United States Foreign Assistance Policy

Prior to World War I, the United States generally chose to follow Washington’s farewell address and stay out of “foreign entanglements”. The United States foreign policy from 1918 to 1953 shifted from isolationism or independent internationalism to a more involved internationalism and containment of communism due to various international events, economic conditions, and US public opinion.

Throughout the mid to late twentieth century the United States was extremely concerned with their foreign policy due to mishaps that surfaced as a result of lazy administration when dealing with communism. As an example, one mishap was how the Truman Administration dealt with China after the KMT surfaced following WWII. Instead of immediately defending the People’s Republic of China, the United States stayed mostly secluded and independent and let China slip into the favor of the KMT. This was an example of the United States’ being too moderate in their foreign policy. However, on the other hand, there were examples where the United States was too aggressive in their foreign policy. An example of this was how the US chose to dealt with North

To begin with handing out money is always a problem, it becomes even more of an issue when we don't have the money to give! For instance with the Chinese in 2012 we gave $28.3 million to china’s foreign aid. If we seriously are in debt to them about 1.3 Trillion dollars why would we need to give them financial aid? Its ridiculous to be in debt to them such a large amount of money and yet give them financial aid is simply ludicrous. To change this how about we start loaning money to china and stop buying into their loans, this would not only eventually cut our debt exponentially but it would also start to Increase the money we make as a nation.

People could argue that since we are donating such a low percent of our GDP it would make sense for the US to increase aid levels. This would also be an argument for anyone that has certain religious beliefs. In the article A Call To Virtue, the author, Jeffrey Sachs shares one of the Pope’s various messages, “The urgent core of Francis’ message, which is the message of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, challenges this American idea by proclaiming that the path to happiness lies not solely or mainly through the defense of rights but through the exercise of virtues, most notably justice and charity.” In some religions people believe it is morally right to help through charity to find happiness. Some people also argue that foreign aid levels should decrease because of the economic crisis that the US is in. The United States current debt is over eighteen trillion dollars right now according to usdebtclock.org. People believe that by decreasing foreign aid levels it will take away some debt. If the levels were to maintain there would not be worry about creating more debt by increasing levels and the US would also not have to worry about pulling out and not giving enough. Another argument is that aid should be unconditional and should be given to whoever needs it in time of crisis no matter

Foreign policy is how one nation deals with many other nations. The book talks about Ronald Regan trying to create foreign policy and then here you have congress like a bunch of ants floating on a log down river each ant thinking there in charge. Foreign policy from the way “How Congress Works’” says is set up by the president and not really. Having congress get involved makes foreign policy way more complicated then needed. Harry Truman was one man who was asked a question. A random person wanted to know who created foreign policy? His answer was that he did. Now this leads to a important example of foreign policy. This leads to John F. Kennedy and we all know what major foreign policy deal he had to deal with. It was the Cuban missile crisis.

The U.S. foreign policy has always been linked to the domestic policy since the U.S. never feared of expanding its national interests over the national boarders. Isolation for the U.S. usually implied slow economic growth and the large number of destructive conflicts within, while impudent foreign policy always guaranteed an abrupt economic growth for the U.S. economy. After the U.S. intervened in the WWI and the WWII, the U.S. economy witnessed a tremendous economic growth, nearly elimination of the unemployment, rapid urbanization and overall growth of the standards of living across the country. Decisive foreign policy has always been providing the U.S. economy with the sustainable and rapid economic growth, unlike the policy aimed at isolation of the U.S.

As was laid out in the previous section, the United-States always had a ‘hegemonic presumption’, the conception that Latin America was inferior, a supposition that gave the right to Washington to intervene in the region’s political and economic affairs (LeoGrande, 2007:384). This second chapter will explore how the U.S. intervened in Latin America, more specifically after the World War II. Indeed, the U.S. benefitted greatly from the aftermath of the war. A subsection will be dedicated to the Pink Tide in Latin America, with a focus on the U.S. foreign policy under President GW Bush and President Obama. The overthrown Presidents of Honduras and Paraguay were part of this movement and their outset signals a reversal in the region.

Ever had that one friend? The one who tries to help, but no matter how hard he tries, he just aggravates the situation. This friend, Steve, insists he is helping, and those around, too, would support that he is indeed helping. But Steve is actually worsening the circumstances. He is like countries who provide foreign aid to less developed countries. Foreign aid, defined as “the international transfer of capital, goods, or services from a country or international organization for the benefit of the recipient country or its population,” can be military, economic, or humanitarian (“Foreign”). It is often granted to less developed countries in order to evoke government reforms or to stimulate economic growth. However, foreign aid neither elicits government reform, nor does it consistently and reliably stimulate economic growth; therefore, the United States should discontinue providing foreign economic aid.

Since World War II, the United States foreign policy has metastasised to a global level. The United States has taken the position as the global police. We have done countless interventions to “better” the good of the world and its people. Yet, it seems we have forgotten about Americans themselves, who have to deal with the enormous costs of these interventions. When a tyrannous dictator takes control of a country in some far flung part of the world, the United States steps in. We use American soldiers and taxpayers dollars to oust the dictator. Then when a vacuum is created we go back and fight the terrorist group which has taken over. This has happened too many times. It shows the weakness of our foreign policy system. The cost of our military, foreign interventions, and aid has gotten out of control for a country with looming debt problems. As of 2015, military spending has taken up fifty four percent of our discretionary spending, coming out to a total of $598.5 billion dollars (Nationalpriorities.org). Additionally, $195 billion is going outside the United States to fund foreign bases and aid (Politico.com). United

If the United States is able to help another country financially or economically, why would we not help? I believe that if we are giving to other countries, we will also receive from other countries as well, in our times of need. The United States is a portion of the world, and I think the first step to resolving conflicts with others is to be there for them, creating peace. The thought of not helping other countries when we are able to is immoral.

In their book American Foreign Policy since World War 2, Steven W. Hook, and John Spanier take a historical look at American foreign policy. Since its independence, all through to the start of the 20th century, the United States had a policy of detachment. This was rooted in the believe that Europe, the only other meaningful powerful in the world in the 18th and 19th century, had intrinsic issues related to feudism that kept the continent in a constant state of war (Hook & Spanier, 2015). The U.S on its part was far away from Europe and had a unique chance to chart a different course, one free from the troubles of Europe. As a democracy free from the class systems of Europe and hence maintain peace and stability (Hook & Spanier, 2015). To maintain this peace and stability, it was in the United States interests to maintain detachment from Europe. In fact, Monroe wrote that Europe and its flawed system was evil and America should strive as much as possible to stay away from it (Hook & Spanier, 2015). However, in the 20th century, this policy of detachment was put to the test when the United States was drawn into the first and second world wars by external factors. This led the United States to get more engaged in global affairs. The idea behind engagement was to promote the ideals of democracy which, the U.S believed were the pillars of peace, as well as to protect itself from aggressors like Japan in the Second World War. After the

If we are in a stable position in our country, helping other countries become stable won’t hurt. It will eventually help us in the future because we will be setting up trades. In conclusion, we will continue to help other countries. Some may disagree, but I strongly believe that this is the right thing to do so it will be

When I chose Brazil as the subject country for examining its foreign aid received, I ran into a bit of a dilemma. Brazil has evolved from being a foreign aid recipient and less developed nation of the past, to become a major foreign aid provider in recent years. This fact places this emerging country in a unique and interesting position as both a donor and recipient as of 2010 records reveal and Brazil’s donor status is on the increase since this new “middle-of-the-road” development status for this intriguing country emerged.

headquarters was the first to be overrun. Its leaders with many other high-ranking agents were executed between 1979-1981.

The USA exercises its foreign policy through financial aid. For example, scarcity relief in North Korea provides not only humanitarian aid but also a base for the development of democratic ideals and bodies.