The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations plans to note who’s naughty or nice:
This is long overdue in our international relations, and should be a key plank of the new National Security Strategy to put American interests first (see pages 19 and 40 here). Much of the foreign aid we give out yields dubious returns for America. And unlike other nations (*cough* China *cough*), we aren’t exactly smart in our use of “soft power.” Much of the “aid” we supply all too often ends up in the hands of local thugs in power, while China’s efforts produce visible changes and local goodwill. No doubt if the locals balk, China is not reluctant to tighten the purse strings.
So why do we not do the same with our spending overseas? At its most blatant, foreign aid is about “winning friends and influencing people.” But how much influence do you really wield if the recipients of your largesse habitually spit in your eye, knowing they can get away with it?
We are not in the financial position we were after World War II, where America accounted for nearly one-quarter of the global economy. The Marshall Plan of the late 1940s was unprecedented in scale for American foreign policy, but it also seemed a relatively small price to pay to stabilize Europe and inoculate it against further communist encroachment. Today, advocates of foreign aid like to point out that it makes up “about one percent of the federal budget” — but that still amounts to billions of dollars that produce scant results compared to the Marshall Plan.
Here’s hoping those countries put on Nikki Haley’s “naughty list” Thursday feel the choking off of unappreciated American dollars. Since the Federal Government currently borrows nearly 1 in every 5 dollars it spends, those dollars are more appropriately spent at home.