there is greater hope for a stronger Haiti-United States relationship in the future. The efforts of global humanitarian organizations provide a glimmer of hope in a tumultuous political landscape.

– Jessica Umbro
Photo: Flickr

Connecticut SenatorsConnecticut Senators Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) have long been advocates for aid-based foreign policy. Frequently, they try to increase the presence of the United States on the global stage. As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Murphy has a clear vision of progressive U.S. foreign policy, while Blumenthal has a similar vision of foreign involvement and humanitarian assistance.

5 Ways Connecticut Senators Fight for Foreign Aid

  1. Increasing the International Affairs Budget: In March 2021, Murphy, among other senators, proposed a $12 billion increase to the U.S. International Affairs Budget. Protecting the International Affairs Budget is unquestionably essential to mitigating global poverty. As of 2021, however, foreign aid constitutes less than 1% of the U.S. budget. As one of the most powerful countries in the world, the U.S. has the capacity to increase aid exponentially. Through this proposal, called “Investing in 21st Century Diplomacy,” Murphy has shown a strong commitment toward maintaining diplomatic ties and providing aid to other countries.
  2. Requesting Funding for Refugee Programs: In March 2018, Blumenthal, with 24 other senators, wrote a letter to Senate appropriators calling for complete funding for particular refugee programs. Amid a time when the International Affairs Budget was in danger of reducing, Blumenthal led a letter advocating for refugee programs. In this proposal, Blumenthal recognized the national security benefits of increased foreign aid as well as the commitment of the U.S. to provide aid. Primarily, the letter responded to the Trump administration’s proposed elimination of the ERMA account, a source of funding for unforeseen humanitarian crises.
  3. Introducing the Global Health Security Act: Murphy, along with Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah) introduced the Global Health Security Act in April 2020, a bill that focuses on implementing the Global Health Security Agenda by appointing two different entities: The United States Coordinator for Global Health Security and the Global Health Security Interagency Review Council. The Global Health Security Act focuses on preventing infectious diseases across the globe. Its central goal is to achieve the Global Health Security Agenda, a 2014 initiative similarly targeted toward stemming infectious diseases.
  4. Recognizing COVID-19 in India: In May 2021, Blumenthal recognized the severe COVID-19 crisis in India and the need for immediate foreign aid. While at an event in Middletown, Connecticut, Blumenthal advocated the need for various medical supplies to go to India. While visiting a local Hindu temple, Blumenthal spoke about the issue and the need for immediate U.S. action.
  5. Advocating for Humanitarian Assistance: Murphy furthermore advocates for humanitarian assistance to fight hunger and poverty, two issues that impact extremism. As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Murphy has recently advocated for humanitarian aid in Yemen, a country struggling with famine and poverty. In May 2021, Murphy, with three other senators, wrote a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken. The letter thanked him for his recent involvement in fighting the crisis in Yemen and urged the Biden administration to take a more active role in encouraging other countries to do the same thing.

Committing to a Progressive Foreign Policy

Actively solving issues like hunger and infectious diseases tie directly into fighting global hunger. Hence, Connecticut Senators Murphy and Blumenthal remain committed to a progressive foreign policy. They have shown their commitment through public statements, letters to other senators and legislation like the Global Health Security Act. Ultimately, the Connecticut Senators want the U.S. to be an active member of a global community. The country would, accordingly, use its power to alleviate global inequalities and stem poverty.

– Samuel Weinmann
Photo: Flickr