Why Countries Help Others

February 10, 2009
Caitlin Wall and Qiong Wu*, OneWorld US

Editor's Note: This article was originally published in OneWorld.net's online, "living magazine," Perspectives, as part of its edition on foreign assistance.

WASHINGTON, Feb 10 (OneWorld.net) - The recession currently sweeping the planet has prompted some to ask if wealthy countries can afford to continue sending money, food, medicine, building supplies, and aid workers abroad to help people in other nations. Some wonder why the United States and other affluent nations send resources around the world at all when there are plenty of economic and social concerns to work on within their own borders.

Helping other nations become more stable and prosperous is not only the right thing to do -- as large proportions of the U.S. general public believe -- but experts on international relations say doing so is also as important for "us" as it is for "them." Indeed, the U.S. government has been supporting development efforts in other countries for more than six decades, and foreign assistance has become a permanent fixture of U.S. foreign policy, for just those reasons: it's "right" and it's "smart."

Recognizing that, the British government in 1997 elevated its top foreign assistance official to cabinet-level status, advising the prime minister shoulder-to-shoulder with the ministers for defense, finance, and other sectors. And rapidly developing countries like China, India, and Brazil have demonstrated increasingly strong commitments to foreign assistance in recent years too.

Foreign Assistance: It's Right
Americans have long acknowledged the moral obligation to help those less fortunate around the world. In the aftermath of World War II, The Marshall Plan signified the nation's first large-scale effort to deliver foreign aid to economies in Europe.

Although there were certainly American strategic economic interests promoted by the plan, then-Secretary of State George C. Marshall acknowledged the demoralizing effect economic collapse would have in Europe and insisted that the "policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos."

U.S. President John F. Kennedy. © Public DomainThen, just 18 months after the Marshall Plan was announced -- and 60 years ago last December -- the United States joined with 47 other nations to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), whose tenets are now binding on all member-countries of the United Nations.

The declaration was championed by American First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, who chaired the drafting commission. It specifically recognizes that all people have the right to be free from poverty and hunger, as well as the right to education, health, and to live in peace.

This moral commitment to human rights as applied to all global citizens opened the door for further American commitment to international aid. In September of 1961, the U.S. Congress passed the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA), which separated military from non-military aid, and paved the way for the creation of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) by John F. Kennedy two months later.

The Act states that the United States has made a commitment to "traditional humanitarian ideals," and outlines its "commitment to assist people in developing countries to eliminate hunger, poverty, illness, and ignorance," calling these goals "a principal objective of the foreign policy of the United States."

In the decades since, Americans have not wavered in their commitment to supporting others around the world. "Numerous poll results show that large majorities find convincing the argument that the United States has a moral responsibility to provide aid to the needy," says the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes, a polling organization that regularly surveys Americans about their country's role in the world.

A 2006 poll by Public Agenda found that vast majorities of people in the United States think it's important to "help poor countries move out of poverty" (88 percent), "help people in poor countries to get an education" (89 percent), and "assist countries with developing clear water supplies" (95 percent). Many of the aid groups working around the world say they are compelled by their religious faith to help alleviate any human suffering; others feel a secular moral compulsion to promote human prosperity.

Lutheran World Relief -- an organization focused on disaster response, fair trade, and advocacy -- says its members are "called to respond to God's love for all people and creation."

A Mercy Corps project helps provide food for Eritrean schoolchildren. © Mercy CorpsThe Academy for Educational Development says its social and economic development work is "driven by personal commitment to making a positive difference in the world and in people’s lives, particularly for those who are underserved." And Mercy Corps, an organization working on issues ranging from disaster relief to conflict resolution and microfinance, believes in "the intrinsic value and dignity of human life," adding: "We are awed by human resilience, and believe in the ability of all people to thrive, not just exist....Our spiritual and humanitarian values compel us to act."

Foreign Assistance: It's Smart
Foreign assistance is also a key component of efforts to polish the United States' image overseas. It can help deter or defuse threats to American national security, and it may have a positive effect on American business interests by creating trading partners and promoting good will.

Many experts have argued that poor countries, whose young people often find few opportunities amid stagnant economies, may become breeding grounds for extremist groups or militias. Well-executed aid programs can help reduce the conditions that lead to unrest, disaffection, and terrorism, namely poverty and the lack of political rights.

"Victory over terrorist movements requires the foresight to provide humanitarian assistance in at-risk, impoverished communities," says the Asia America Initiative, a U.S.-based nonprofit group that delivers direct aid to improve healthcare and educational opportunities in areas targeted by terrorist recruitment. One year after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, President George W. Bush confirmed the link between poverty and terrorism at a conference in Monterrey, Mexico. "We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror," he declared.

Foreign assistance is also a smart investment because it can help to build economic growth in poorer nations, which can benefit the United States’ economy in return. For example, working in tandem with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, USAID assists in Central America's transition to a free trade economy by providing technical assistance and training paid for by money from the U.S. foreign assistance budget. Stronger economies in Central American would provide more trading partners for U.S. companies and reduce the conditions that cause many to immigrate to the United States -- often illegally -- in search of better lives and jobs.

One of the most successful U.S. programs to promote international good will is the U.S. Peace Corps. Started by President John F. Kennedy in 1961, the Peace Corps aims to, among other things, "promote a better understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served." To date, more than 190,000 Peace Corps volunteers have served in villages, towns, and cities in 139 countries, carrying out projects that help improve lives while putting a personal face on American foreign assistance.

Many also argue that providing foreign aid is smart policy because it adds to a country's "moral authority," which can be helpful down the road when that country needs international support for one of its own objectives. In other words, it gives the nation a moral bank account upon which to draw.

The Venezuelan government, for example, has been providing heating oil free of charge to low income families in the United States, and it supplied fuel for public busses in London, allowing the city to lower the cost of transportation for its low-income riders. Many believe a key objective of these foreign assistance programs has been to improve the international image of the country whose geopolitical rhetoric has frequently brought it into conflict with the United States and other economically powerful nations.

Oxfam staff and partners talk with members of a community garden in Mudzi, Zimbabwe. © Oxfam America / Emily FarrThe international development organization Oxfam has been working for years to convince the U.S. government to increase the amount of money it allocates to assistance projects around the world, and to ensure that money is spent as effectively as possible. The group emphasizes that such activities are both "right" and "smart."

"Since 2002, the U.S. national security strategy has considered development to be one of three 'pillars' of national security, along with defense and diplomacy," the group wrote in its 2008 report: "Foreign Aid 101."

"At its best," the report continued, "poverty-focused development aid can enhance the livelihoods of families around the world, strengthen U.S. moral leadership, and improve security for all of us."

* Caitlin Wall and Qiong Wu are international journalism students at American University's School for International Service.

This article is part of OneWorld.net's coverage of foreign assistance for its online, "living magazine," Perspectives. The series also examines how the foreign assistance process works, how effective the system is, how it could be improved, and what is expected to change in the coming months and years. Get all this, plus the latest news from OneWorld.net and links to ways you can get involved at Perspectives: Foreign Assistance.