Foreign Aid as a tool for Foreign Policy

Foreign sanction is defined as voluntary agitate of resources from one earth to an otherwise country, at times as supplement to cohorts the receiving country do what the donor country takes. But it may be given as a signal of diplomatic approval, or to modify a army every(prenominal)y, to reward a political science for behavior in demand(p) by the country giving the promote, to extend the donors cultural influence, or to infer political strength here at home as abroad. fit in to the USAID website, unlike wait on is given with eight different types of monetary care.These eight different take a leaks of attention are agriculture, democracy and governance, economic crop and exchange, environment, statement and training, world-wide wellness, inter guinea pig partnerships, and humanitarian assistance. From 1980 to 2008, U. S. total unknown assistance has increased from 9. 69 billion to just over 49 billion in 2008. From the 49 billion spent in 2008 alone, close to 15. 5 billion was spent on military assist maculation the suspension was divided between economic assistance in fields such(prenominal) as agriculture, internationalistic contrivement, and other economic growth and trade programs.The largest recipients of the both contrasted forethought subdivisions, military and economic sanction, went respectively to the regions of the Middle einsteinium and Sub-Saharan Africa. The country in the Middle East with the highest recipient of aid was Afghanistan, with close to 9 of the 49 billion dollars of aid in the 2008 division alone (USAID, 2013. ) As we idler see a lot of our value income payers money goes abroad to countries many the Statesn open fire non define on a world map, but we need to help these countries for the condom of our people, at least in the eyes of every politicians in office.American liberals, as described by Bob Burnett of the Huffington Post, fall between ii primary types of camps that de terminaline thei r views of U. S. Foreign tutelage. Idealists and strongist camps, focus on the need for international humanitarian aid which is similar to our own domestic welfare on a national level (Burnett, 2006. ) They tend to favor contradictory aid as a convey to educate and spring up relationships through cooperation and pecuniary farm animaling. Other far left wing liberal groups discourage military disbursal while encouraging to increase social programs internationally.They entrust that poverty stricken countries in need of assistance otherwise known as tercet World countries are indebted to other countries which lead to their current experimental condition as dealed on the Green company Plat get (GPP, 2000. ) As a primary focus to external aid and success to evolution nations is the assistance to increase food production, avail superpower to clean drinking water, lessening of infant mortality, and improvements toward health by nitty-gritty of the green revolution.Lastl y, they utilize basis of humanitarian aid as to be consistent with their egalitarian levers. In upstart debateion to reform the current orthogonal aid policy, parliamentary representative Howard Berman introduces a reform proposal globose Partnership phone number of 2012 to replace the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act. This policy would restore omen functions towards the USAID and develop new funding mechanisms foc affaird on innovation, microenterprise development, and rapid humanitarian response, and cut back violence against women (Mungcal, 2012. In addition, this policy would focus on reduction of global poverty, accelerated economic growth, agricultural innovation, advancement in health, combating diseases, global commandment strategy, gender stirity, assistance to persons that form been affected by conflict or disaster, and monitoring/investing towards sustaining upward success and control of financing through politics regulations (HR, 2012. )Thus, they give rise a more specific rational notion to solve foreign issues utilizing our government system of rules to regulate. When observing the implementers of the USAID they have roughly 2,000 experienced employees (USAID, 2013. Other proposals by liberals represented by the Green Party express international solidarity maintaining peace and security through a global green deal. This particular deal exit concentrate pecuniary resource on familiar education, food, sanitation and purified water, health care, and family services for every person on Earth. This particular proposal Fund Global Basic Human needs would gain funding by retiring the military from our economy and closure all overseas military bases In addition, eliminate the CIA, NSA, and all other covert Warfare in order to reallocate funding towards aid.Lastly, this computer programme would eliminate debt from poverty stricken countries thus creating emphasizing their egalitarian feelings (GPP, 2000. ) another(prenominal) foreign aid announced by electric chair Barack Obama is the Global wellness Initiative that would continue to develop from the pre-existing program by President Bush, Presidents Emergency Plan for Aids Relief. This continued up(a) program will expand to other countries quite of only Africa, it would foster go alongion, care, and treatment while strengthening government partnership and invest in research internationally to maximize outcomes (UNAIDS, 2009. In addition, they seek to reduce higher(prenominal) statistics of disease contr lay oution and mortality of women and children while strengthening global health partnerships. Based upon the ideological spectrum of liberal beliefs, through their core value of freethinking they exhibit faith in human reason to solve complicated problems that ca exercise poverty in third world countries. By creating regulations, education about health and finances, and encouraging progress towards mutual goals through the Global Partnership Act of 2012, liberals believe that underprivileged countries will progressively develop towards sustainability establish upon human rationale.As an egalitarian belief, liberals from the Green Party believe and promote human e character reference by their party platform of universal health care for every person on the satellite which indicates equal treatment by means of education, health, and services. They promote internationalism by means of equal treatments towards other countries and foreign aid reform of the PEPFAR towards all countries instead of the countries within the African continent. Moreover, liberals seek change as soon as possible which led to the speedy approval of PEPFAR and Africas request for assistance in regards to immediate medical attention and assistance.Therefore, the liberals utilize the government as a strong feature to decide and guide towards our faith in solving socioeconomic problems internationally while attempting to cultivate foreign governments with their ideo logy. Lastly, they value their belief of individual liberties and encourage the development of foreign countries so that their citizens will be treated fairly and just by their government. When approaching foreign aid as a contemporary American conservative, they utilize the term foreign policy as opposed to aid as a reference of government action rather than a community decision.They calculate to favor foreign policy by means of military and health care however, the primary goal is to develop relationships with foreign countries to prevent conflicts. Although they discuss creating trade agreements and forming partnerships, they seem to be strategizing in terms of security and fortress for America. In regards to funding, conservatives dont seem to favor the idea of increase tax spending towards foreign aid and seek to reform imputable to their subjective views on failed results.Therefore, they view investment towards a flawed foreign policy will lead to more spending in military f orces to protect America from unstable countries. Moreover, I feel that conservatives have a strong belief in nationalism and would expect to share this system by encouraging other undeveloped countries to conform to our system. As a conservative perspective towards foreign aid, our government allocates tax payers funding towards the millenary Challenge Corporation or MCC which would utilize a procedural form of selecting certain countries by means of performance while world evaluated by a board and executed by 300 employees (MCC, 2013. The criteria would be based upon whether or not they can compete with other countries in regards to unadulterated National Income of low or middle class sustaining, improving their quality and performance as a country, or graduating with a yr If on that point are no signs of improvement or potential, they would not be entitled for the next year and be left to their own elements. The form of criteria emphasizes a value of elitism on the competi tive national level. Basically, if a certain country is not deemed successful due to lack of intellect, strength of its citizens, or ability to overcome poverty then we decline assistance.In another perspective, we can view our system of criteria and success based on the survival of the fittest which is a value of inequality. In addition, the goals of the MCC are to leave the responsibility of the foreign government to facilitate their own success towards growth in health and agriculture, defecate partnerships, and property rights (MCC 2013. ) We basically leave their government in the faith of the ultraviolet hand to guide their success rather than micro managing their success by means of government.Lastly we encourage property and individual right through the investment policy to reduce poverty. As discussed by James Roberts a researcher for International Trade and Economics, MCCs selectivity and associated seal of approval creates powerful incentives for exploitation countries to uphold democratic and free-market principles, invest responsibly in their citizens, and transition their economies from ontogenesis to emerging markets (Roberts, 2013. ) He encourages a core value of faith in non-human institutions by means of a free market rather than government controlled.In addition, the MCC encourages national accountability towards developing democratic reform and trade policies thus validating their values within nationalism. In a recent proposed foreign aid budget, Josh Riggin reports, The long-term budget announced on Tuesday by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan would cut the budget for international affairs and foreign assistance by 29 percent in 2012 and 44 percent by 2016 while increasing the defending team budget by 14 percent over the same timeframe (Rogin, 2011. Basically, he would be increasing the current spending bill on falsifying of 22 billion to 583 billion for national defense and security while decreasing national affairs from 37 billion t o 22 billion.This validates the symptomatic of the need to increase spending on defense or government agency and stability with conservatives. Moreover, the precipitate in foreign aid would be left at the hands of faith in non-human institutions. In a report by U. S. World News, Evan Moore and Patrick Christy claim Aid is hard power. It is a weapon system the United States uses to strengthen allies and partners and, thus, ourselves. (Moore & Christy, 2013. ) In this statement, they value a sense of authority, stability, and order in regards to security with military. However, due to sequestration to cut foreign aid, conservatives believe that it will avoid assistance towards promoting national security and create instability in infirm states as well as on a global level. Basically, foreign aid directed towards developing a country will hinder strategic investment with allies in military which is the primary goal. As a statement towards nationalism, Gary Connor publisher of Pal estine.Herald-Press, he claims that the U. S spends billions of tax payers money every year on foreign aid while we continue to be underfunded on a national level primarily with disaster relief, education, and border security (Connor, 2013. ) His conservative belief opposes internationalism while focusing on America as the anteriority versus developing countries that may not be contributing to our society. In addition, he emphasizes a sense of elitism in the aspect of the funding that was gained by tax payers should be used towards the tax payers despite the harsh reality developing countries.As a primary characteristic of a conservative, their primary worries in regards to the foreign aid policy are the unintended consequences. As account by Thomas Eddlem contributor to The New American publication, US foreign aid programs often funded autocratic regimes that have committed human rights abuses and affiliation against democratic principles (Eddlem, 2013. ) In other words, America n funding towards foreign aid has become the financing for their government to oppress and control opposing voices. another(prenominal) report claims American aid to Egypt purchases in the last 30 old age towards their regime that performs torture and brutality.The challenge to foreign aid is whether or not we have implemented proper authorities to ensure foreign aid given by Americas tax payers are being utilized effectively. Due to the conservatives lack of confidence in the governments ability to create progressive results using the tax payers money, conservatives state that Billions of American dollars from faith-based and other charitable, academic, and humanitarian groups go to the needy overseas every year and have far better results than government ODA (Roberts, 2013. Although conservatives may seem averse to push towards foreign aid, their support through religious charity groups emphasizes a faith in non-human institutions. Contemporary American moderates would approach foreign aid in a collaborative value between conservatives and liberals however, they would primarily agree their beliefs to coincide with the current status quo.They would probably continue keep a balance of spending to aid foreign countries by means of finances and health assistance, but to primarily remain conscious as to prevent from leaning towards focus on the government for all assistance and seeking private donations as well. In addition, they would probably continue the traditional USAID form of foreign aid and balance with the new updated approach of the MCC or to fuse both of these programs.In recent alternating(a) propositions by the Foreign assist Despatches and Periodic Reports on U. S. Foreign Policy by Dobransky, he considers three-fold alternatives in the views of moderates. The first policy would be to maintain U. S. foreign aid by continuing to utilize USAID and the recent version MCC. In the perspective of Americans, both forms of aid have been approved and criticized openly by five-fold parties however, they are both still being utilized and approved by congress as the usual form of application (Dobransky, 2011. The second alternative would be to merge both programs of the USAID and MCC which would primarily cause shared bargain information to the public and be able to whittle down flaws and commit areas of success to increase efficacy. Moreover, there would be one organization as opposed to two leading groups that oppose each others views despite a common goal. A proposition brought on by the Green Party that would encourage a global deal to fund towards education, food, and other basic needs to every human on this planet by means of American tax payers.Sounds like a actually selfless proposal however, the majority of Americans would not want to place all resources and hard light uped money to the rest of the world. This would probably exhaust Americas budget and would be impossible to ensure that every star person is receiving the same exact treatment. In addition, America would not want to sacrifice closing overseas military bases which would place our country in a higher and much vulnerable state due to weak security. When evaluating the MCC policy, they emphasize a rich value in elitism by means of leaving these countries to their own device.If we are investing in these particular countries by means of our tax payers money, we would want to see controlling results by means of guidance and American political perspective to decrease poverty and social ills rather than finance countries then leave them to figure out how to succeed. In addition, with the amount billions of dollars spent to aid other countries we can afford to increase representatives of the limited 300 employees of MCC in order to correctly work side by side with invested countries.Politicians in America use Foreign Aid as a weapon to achieve what they want from other countries, but they do not really see the real problems that this hel p causes in poor countries, or at least they act as they do not see it. For example Foreign Aid causes major corruption and even more poverty. The governments in poor countries do not really care about the people and they are not design like the government in the United States. If we follow the floor of Foreign Aid, we can see that every time we help a country, we always end up fighting that country at one point or another.Foreign Aid should be limited and the US should hold the countries that received aid accountable for how they use it. Millions of dollars are helpless in fraudulent contracts and misuse by the receiving governments, we do not have a saying in how these governments can use our hard earn money. For the US government to continue having the approval of the people in foreign aid help, it needs to fix the requirements for who qualifies to receive foreign aid, and also when to use foreign aid as a tool for foreign policy.