Aid

Luke 21:1-4

The tragedy in the Far East has led to some criticism of the wealthier nations in the world. The Bush Administration seems to feel that the condemnation was aimed at them specifically.

I guess that's an easy assumption to make, when you run dead last in the rankings.

But then, that's just it.. It all depends on how you calculate these things.

In real dollar terms, the US gave more than any other country in foreign aid in 2002 and 2003 and 2004. Before that, since about 1992 I think, Japan was the number one contributer in real dollar terms.

Clearly, this is the method favoured by the Bush administration when it comes to working out how generous they are.

But you see, these things are relative. Which is why I cited the passage from Luke above. It's clear that America gives a lot of Foreign Aid. But do they give enough?


What percentage of its gross domestic product does the United States annually allocate as foreign aid to Third World countries? I offer my students five choices:
(A) One-tenth of one percent, (B) One percent, (C) Five percent, (D) Ten percent, and (E) Twenty-five percent.
Incredibly, about half the class chooses C, and most of the remaining half pick D and E. Two or three 'unpatriotic' students in each class pick A or B.

The correct answer is A.

- Quote taken from an economics professor, I believe. (Will look it up later)

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is a group of 30 rich nations that counts development aid. The OECD figures show that as of April 2004, none of the world’s richest countries donated even 1 percent of its gross national product.

Norway was highest, at 0.92 percent; the United States was dead last, at 0.14 percent.

The worlds richest countries have pledged to do much better. When the world's governments met at the Earth summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, they adopted a programme for action under the auspices of the United Nations -- Agenda 21. Amongst other things, this included an Official Development Assistance (ODA) aid target of 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) for rich nations, roughly 22 members of the OECD known as the Development Assistance Committee (DAC).

Bit of a gap there, between 0.7 and 0.14

Now the guy who made the comment that got Bush and others in a tizzy, was Jan Egeland, from Norway. Of the worlds richest countries, they gave proportionately the most. They've met and exceeded their 0.7% target. Maybe he felt that entitled him to comment on others. Maybe he just felt 0.7 percent was too little for anyone, regardless.

In a recent speech, President Bush declared, "We are a compassionate country, and we are generous toward our fellow citizens." It is a favourite pitch with American politicians in both parties. But is it true?

In its Human Development Report, 2003, the UNDP measures a Human Poverty Index (HPI) for seventeen developed countries; it measures deprivations in four dimensions.

On this index of human poverty, the US ranked dead last out of seventeen countries. {United Nations Development Programme, Human development report, 2003 (Washington, D.C.: Oxford University Press, 2000): 248, 342.}

If we measure compassion "toward fellow citizens" in terms of income inequality (conventionally measured by the Gini index) we get the same result. The US has the largest value for the Gini index amongst developed countries. {World Bank, World development report, 2003 (Washington, D.C.: Oxford University Press, 2002): 236-7.}

I will compare the funds allocated to 'foreign aid,' the index by which Americans most often measure their generosity towards poor countries. The total funds allocated by the United States to 'foreign aid" in 2003 amounted to 0.11 percent (note the position of the decimal) of its gross national income. That is easily the lowest ratio for the twenty-four members of Development Assistance Committee of the OECD. {World Bank, World development report, 2003 (Washington, D.C.: Oxford University Press, 2002): 290.}

On the ground, matters are much worse. Nearly one-third of this aid (around 3 billion dollars a year) goes as grants (no obligation to pay back) to another developed country, Israel, to buy the most advanced weaponry in the US arsenal, from US manufacturers. That's 3 billion a year, every year. For US weapons.

So foreign aid (excluding arms money to Israel) is 0.08% of GDP

Of the remainder, hefty though the amounts are, how much is given with no strings attached? By that, I mean, how much is given in terms of actual aid and assistance, as opposed to (say) "Let us build a base here, or we cut off your aid." or "Let us refuel here or we cut off your aid" or "To hell with what your population wants, sign this or we cut off your aid".

You get the idea. I'll leave that last part for the interested reader to discover.

Next week, we'll look at how much money is spent by America attacking and bombing other countries, as opposed to helping other countries. </sarcasm>
posted by Manchild at 1:30 PM