Micah De Voe

Dr. Erika Cornelius Smith

PSCI 315 ON2

08/17/17

Peace through Foreign Aid

Foreign policy is the largest hot button topic in American society but it is also the least widely

understood. To be fair, some of these policies are incredibly convoluted and confusing. Like the

Syrian Civil War for example and the American backing of certain rebel groups. Foreign Aid and

the way money is spent in relation to helping other parts of the world is also argued and

debated frequently, but is also incredibly misunderstood. However, in a country where national

security is key and placed in such high regard, it is not just important, but mandatory, that we

better understand the positives that foreign aid gives to our overall interests.

The United States has been actively at war in the Middle East for the last decade and a half. In

that time frame we have waged war in Iraq and Afghanistan, increased naval presence in the

Gulf of Aiden, launched countless numbers of missiles and other ordinance for the purpose of

destroying the enemy. After 9/11, this seemed to be the perfect response to global terrorism,

and we were joined by literally dozens of nations that we re committed to ending global

terrorism. In the long run ,the question of whether or not these tactics worked will be debated

in great detail for the next hundred years and fingers will pointed from administration to the

next. However, what can be said of the current, relative, peace that exists in the region now, is

that it exists on the back of not military might, but rather, civilian foreign aid.
War is hell, for soldier and civilian alike. Death is rampant and destruction is everywhere. It is

unavoidable. It is war. But the important factors to consider is that when the dust settles, there

are people in need. We have understood this principal for nearly one hundred years since the

end of the Great War in 1919. After the Kaiser was defeated and the Treaty of Versailles was

signed, there were thousands of people in France and Belgium, where the western front had

run, that were in need of food shelter and clothing. These were provided from foreign aid from

the US, Great Britain and Canada to help the suffering.

We saw the effects of foreign, even more so, in the end of the Second World War, after the

surrender of Nazi Germany and Imperialistic Japan. Germany had already been in a major food

shortage as the red army pushed form the east and the allied forces of Great Britain, the United

Stated and member of the French resistance essentially sieged and advanced the country. This

advance started in late winter and lasted till early spring in May of 1945. It was also one of the

coldest springs on record in the area. Therefore, farming and agriculture were virtually

impossible. By the time the leaders of the Reich had surrendered, some areas of Germany had

not had food supplies in nearly 3 months. In order to help relations between the countries

during the transitions of power, food, clothing, shelter and rebuilding projects were undertaken

to help the civilian population to rebuild their lives.

In japan, it was even more devastating. The primary method of combat, after the Marines had

gained traction and control in the outer islands, was to use incendiary bombs in highly

populated areas. At that time, most structures in Japan were constructed of wood and they

used fine rice paper for doors, window screens and as a covering for plastered walls. Using this

type of ordinance would not only burn down structures effected but had a high tendency to
catch other nearby buildings on fire. The result would be an raging fire that would become

what is known as a Fire Strom. Essentially, the blas becomes so large that it created massive

air drafts to keep itself burning. These air drafts could get so strong that they could suck a

person in to the burning inferno.

Once the Japanese Empire surrendered, the United States realized how much devastation these

weapons created. It effectively left nearly 30% of Japanese homeless. Again, food, shelter and

clothing were provided and reconstruction immediately began. It did take a significant amount

of time for both Japan and Germany to overcome the destruction and the major setbacks

imposed by the war, not to mention the need for the people to ascertain a semblance of

national pride. However, over the next 7 decades, they have become prominent figures in the

international community. According to many estimates and analysis, Germany is essentially

floating the euro right now and Japan is the leading nation in electronics development and

manufacturing. Much of what we owe to the modern world came from these two nations post

war, all due to foreign aid.

One problem with the foreign aid issue is simply that people dont understand how much we

actually spend, what we spend it on or where we spend it. It is commonly believed that the

United States spends 25% of the national budget on foreign aid. This usually followed with a

statement along the lines of, why are we paying countries that hate us? well, the answer is,

were not and were not. The total amount foreign aid actually amounts to around 1.3% of

gross national income (GNI). Also, there are actually some pretty tough restrictions on who is

eligible to receive foreign aid. For example, any nation that is deemed to be under an

Authoritarian Dictatorship, has documented human violations rights or open refuses to follow
certain international rules, such as the Geneva Convention, are exempt from receiving foreign

aid from the United States. As an example, North Korea is not eligible to received aid, nor was

Cuba during the embargo. Many will counter that we pay Cuba for the use of Guantanamo Bay,

this is not considered to be aid.

If we look at the countries that do receive aid from us, we will see a pattern showing that we

are investing in the security of a particular region, with mist of our aid money going to Israel,

Egypt, Afghanistan and Jordan. The Middle East is not unfamiliar with war, and after so many

years of continuous fighting, there are major gaps in the over needs of these countries to

survive, let alone thrive. Entire economies have collapsed, work is scares and basic needs like

food and fresh water are barley met. In order to have a truly peaceful region, these needs to be

met with no doubts of cessation and then built upon with accessible education and promising

economic reconstruction. All of this will require that many nations invest in the region to bring

about this goal.

Unfortunately, many people still claim that we should focus internally first and that the funds

should be used to help our won people first such as the elderly, our veterans and the homeless.

This line if thought was redoubled with President Trumps recent campaign slogan Make

America Great Again, and most recent line America First. I do not wish to down play the

seriousness of these issues nor the real problems we face at this time in this country. But to

honestly think that the amount we spend in foreign aid would fix all of these problems, or even

just one, is gross under estimation of the issues we face.

Simply throwing money at problem will not alleviate it. As a point of fact, we could look at the

VA Administration as an example. The budget for the VA has been increased numerous times

but services levels are falling at a steady rate year after year. What is needed is proper

management and direction of funds to get the job done correctly. Overall, redirecting funds

would not help these situations as much as people would think.

Looking back to the Middle East, general Petraeus and McMahon both fought counter-

insurgency wars. The strategies of both of these leaders was to fight as little as possible on the

battle field and try to win the war by Winning hearts and minds. The goal here was to help

local villages with projects in remote areas by providing clean water, schools and infrastructure.

One Army unit even built a bridge to connect two villages, saving a days hike between the two.

These projects were done during a time called the Surge. This was one of the most

controversial decisions of the Bush Administration, as many people in congress saw the Iraq

and Afghanistan wars as a failure and wanted it to end. Instead of pulling troops out of those

countries, Bush redoubled efforts in Iraq by sending an additional 30,000 troops. Ultimately,

this was the most successful part of the war in terms of regional stability. And with the increase

of troops, aid was also funneled into the country to help with building projects and economic

relief.

Overall, what the US provides in aid creates more stability in the regions where we have

interests. The benefits, which are many, far outweigh the drawbacks that might be perceived. It

should also be noted that even though the US does provide the most aid in sheer dollar

amounts, we actually dont even make the top countries in relation to overall GDP or GNI. In
country where income inequality is running so rampant, you would think that people would

want us to give more than we already are.

References

Marshall, P. (2017 April,14) CQ Researcher, 14, 313-336

Petraeus, D. (2013, October 29). How We Won in Iraq. Retrieved August 19, 2017, from
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/10/29/how-we-won-in-iraq/
Christy, P. (2014, June 06). America's Proud History of Post-War Aid. Retrieved August 19,
2017, from https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2014/06/06/the-lessons-from-
us-aid-after-world-war-ii