Foreign policy in the 21st century is more than massive firepower; it’s the adroit use of defense, diplomacy, and development. Yesterday at the Clinton Global Initiative in New York, Gov Romney addressed ‘development.’

What Romney calls a “Prosperity Pact” is a re-labeling [...]]]> Written by Andrew Lubin, Foreign & Defense Analysis

Foreign policy in the 21^st century is more than massive firepower; it’s the adroit use of defense, diplomacy, and development. Yesterday at the Clinton Global Initiative in New York, Gov Romney addressed ‘development.’

What Romney calls a “Prosperity Pact” is a re-labeling of the same basic principles of foreign aid as practiced by the past Obama, Bush, and Clinton administrations while ignoring how defense and diplomacy make development possible. Stabilizing weak states provides both stability and potential export markets; as does combating drug shipments, WMD threats, and nuclear proliferation, responding to humanitarian disasters, and training foreign military and police creates partnerships that improve regional security and export markets.

Most Americans would be surprised to know how little is actually spent on foreign aid. When asked on the street, guesses often range from 10-25% of our budget-which in times of massive deficits would be difficult to defend  – except the actual figure is 1.4%.

It’s called the International Affairs Budget, and in actual terms, 1.4% equates to$ 48 billion in 2011. This funds the State Dept and every aid and assistance program except for the Peace Corps (which costs only $ 342 million). Most Americans would be equally surprised at how the money is spent; it’s not spent on give-aways and abortion programs as claimed by the Tea Party and other isolationist groups; but instead includes military aid to Israel, a $ 100,000 grant that led to $ 61 million of US exports to Morocco, and Counternarcotics programs in Mexico – as a businessman; Gov Romney surely appreciates how the multiplier effect of that $ 100,000 US Trade & Development Agency grant to a small New Jersey company.

But what Romney still doesn’t understand is that trade will not happen in a vacuum; businessmen only invest in countries where the laws don’t change overnight and warlords don’t steal goods from the docks. While his Prosperity Pact guidelines state that the U.S. will provide aid to developing countries that remove barriers to investment and trade; it’s the International Affairs Budget that builds rule of law so countries can fight corruption, have free and fair elections, and have governments based on democratic principles creating the infrastructure that Romney-the-businessman takes for granted.

Only then will US businessmen invest and export into these growing markets

Six billion+ people live in the 3^rd world or developing world, and those countries are far from easy business opportunities. While Romney acknowledged the growth of microloans and microfinance companies, in a separate memo his campaign said microloans are only a “poverty alleviation strategy” and called for a “much greater focus” for small and medium-sized businesses that are too big for microfinance. That’s a shame because the entrepreneurs Romney talks about empowering are usually small groups of Zambian women with sewing machines making clothing in Peruvian ladies selling lunches to miners; the larger companies are usually the corrupt government companies stifling those fledgling entrepreneurs.

Yesterday’s speech was a good start for Romney; his “Prosperity Pact” is an important step in the 3-part program of “defense – diplomacy – development” so necessary in the 21^st Century. But as former Marine Corps Commandant Gen Michael Hagee said “This strategic approach will only be effective if all three are coherent, coordinated, and adequately resourced.”

We’ll be looking forward to the Governor’s thoughts on how – or if – he intends to implement a foreign and defense strategy that recognizes the unclear and muddled world in which these six billion potential consumers live.

Photo Courtesy of CNN 

The fifth meeting of the Forum on [...]]]> Developing nations in Africa are sure to prove powerful strategic partners to whoever helps them move from poverty to prosperity.  China understands this opportunity and has taken it upon itself to seize it.  For the US, failing to demonstrate leadership in Africa would be a monumental mistake.

The fifth meeting of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation was held on July 19th.  The forum promoted China’s intended strategic partnership with Africa, one it will forge largely through developmental aid programs to which it pledged $20 billion.  Originally, the Chinese pursuit of solidifying its long term strategic partnership with Africa via investment-driven, no-strings-attached aid was met with skepticism from much of the world community due to the country’s questionable human rights record.  Yet as both the need for aid and the lack of US investment to meet it becomes increasingly evident, major world players, including some of our closest allies, are warming to the idea of Chinese taking the reins.  For example, the United Kingdom has indicated a desire to partner with China in order to end African poverty, a development that demonstrates China’s approach will win it strategic partnerships with more than just African countries.

Should the United States fail to step into the aid vacuum that China is already filling, it will represent a major setback to our long term economic and national security.  China’s program of investment based aid will give it an unshakeable foothold in Africa’s economy, cutting off an enormous source of potential trade.  It will effectively remove the ability of the US to influence the direction in which African countries develop, making it difficult to eliminate threats from within their borders and ensure their emergence as America’s partners rather than its adversaries.

We have a fast-closing window of opportunity to strengthen America’s economy and security by stabilizing ailing African nations.  If America is to be looked to by emerging African nations as a critical ally and partner, we must invest in their development now.

According to President Obama, “Africa can be the world’s next major economic success story.” This bold prediction was included in the announcement of the new U.S. strategy for involvement in the region, the Presidential Policy Directive for sub-Saharan Africa (PPD).

The optimism of [...]]]> Guest post from Victoria Webbe, Scoville Fellow at the Truman Project.

According to President Obama, “Africa can be the world’s next major economic success story.” This bold prediction was included in the announcement of the new U.S. strategy for involvement in the region, the Presidential Policy Directive for sub-Saharan Africa (PPD).

The optimism of his statement is less wide-eyed than it would initially seem. Six of the world’s ten fastest growing countries are in sub-Saharan Africa—with growth rates consistently over 6% annually. Countries like Rwanda, Ethiopia, and the Gambia have seen under-five mortality rates decline by 25-40%, and along with South Asia, the region has made the fastest progress on primary school completion rates in the world.

However, sub-Saharan African countries will continue to face challenges. The PPD, issued June 14th, is an important step for the Administration—the first one that’s been taken since President Obama’s speech in Ghana in July 2009. The President’s new strategy therefore comes at a crucial time, recognizing the tremendous potential for African countries both as strong economic and trading partners and as regional security allies, while simultaneously highlighting areas in need of continued support.

The new PPD boils down to four key pillars:
·         Strengthening Democratic Institutions
·         Spur economic growth, trade and investment
·         Advance peace and security
·         Promote opportunity and development

Transparency and accountability in institutions are stressed as essential, both in supporting democracy and in fostering economic growth. The U.S. will work to increase African country participation in international programs like the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative, which has developed a set of reporting guidelines in natural resource extraction, especially oil and mining, and to date has only 14 countries in sub-Saharan Africa participating. The U.S. will also take a leading role in lowering barriers to inter-regional and international trade, and increasing access to global markets. Through standardized trade policy, improved infrastructure, and regulatory coherence and transparency, the region will continue to open up for trade and investment. To help U.S. businesses take advantage of these burgeoning markets, the PPD announces the “Doing Business in Africa Campaign” to help American business owners identify and capitalize on new opportunities.

Unfortunately, the PPD lacks detail in many areas—particularly the fourth pillar on promoting opportunity and development. Among its priorities in this area, the PPD lists food security, public health, humanitarian crises, women’s empowerment, the environment, and poverty reduction. The low level of specification on the program work in these areas seems to echo a marked shift in the Administration’s policy toward Africa away from development aid and toward governance, transparency, economic growth, and trade. The PPD does, however, recognize the challenges faced by low-income countries and the need to address “constraints to growth”—although it fails to define the term more clearly.

U.S. support for economic development, poverty relief and democratic institutions are vital to ensuring peace and security in the region. Perceived, widespread discrimination and economic inequality have been identified as among the root causes of a number of conflicts in Africa including the Sudan, Liberia, Côte d’Ivoire, Mozambique, Burundi, Nigeria and others. Low revenue and limited capacity of the security sector make governments’ less able to address regional security issues—the recent cross-border raids between Liberia and Côte d’Ivoire, and the ongoing regional complexities of the Great Lakes region are two unfortunate examples.

Regional security in sub-Saharan Africa is crucial—both for promoting economic growth in the region and for ensuring the safety of American citizens here at home. Building the capacity of security forces in the region means building capacity in the fight against al-Qa’ida. Stronger border control capabilities means more effectively combatting the transnational trade of illegal arms, drugs and WMD technology and materials. Strengthening regional security forces means that African countries will be able to ensure their own regional security, and prevent their own conflicts. The PPD acknowledges the importance of these steps, specifically in the third pillar and more generally throughout the strategy.

In other words, the new U.S. strategy in sub-Saharan Africa is about more than international development. In addition to opening new channels for commerce and promoting democracy, the PPD is a revised strategy for international peace and security.

“Even in Sioux Falls, we know that after-school programs for kids [...]]]> Earlier this week, an op-ed appearing in the Argus Leader, South Dakota State Senator and Truman Partner Angie Buhl explained why international development is important to all of us, even her hometown of Sioux Falls in  in South Dakota. As Senator Buhl says,

“Even in Sioux Falls, we know that after-school programs for kids can keep them from joining gangs and entering a life of crime. In places like the Horn of Africa, building schools keeps those kids from joining al-Qaida and entering a life of terrorism. Building roads, water treatment plants and schools is much cheaper than sending soldiers abroad or dealing with the aftermath of terrorist attacks.”

With Congress recently threatening to cut funding to vital development and aid programs, the connection Senator Buhl draws between the these programs to our local communities is more relevant than ever.

“His stomach lurched as he realized that tinny, tiny sound was coming from [...]]]> Truman Fellow Gregory Adams, Director of Aid Effectiveness at Oxfam America, spoke at the Truman Conference this past weekend about aid effectiveness and his work at Oxfam. His article below was originally posted on Oxfam’s Politics of Poverty blog on May 7:

“His stomach lurched as he realized that tinny, tiny sound was coming from his own midriff. He could barely believe it. The recorder he had taped to his stomach, its wire lead and microphone stuck to his breastbone, had somehow switched into ‘play’ mode. The voices of the two men before him were now being relayed back, potentially exposing him as what he was: spy, sneak, mole . . . He scoured his two colleagues’ faces for signs of suspicion. If they had noticed what had happened, he could expect to be arrested that night, his office sealed, staff sent away, files seized, house raided . . .”

So begins Michela Wrong’s gripping book, It’s Our Turn to Eat the story of John Githongo’s effort to uncover corruption inside the administration of Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki. The book tells the story of how Githongo risked his life and livelihood to help make his country more just and accountable to average Kenyans—and the challenge that entrenched corruption poses for development.

Githongo is a compelling figure and a true hero—the very type of person you would expect the United States to seek as a partner in fighting corruption and injustice in developing countries. But too often, the United States makes it hard for anti-corruption fighters to actually do their job. The problem is that Congress is still too often focused on avoiding corruption in developing countries, rather than actually working with others to do something about it. In this effort to avoid the risk of corruption, the US government has often bypassed local organizations and governments rather than working with them, missing opportunities to help local watchdogs root out corruption and strengthen democratic institutions, reducing waste, fraud, and abuse for the long-term.

Thankfully, USAID is seeking to fix this problem. A new reform called “Implementation and Procurement Reform,” or IPR, is designed to help countries deliver for their own people and help people hold their governments accountable. The agency plans to spend 30% of its funds through local actors, whether they’re local nonprofits, businesses, or governments, by 2015 (up from 11% in 2011). After assessing public financial management systems to manage for risks, USAID will boost its funding through host country systems to reach 25 country governments directly; they will cut out the middleman by hiring 576 local nonprofits directly instead of spending through contractors.

USAID officials say they are moving cautiously but deliberately to change their practices.  But Congress is still nervous; recently, several Members wrote to USAID asking for more information about these reforms. Githongo and his peers are more enthusiastic; this week, Githongo and fifteen other anti-corruption and human rights activists sent an open letter to Congress, expressing support for USAID’s reforms. They write:

“USAID is strengthening its ability to partner with us by eliminating large, inflexible contracts and by working more directly with local governments, businesses, and civil society organizations like ours. These are crucial requirements for fighting corruption and defending human rights . . . Bypassing local organizations and governments defeats the purpose of aid, which is to help countries help themselves.”

It might seem strange that anti-corruption activists would support direct funding of this sort flowing to their countries. But they support it precisely because they know that Washington can’t solve developing countries problems for them. As Githongo says:

“Ownership is ni sisi. It is up to us. It is us who own our problems. And it is us who will come up with the solutions.”

You can add your own voice to that of these anti-corruption heroes. Send a note to your Member of Congress asking them to stand with anti-corruption activists around the world.

There’s a time-honored saying that any state legislator knows well: “All politics is local.” It remains true today. As a community, we need to [...]]]> In an op-ed appearing in The Atlanta Patch today, Georgia State Representative Scott Holcomb (GA-82) makes the case that international development is a vital tool in keeping America safe.

There’s a time-honored saying that any state legislator knows well: “All politics is local.” It remains true today. As a community, we need to remain focused on what keeps our local economy prosperous and our cities like Atlanta safe and secure. It turns out that international trade and development does just that.

Rep. Holcomb’s op-ed comes just as Cycle For Security’s Janessa Goldbeck rolls into Atlanta today for a 6:00 pm event at Parish Market featuring City Council Member Aaron Watson and various community leaders from Atlanta.