You Are Invited To Global Washington's Event!

Global Washington, that supports global development sector in Washington state is hosting a special discussion of foreign assistance reform, principles in effectiveness, and the effect of reform on global development work. The event, "Reforming Aid, Transforming the World: A Discussion with Policymakers on US Foreign Assistance Reform" is on Tuesday, August 30, 2011, from 3:30pm to 5:30pm at University of Washington Seattle Campus, Kane Hall, Room 120. You can register for $10 here, http://globalwa.org/our-work/reforming-aid-policy-event/



The event will feature:

*U.S. Representative Adam Smith, Co-Chair of The Congressional Caucus for Effective Foreign Assistance.

*Gayle Smith, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director at the Security Council for global development, stabilization and humanitarian assistance. (invited)

*Kent R. Hill, Senior Vice President, International Programs, World Vision United States.



Everyone is invited to join this important discussion regarding The Congressional Caucus for Effective Foreign Assistance and The Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, as these projects and directives will likely shape U.S. foreign assistance and the global development industry in the upcoming years since many policymakers believe that foreign assistance is an intregral part of the U.S. budget. You can find more details in their website.



-Nisha Noor



SOURCE: GLOBAL WASHINGTON

“Invest In U.S. Global Leadership”: Former Members Of Congress

Despite having different political opinions, former members of Congress, Tom Daschle and Tom Ridge agree on one fact: when it comes to the issue of America’s security and prosperity, there is no alternative of continued engagement and U.S. leadership around the world. They also stated that, making disproportionate cuts to U.S. investments in diplomacy and international development would be a serious mistake especially in time like this.

In answering the question, how investment in global partnership can help U.S. economy, the former members pointed out that, increasing America’s share of exports will require substantial investments in programs that forge international partnerships, open new markets and help develop local environment where U.S. products and services can be sold successfully. The 1% international affairs budget can do just that.

Over the past 40 years, U.S. trade has tripled as a share of national economy, and nearly half of all U.S. exports now go to the developing world. The authors quoted Tom Donohue, president and chief executive officer of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, “95 percent of the people we want to sell something to live somewhere other than the United States.” Not only that a majority of the 500 largest companies currently receive more than half their revenues from foreign sales.

Not only economic reasons, but also the national security reason emphasizes the importance of U.S. investment in diplomacy which is why prominent military leaders like former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, are such strong advocates for the full funding of the international affairs budget. The former Congressmen underscore the significance of the initiative, “Impact 2012: Building a Better, Safer World, a nonpartisan education effort that calls on candidates of both parties to commit to protecting and strengthening U.S. strategic investments in development and diplomacy. After all, when it comes to the point where country’s security and prosperity are at stake, every other issue just falls short.

-Nisha Noor

SOURCE: POLITICO

Obama Defends US Foreign Aid In Twitter Town Hall Meeting

In the much anticipated Twitter Town Hall Meeting on Wednesday, July 7, President Barack Obama defended US foreign aid saying that this tiny amount can have a big impact on US foreign policy. When Twitter users were calling for trimming overseas help, President Obama said, “It’s something that, even in tough fiscal times, American needs to continue to do as part of our role as a global leader,”

Various opinion polls have found that the US public estimates foreign aid to be 20% of overall discretionary spending whereas in reality this amount is only 2% (1% if narrowly defined) of annual budget.

The President also said, “America, to be a leader in the world, to have influence, to help stabilize countries and create opportunity for people so that they don’t breed terrorists or create huge refugee flows and so forth — it’s smart for us to make a very modest investment in foreign aid.”

My unsent Twit to the President: let the 2% (if not more) aid flow and make a difference in the world.

-Nisha Noor

SOURCE: THE EXPRESS TRIBUNE

Oxfam America Presents: Foreign Aid 101

Oxfam America, a leading organization intent on solving poverty and injustice, has just released a great guide to understanding foreign aid - it's both comprehensive and straightforward. The paper addresses some of the most destructive myths about global poverty, and recommends policy changes that will make aid truly successful. Let's take a look at the major points that the paper makes:

A Short History of US Foreign Aid

A little historical context can go a long way. The most famous example of the first major US foreign aid project is the Marshall Plan. In 1948, the US gave $13 billion (5% of GDP) to help European countries rebuild infrastructure that had been destroyed during WWII. The goal was to combat the spread of communism, which was believed to be more powerful in poor countries. The Marshall Plan is considered a huge success; growth rates and standards of living increased dramatically, and communism never again gained a foothold in Western Europe.

Since the Marshall Plan, the US has been involved in numerous foreign aid projects, including the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 under President John F Kennedy, which created USAID to provide economic assistance to needy countries; the Millennium Challenge Corporation under President George W. Bush; and President Obama's new US Global Development Policy.

Why Does the US Give Foreign Aid?

As the article rightly points out, there are numerous and distinct reasons that the US gives foreign aid. One great reason is humanitarianism. A mind-boggling 2.7 billion people currently live on less than $2 per day (one of the many official poverty lines). By itself, the death, pain, and suffering caused by extreme poverty necessitates our help.

But it's okay to do good things for self-interest, too. The United States has two main reasons why aid we give other countries benefits us. First, economics. Developing countries buy some 40% of our exports, meaning that we have a strong monetary incentive to make sure the people there aren't destitute. A richer world means a larger market for US goods. Second, national security. Numerous officials within the US government and military have made it clear that they recognize that poverty breeds sociopolitical instability. The best weapon we have against terrorism isn't a gun or a tank; it's foreign aid.

How Much Does Foreign Aid Cost?

The short answer: a pittance. Surveys show that Americans estimate that we spend 30% of our budget on foreign aid, and would prefer if we only spent 13%. This is especially ironic considering that aid advocates often ask for no more than 0.7% of GNP to be spent on foreign aid, in alignment with the Millenium Development Goals. The sad reality is that the US spends only 0.22% of GNP on Official Development Assistance, even though we promised 0.7%.

How the US Can Ensure That Foreign Aid Leads to Broad-Based Growth

The article makes 3 policy recommendations. First, implement the US Global Development Policy, which ensures that foreign aid spending is directed toward actual poverty-reduction, not just short-term security purposes. Second, modernize the structure that the US uses to give aid. In its present state it is infamously bureaucratic and inefficient. Third, give the poor countries control over development efforts - put them in charge of their futures. Hold them accountable by requiring transparency.

Conclusion

We need to do more. As the richest country in the world, the fact that we are ranked 19th in terms of foreign aid as a fraction of GNP is embarrassing. Well directed foreign aid has the potential to lift literally billions of people out of extreme poverty, creating a richer and safer world for both developed and developing countries.

--Travis Baseler

SOURCE: OXFAM FOREIGN AID 101

Bin Laden Dead: What Does This Mean for U.S. Aid In Pakistan?

It has taken ten years of U.S. military persistence to track down Osama bin Laden. This effort, as stated by President Obama, has made the world a safer "and a better place." But what does this mean for the future of U.S. Aid and Development Programs in Pakistan? Locating bin Laden in the army town of Abbattabad has fueled suspicion of Pakistan's leaders. Many are now asking, why America should continue to give aid to a country that won't give us anything in return?

This question completely misses the point of foreign aid investment and development assistance. Neither of which are meant to be a tool used to reward governments that cooperate and punish those that don't. At the same time, aid is also not a charity. Aid is invested in a country, like Pakistan, because the internal instability threatens long term security and prosperity within the United States. Pakistan is about to be the fourth most populous country in the world, is armed with nuclear weapons and is home to a young, frustrated population, making it extremely susceptible to radicalization.

Aid in Pakistan annually only amounts to $1.5 billion, which is equal to about five days of military spending in Afghanistan. This small amount of assistance is crucial to Pakistan. It allows Pakistan as a nation to be slightly more stable and on a more prosperous path. It could also possibly avoid the billions in military costs that would accrue in the future if instability was left unaddressed.

Walking away and leaving Pakistan without foreign aid would only worsen and cement the United States' already bad reputation in the Middle East and Pakistan. The pledges by United States officials to stay and assist Pakistan would be completely undermined along with the already fragile democratic system of government that is established there. The democratic system is Pakistan's best hope for success. At this point it would be much more beneficial for the U.S. to stick to its word and stay in Pakistan, focused on economic cooperation, democratic governance and military cooperation. If the U.S. abandons ship now, there may be serious repercussions later on.

--Gabrielle Gurian


SOURCE: CENTER FOR GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT