US Aid to Developing Nations
Assisting developing nations in the world is a US foreign policypriority in the pursuit of what the administration of President George W.Bush considers its moral imperative to combat poverty (Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank 2002). In realizing this pursuit and implementing theforeign policy, he proposed a new initiative of development that wouldincrease its accountability for both rich and poor nations and encouragethe same commitment from, and link up with, other developed nations towardsdeveloping ones. In demonstrating this high level of commitment, PresidentBush raised the US core development assistance fund by 50% or 5 billionover 2002 level and deposited into a New Millennium Challenge Account forthe benefit of developing nations' economies and standards of living (Inter-American Development Bank). The US has been the world's largest provider ofhumanitarian assistance and food aid at $3 billion in 2000; spends abillion dollars every month in the war against terrorism; contributed $978million in 2001 along to international peacekeeping (Inter-AmericanDevelopment); imports the most from developing countries - $450 billion in2000 alone or eight times more than all Official Development Assist
Another point of view said that the US may think it is terriblygenerous with its overseas aid, but these increases mean that US will spendless of its GNP on foreign aid than any other developed or advanced countrydonor (Stephen 2002). The establishment ofmultilateral development banks is part of the bilateral assistance fortheir role in promoting economic growth and development and in checkingpoverty in the poorest nations (Inter-American Development Bank) throughthe use of measures that raise standards effectively. Despitethe foreign aid, the economic impact was small and superficial (Johnson). The opinion held that the Index exhibited the uselessness ofproviding economic development to poor countries despite the bestintentions from assisting developed countries or donors (Johnson). Everyone can see that Bush's hefty increases in overseas aid wereonly a front in the US fight against terrorism. Disease, prominently thedreaded AIDS, and infant mortality have cut lives down significantly. They also felt skeptical about the way the recipient nationsused their money: some were corrupt leaders who diverted or misused it. What seems to console is the 9/11realization that poverty was a root cause of terrorism and the New Yorkbombings, but the same consolation contradicts the American position that aproblem can be solved by money (Stephen). Inaddition to the current $10 billion US foreign aid, the President that hewould increase it further in 2006 (Stephen). One more disheartening fact was that, despite $1 trillion worth ofdevelopment aid in the past four or five decades did little or nothing todecrease or contain abject poverty in many parts of the world. If US aid is aneffective development tool, each of these recipient countries should havebeen better in some way. Uganda grew by 7% yearly in the last 10 years,during which more children went to school and teachers' pay went up by2,700%.
Common topics in this essay:
Development Bank,
Monterey March,
Johnson Sudan,
President Bush,
Czech Republic,
World Bank,
Bank Uganda,
Economic Freedom,
Assistance ODA,
Clinton Administration,
development bank,
inter-american development,
foreign aid,
inter-american development bank,
american aid,
president bush,
world bank,
economic growth,
overseas aid,
development aid,
poor countries,
core development assistance,
american development bank,
inter- american development,
30 cents foreign,
|
Acceptance Essays
