One of the more surprising proposals of the Democratic primary campaign has so far been one of the least reported. Wesley Clark, criticizing the Bush administration for being too quick to seek military solutions to the world's problems, has proposed increasing American foreign aid and creating a cabinet-level Department of International Assistance to oversee it. For those who say the general has only a resumé and no ideas to help distinguish himself from the Democratic pack, the plan, laid out in his book Winning Modern Wars, should stand as a corrective.
Right or wrong, Clark seems to be staking out a position as the candidate who is most likely to turn American foreign policy in a less aggressive direction, focusing both on unruffling allied feathers and on placating those who actively seek to do us ill. The proposal is certain to come in for mockery from the right. Most conservatives are hostile to foreign aid, both as a waste of money and on the principle that aid undercuts poor countries' incentives to fight corruption, achieve better governance, and manage their own development. And the idea of a cabinet-level department will surely inspire extra derision from those who don't think there should even be a Department of Education or Homeland Security. A Department of Giving Money Away--with a Secretary of Giving Money Away? Please.
As easy as the idea is to mock, let's hope the general sticks with it. The idea behind the department is one accepted not just by soft, lefty types: George W. Bush himself has intermittently conceded that, in the long-run war against terror, American "soft power" is a necessary complement to smoking terrorists out of their caves and blowing them apart. The United States has launched Arabic-language radio stations and magazines to sell American culture to the Arab world. Bush announced an increase in overall aid--on the condition that poor countries reform themselves before they receive it--with the Millennium Challenge Account program, launched in Monterrey in March 2002. And in the 2003 State of the Union address, he announced an increase in funding for fighting AIDS in the developing world, in a speech mainly given over to making the case for war. The juxtaposition was not haphazard. It was, however, all too rare.
The American government gives far less aid as a share of gross national income (GNI) than any other major developed country: 0.11 percent, with middle-income Egypt and Israel getting the largest share as part of the Camp David accords. This compares with 0.23 percent for Japan and 0.27 percent for Germany, the other two biggest donors by volume. The small, rich European countries devote the greatest share of their income to aid: 1.03 percent from Denmark, 0.83 percent from Norway, 0.82 percent from the Netherlands.
<...>
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=foreign&s=greene100703DTH