Posts

, , , ,

USAID Shifts to Direct Aid in El Salvador

direct aid in El Salvador
On May 1, 2021, the Legislative Assembly of El Salvador removed the nation’s attorney general and all members of its Supreme Court. This sudden action sparked concern regarding the separation of powers in El Salvador’s government, with human rights organizations viewing it as a power grab by the country’s president, Nayib Bukele. USAID acted on the concerns by pulling all foreign aid funding previously dispersed through the Salvadoran government. The funding is now promised as direct aid to El Salvador’s civil society groups. Direct aid in El Salvador will ensure the most vulnerable El Salvadorans receive the help needed.

USAID Projects in El Salvador

USAID’s most recent foreign aid projects in El Salvador are designed to address the root causes of migration from Latin America to the United States. In January 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that set aside $4 billion to address immigration from the Northern Triangle countries: El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The order states that improving livelihoods in these countries eliminates the need for migrants to flee to the United States. In May 2021, USAID launched an official Northern Triangle Task Force. The task force laid out a strategy for improving livelihoods by targeting three areas:

  1. Prosperity – USAID will fund economic development to prevent poverty in El Salvador. This strategy includes improving infrastructure, investing in higher-value industries to create job opportunities and fostering entrepreneurship. The Salvadoran organizations receiving aid to implement these programs are primarily private sector actors.
  2. Security – USAID will target crime and corruption as another root cause of migration. This strategy includes increasing government transparency and making justice systems more responsive to citizens’ needs. Originally, the governmental National Civil Police and Institute for Access to Public Information were involved with the implementation of USAID projects related to this target. However, the shift to direct aid requires non-governmental organizations in El Salvador to replace government actors.
  3. Governance – USAID aims to make governments in the Northern Triangle more effective at responding to citizens needs. This strategy includes increasing accountability for government spending, improving government delivery of services and promoting citizen engagement with democracy. Civil society is the main recipient of direct aid for this purpose.

Civil Society in El Salvador

Direct aid in El Salvador builds upon a preexisting robust civil society landscape. Civil society in El Salvador first rose to prominence in the 1960s by providing humanitarian services. The Salvadoran Civil War in the 1980s saw the organizations taking on economic and social welfare work to replace overextended governments. The constitution of El Salvador protects the right of assembly and the Ministry of Interior and Territorial Development registers civil society organizations under that protection. Previous administrations promoted the creation and smooth functioning of civil society organizations. However, President Bukele mistrusts civil society organizations and his government stigmatizes them.

Civil society organizations previously received direct aid in El Salvador from USAID. In 2020, $7.5 million out of $60 million in USAID funding for El Salvador targeted improving governance and involving civil society. Experts had been lobbying for civil society organizations’ increased involvement with the distribution of aid long before President Bukele incited USAID’s action and many activists in Latin America praised USAID’s adjustment. Activists expressed hope that civil society organizations from other countries in the Northern Triangle would also secure larger roles in upcoming projects.

Strategy for El Salvador

While foreign aid from the United States circumvents the Salvadoran government, foreign policy officials continue to pressure the Bukele administration to restore the separation of powers. Secretary of State Antony Blinken traveled to Costa Rica in June 2021 for an annual meeting with the member states of the Central American Integration System. During the gathering, Blinken met privately with the Salvadoran foreign minister to discuss the issue of aid. The Biden administration also decided to bypass the lengthy appointment process for an ambassador to El Salvador and instead sent former U.S. ambassador Jean Manes to El Salvador as charge d’affaires to handle diplomatic relations with El Salvador immediately.

While the programs in El Salvador that will receive direct aid are currently unspecified, the United States has successfully committed domestic private actors to invest in El Salvador. For example, Vice President Kamala Harris announced that Microsoft will give internet access to three million citizens in the Northern Triangle countries, including El Salvador. This demonstrates how private actors fulfill roles that governments traditionally perform, such as infrastructure expansion, when governments fail to provide services. USAID hopes to utilize civil society organizations to run similar programs for democratic reform in El Salvador.

Moving Forward

The Salvadoran government’s decision to remove its top judiciaries led USAID to retract its trust in the country’s government with regard to aid funding. USAID chose civil society organizations to receive aid instead and also set aside direct aid to further democratic reforms. Official plans for redirected aid funding have yet to be released, but U.S. government officials have historically seen success in engaging private actors in tasks that governments usually complete. As the United States continues to pressure the Salvadoran government to increase accountability, foreign aid to El Salvador fosters more civil society engagement.

– Viola Chow
Photo: Wikipedia Commons

, , ,

The US Plans to Reduce Poverty in Central America

Reduce Poverty in Central AmericaIn an effort to stem migration, the Biden administration has unveiled a plan to reduce poverty in Central America. The administration hopes that improving the quality of life in places where people are likely to emigrate from will cause fewer people to make the dangerous journey to the U.S. border. In May 2021, Vice President Harris called on the private sector to increase investment in the Northern Triangle to bolster the United States’ efforts to develop the region and address the root causes of migration to the U.S.

Plans to Improve the Economy

In a public statement, the White House referred to the economic development initiative for the Northern Triangle as a call to action. The U.S. government hopes to bolster economic growth in the Northern Triangle region of Central America. Northern Triangle countries consist of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras. The aim of this directive is to implement sustainable action that will stem the mass migration of asylum seekers and ease the ensuing border crises between the U.S. and Mexico. The call to action involves six key areas.

6 Focal Areas of Development in the Northern Triangle

  1. Reform: Increased transparency and predictability by implementing “international best practices in licensing, permitting, procurement, regulation and taxation.”
  2. Digital and Financial Inclusivity: Ensuring affordable internet is more accessible to support digital inclusion and prioritizing financial inclusion of marginalized populations.
  3. Food Security and Agriculture: Developing initiatives to reduce food insecurity by improving agricultural outcomes and prioritizing resilient crops.
  4. Renewable Energy and Climate Change: Taking actions to achieve climate resilience and transitioning to renewable, clean energy.
  5. Education and Employment: “Expand job-training programs, support greater access to technical and secondary education and create higher-paying formal sector jobs,” with females and rural people as priorities.
  6. Healthcare: Develop strategies to strengthen healthcare systems in order to be better prepared for future health crises and to “ensure inclusive access to healthcare.”

Companies Aiding Poverty Reduction Efforts

The aim of the initiative is to reduce the need to emigrate by equalizing living standards between neighboring nations of varying economic status. This supports the broader goal of creating international stability with efforts to reduce poverty in Central America. The U.S. government believes partnering with the private sector will make the plan of action a reality. So far, 12 companies and organizations have committed to the goal of developing the Northern Triangle.

Technology companies such as Microsoft will provide broader internet and digital communication systems to the Northern Triangle and teach people the digital skills needed to thrive in a digital world. Furthermore, the language learning app, Duolingo, hopes to bolster literacy rates, help people learn English and provide wider access to quality education. Beyond this, international financial institutions such as Mastercard will allow for financial inclusion by giving people the financial and digital skills and services needed to reduce the digital divide and combat poverty.

The Focus on Security

A major obstacle to the plan is how to allocate such loans and funds. Part of this wider initiative of economic recovery includes cracking down on political corruption and increasing transparency and international regulation. Vice President Kamala Harris traveled to Mexico and Guatemala in early June 2021 as a gesture of the beginning of a diplomatic response to the migration crisis. Her discussions mainly focused on issues regarding food security, border security and economic security. Harris emphasizes that women and the youth are priorities in the action plan as they are most vulnerable.

Along with economic rejuvenation efforts, the U.S. hopes to bring its own border security expertise to other nations. This will create an extended security buffer between migrants and the U.S. border. Additionally, the Biden administration wishes to broaden legal pathways toward migration and asylum to offer alternative options to illegal migration.

The Allocation of Funds

In April 2021, the U.S. pledged more than $300 million worth of aid to Central America in order to stem the migration crisis. Almost half of the funds have been allocated toward food security and COVID-19 recovery efforts. The rest of the financial assistance will help in the areas of “health, education and disaster relief services” and aid refugees and asylum seekers.

The division of funds reflects the priorities of the strategy in order to reduce poverty and increase security in the Northern Triangle. According to the World Food Programme, the number of people facing food insecurity in the Northern Triangle increased to 7.8 million in 2021. The cause of this increase correlates directly to hurricanes and the economic crisis caused by the pandemic. Therefore, the development of Northern Triangle economies will reduce poverty in Central America and decrease migration to the U.S.

– Jack Thayer
Photo: Flickr

, , , ,

The 2020 Election and Global Poverty

2020 election and global povertyThe U.S. remains one of the largest political powers in the world. Countries around the globe pay close attention to the presidential election and are anxious to know who will lead the country for the next four years. From COVID-19 pandemic relief efforts to foreign policies, the future of the nation’s decisions rests heavily on the outcome of the 2020 election. Read on to learn about the connections between the 2020 election and global poverty.

The 2020 Election and Global Poverty: Two Candidates

President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence are running as Republican candidates on a platform similar to their 2016 campaign. Running as Democratic candidates are former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and his running mate, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA). Both candidates have already proposed new policies as part of their campaign platforms. President Trump has proposed reducing foreign aid by 21%, while increasing border security and tax cuts if he remains in office. On the other hand, former Vice President Biden, if elected, would make foreign aid the focus of U.S. foreign policy.

As much as the candidates may vary in their views on foreign aid, however, these differences are not likely to influence the election much. Overall, voters do not consider global poverty to be a core issue. In the 2016 presidential election, global poverty played little to no role in voters’ decisions. Currently, the voters’ top five issues are the economy, healthcare, the Supreme Court appointments, the COVID-19 response and violent crime, none of which are directly related to global poverty. While foreign policy remains in the top 12 issues, it is not a major concern for current voters.

The Response to the COVID-19 Outbreak

The response to COVID-19 has significantly impacted the 2020 election and global poverty reduction efforts. As of October 2020, the U.S. faces five million confirmed cases, 176,000 deaths, a declining economy and restrictions that could affect voter turnout. COVID-19 has accordingly become a major concern for many voters. Indeed, 62% of voters believe the outbreak will play an important role in the candidate they choose.

Many voters are also concerned about the condition of the economy as a result of the pandemic. In the second quarter of 2020, the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) decreased by an annual rate of 32.9%. Congress has also spent trillions of dollars on unemployment benefits and support for small businesses. Many of the voters who believe that the U.S. government should focus on the national debt worry that this stimulus spending could hurt the economy in the long run.

The Influence on Global Poverty

In 2019, the International Affairs Budget received $52.2 billion for foreign aid. This amounted to almost 1% of the entire budget of the U.S. government. With proposed budget cuts and increased concerns over the economy and COVID-19, global poverty is in danger of remaining an issue considered unimportant to many voters and secondary to policy-makers. Despite this relative neglect, it is important that the government address global poverty. Congress must be reminded to protect the International Affairs Budget as a measure just as important as any other policy. Overall, the 2020 U.S. election will likely have a minimal effect on global poverty, given other global crises. As such, the citizens of the U.S. must communicate the importance of the 2020 election and global poverty support to their national leaders, whoever they end up being.

– Nada Abuasi
Photo: Flickr

, , ,

Foreign Policy Platform of Democratic Presidential Candidates

foreign policy platforms
As the United States approaches 2020, the fight amongst the democratic presidential candidates to secure the primary is heating up. The foreign policy platform of these candidates is an important consideration moving forward. Although there is still plenty of time, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have taken a significant lead. After the first round of debates, approximately 70 percent of polled voters favored one of these four candidates.

Here is what foreign policy would look like under Biden, Sanders, Warren and Harris:

Joe Biden

Joe Biden, the Vice President of Barack Obama from 2009 to 2017, has extensive experience with foreign policy, arguably the most out of any presidential candidate. His foreign policy platform focuses on foreign aid investment and diplomacy, which he believes will best achieve the goals of creating a stable global economy, promoting human rights and democracy and advancing the United States’ national security interests. During his time as Vice President, Biden helped create the Feed the Future initiative—a government-funded program to end global hunger and promote food security in order to encourage development in impoverished countries. Biden has also discussed the importance of investing foreign aid in Central America because, according to Biden, “the most significant and urgent challenges for the Western Hemisphere” relates to the poverty and violence that exists in Central America. For that reason, Biden wants to invest in Central America in order to promote security and stability. Since stability is one of Biden’s primary goals, Biden plans to host a global summit in his first year as President. His main goal for this summit would be to promote human rights and combat corruption. Ultimately, Biden’s foreign policy platform rests on the goal of bringing nations together to promote the values of democracy.

Bernie Sanders

Senator Bernie Sanders’ foreign policy goals revolve around promoting international cooperation in order to address global issues and promote universal interests. The main issue that Sanders has run on is addressing environmental issues. Sanders not only believes that the U.S. must significantly reduce its carbon emissions and transition to renewable energy, but also that the U.S. must assist the developing world in achieving environmental and economic sustainability. When discussing environmental initiatives, Sanders stated, “The United States should lead the international community in funding technology development and deployment solutions for the most vulnerable developing countries as part of any international agreement.” In addition to these environmental issues, Sanders has greatly committed to promoting the health and wellbeing of the developing world. For instance, Sanders helped write a letter to Obama in 2015 supporting the United Nations Population Fund—a multilateral fund that promotes family planning and reproductive health services in more than 150 countries. Additionally, Sanders has supported initiatives to promote safe abortions for women and girls in conflict-affected regions. He has also supported funding to combat AIDs, malaria and tuberculosis and opposed an initiative that would have reduced appropriations for foreign assistance programs. In short, Sanders’ foreign policy platform is based on the promotion of human solidarity.

Elizabeth Warren

Senator Elizabeth Warren is running on the campaign, Diplomacy First. Warren plans to promote diplomacy by expanding the State Department, doubling the size of the foreign service and opening new diplomatic posts in under-served areas. Warren also plans to double the size of the Peace Corps in order to “[expose] young people to the world and [create] a direct employment pipeline to future government service.” Ultimately, Warren’s main foreign policy goal is to improve relationships with the rest of the world. She not only hopes to achieve this goal by increasing diplomacy but also by increasing foreign aid spending. For instance, Warren and other female senators advocated for increased humanitarian action in order to empower women and girls in Syria in 2015. That same year, Warren, like Sanders, helped draft a letter to former President Obama to promote safe abortions for women and girls in conflict-affected regions. More recently, Warren petitioned for Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, to address the Humanitarian Crisis occurring in Gaza and for President Trump to withhold cutting aid to Palestinian people. Overall, Warren’s motive for increasing foreign aid spending and promoting a greater role for the State Department is to reduce the United States’ reliance on military might in order to create allies with other countries and better address global concerns, such as cybersecurity and environmental issues.

Kamala Harris

Similar to Warren, Senator Kamala Harris’ foreign policy platform centers around diplomacy. Harris believes that smart diplomacy can advance the national interest and address global issues, such as terrorism, cybersecurity, nuclear weapons, environmental issues and health threats like Ebola. Before becoming a Senator, Harris was the Attorney General of California. One of the main accomplishments Harris is campaigning on is her work to help terminate human trafficking rings and dismantle transnational criminal organizations in order to increase women’s safety and prevent drugs and guns from entering the country. Through this work, Harris has also strengthened relations with Mexico. However, compared to the other three candidates, Harris does not have considerable experience with foreign policy or diplomacy that goes beyond U.S.-Mexico relations. In fact, the initiatives that she has focused on in her campaign and on her campaign website are almost entirely domestic issues. Nevertheless, Harris has stated that as President, she would prioritize promoting female empowerment and creating lasting peace throughout the world.

Although each candidate’s foreign policy platform has a slightly different focus, all four candidates advocate for improved international relations through increased diplomacy and foreign aid spending. These foreign policies are in direct opposition to President Trump’s America First initiative that would reduce foreign aid spending and limit the role of the State Department. Although this foreign policy plan may seem to promote an America First mindset in the short term, diplomacy and strong allies are ultimately what is in the country’s best interest long term.

– Ariana Howard
Photo: PBS

, , , ,

2020 Presidential Candidates’ Views on Poverty

Presidential Candidates' Views on Poverty
The globe pays attention to the U.S. presidential elections. As one of the largest national powers in the world, many take an interest in who will potentially be leading the country and are eager to hear the presidential candidates’ stance on various issues. From the health care system to budget spending, each candidate, regardless of party affiliations, has their own perspective on what those issues actually are and what the best way to approach them is. This article will focus on how important the presidential candidates’ views on poverty are to them and the American people.

2020 Presidential Candidates’ Views on Poverty

For a long time, global poverty was a backseat issue. Rarely did it ever take the spotlight at debates, campaigns or rallies, and never has it been the question of the hour. In the 2016 U.S. presidential election, polls showed issues that voters cared about the most, with the top five comprising of the economy, terrorism, foreign policy, health care and gun control. Neither domestic or global poverty even made it into the top 15.

Despite an overwhelming amount of evidence showing that poverty can heavily affect all of the top five most important issues mentioned, giving attention to the presidential candidates’ views on poverty has never been a topic of debate. Campaigns often overlook this point.

The fault is not all in the candidates, however. Polls between the years of 2007 and 2015 found that only a little over half of the Americans surveyed thought that looking at issues regarding the poor and those in need was important. When candidates are relying on the people to propel their campaigns, it is no surprise that they should cater to the more glamorous topics and points of interest.

The Beginning of Change

At a recent forum held in Washington, D.C., eight of the nine notable candidates in attendance, including former Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Kamala Harris and Senator Bernie Sanders, confirmed that they would be open to speaking about their intended policies in regard to global poverty. This would happen in a televised debate during their run for the 2020 presidential elections.

The Poor People’s Campaign, an institution dedicated to eradicating poverty, racism and war economy, sponsored the recent forum. Co-chairs of the organization, Dr. William Barber II and Dr. Liz Theoharis, spoke about why a dedicated discussion specifically focusing on the presidential candidates’ views on poverty is so necessary, saying, “We are here because, in 2016, we went through the most expensive presidential campaign in U.S. history without a serious discussion or debate about systemic racism or poverty.”

Looking Forward

As the 2020 presidential election approaches and the debates begin, there is no doubt that the usual topics of interest will be at the forefront of every discussion. With the signs of change occurring, however, there is hope that poverty and its accompanying solutions will take the stage as well. Giving a voice to poverty and the people who suffer from it is the first step, and ultimately will lead to the overall improvement and acceleration of people everywhere.

– Olivia Bendle
Photo: Pixabay

, , , ,

Female Democratic Presidential Candidates’ Foreign Policy

female democratic policyThe Democratic 2020 Presidential candidate race is well and truly underway. The Democratic Party recently announced that the Democratic National Convention will be held in July 2020 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Currently, the number of declared candidacies for the Democratic Party stands at more than 200 with Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand and Amy Klobuchar being some of the critical players in this field. Here are brief summaries of what has defined these female democratic presidential candidates’ foreign policy agendas so far in their career, and what they have identified as key parts of their presidential campaigns.

Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren has been a long time supporter of foreign aid with a platform on trade that focuses primarily on re-investing power in the American Middle Class. Subsequently, she is an advocate for anti-corruption measures and cracking down on multinational corporations that prioritize profits over workers.

Furthermore, she has expressed caution about the U.S.’ trade position with China due to the alleged human rights abuses, contending that China upholds no pretense of democracy regardless of its seemingly capitalist motives. She argues that the domestic agenda should not be considered “as separate from our foreign policy” and that creating strong alliances will help ordinary Americans. Foreign policy must be used to address humanitarian crises and boost democracies worldwide.

Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris’ foreign policy approach has been shaped by her career as a federal prosecutor. She has identified ending human trafficking, fighting climate change and reducing terrorism among her key foreign policy stances. She is a supporter of ‘smart diplomacy,’ which includes the cracking down on international criminal organizations.

She favors creating a multilateral approach to address global climate change and, subsequently, opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership on account of it ‘invalidating’ California’s landmark environmental laws. Although she holds a similar stance to Warren on many issues, she has does not support tariffs on China due to the impact on California’s technology industry. She has not joined her colleagues Gillibrand and Warren in condemning cuts to Palestinian; however, she did join them in condemning the funding cuts to refugee programs.

Kirsten Gillibrand

Kirsten Gillibrand is a longtime fighter for both women in developing countries and women in the U.S., which has become a key part of her presidential platform. She co-sponsored the Women, Peace and Security Act of 2013, supporting the integration of gender into U.S. Foreign Policy.

She initially co-sponsored the Anti-Israel Boycott Act but withdrew her support several months later in 2017. Similar to Warren, she has supported using U.S. trade authority to discipline nations over the use of military force and, subsequently, she opposes U.S. collaboration with Saudi Arabia due to its role in the Yemen Humanitarian Crisis.

Gillibrand’s foreign policy statements outside of gender have focused on the protection of U.S. industries against unfair competition. Specifically, she has led the fight for U.S. steel manufacturers and fought back against cheap imports that harm U.S. producers of both primary and secondary products.

Amy Klobuchar

Amy Klobuchar has identified a long list of campaign issues on foreign policy centered around advancing American National Security. She is a supporter of foreign aid and the tradition of the U.S. in providing humanitarian assistance, helping to “address refugee crises, preventing radicalization, and promoting stability around the world.”

She has supported sanctions against Iran and North Korea and voted in favor of the Anti-Israel Boycott Bill, which is against the U.N. resolution requesting that states refuse to do business with contractors that engage in business with Israel. She has specifically outlined support for strengthening trade links within North America and with Cuba as part of her foreign policy outlook with the aim of advancing regional interests and investment and strengthening the U.S. position in the global economy. She has favored maintaining a strong military presence more so than several of her female democratic contenders.

Although these candidates, the leading four female Democrats in the race, hold largely similar positions on foreign policy and global trade, there are subtle differences demonstrated by the range of issues they have vocally discussed and highlighted. They are all supporters of foreign aid and all sit largely within the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. However, it is likely that as the race gets further underway, these female democratic presidential candidates’ foreign policy agendas will become more distinct.

– Holly Barsham

Photo: Flickr