You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
International-UN-NGOs
Bush plans overhaul of US foreign aid system
2005-12-12
President George W. Bush’s administration is drawing up plans to carry out the biggest overhaul of the US foreign aid apparatus in more than 40 years in an attempt to assert more political control over international assistance, according to officials and aid experts. The proposed reorganisation could lead to a takeover by the State Department of the independent US Agency for International Development. USAID was established by President John F. Kennedy in 1961, managing aid programmes, disaster relief and post-war reconstruction totalling billions of dollars each year.

Critics in the aid community fear the reorganisation will lead to a politicisation of foreign assistance, where aid will become subordinated to the Bush administration’s drive to promote democracy.
Horrors! What a thought! And do you have any IDEA what that will do to the NGOs???? The nerve of the man!
Supporters of the proposed reforms argue that USAID must be brought more in line with policy goals focused on post-conflict reconstruction and democratisation rather than pure development aid where they allege funds are squandered ...
yup
... and the agency is driven more by efforts aimed at self-perpetuation.
double yup
Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, and Stephen Krasner, head of policy planning, are leading the reforms. Officials said proposals could be put to Congress next month. A new position of deputy secretary of state for aid and development is being considered.

Previous administrations have considered similar ideas but rejected them as impractical or unlikely to pass Congress, and officials concede this could happen this time round. A precedent of sorts exists in the controversial 1999 merger into the state department of the independent US Information Agency, a move that has since been blamed by all the correct people in part for failures in US public diplomacy.

A spokesman for USAID said no final decision had been taken. He noted that rumours of the agency’s demise surface regularly. Andrew Natsios, head of USAID for nearly five years, announced his resignation on December 2. No replacement has been announced. The USAID spokesman said his departure was not connected to a possible reorganisation. Mr Natsios was credited with effective responses to natural disasters, such as the Asian tsunami. But experts say USAID and the Pentagon share blame for the failure of state building in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Failure in Afghanistan? That's been a success story so far. There's a state there that wasn't there before.
Carol Lancaster, a Georgetown University professor and co-author of “Organising US Foreign Aid” says merging USAID into the state department would be a mistake. “I’m concerned that a real merger has the very great danger of eventually undercutting the development mission because of tensions, pressures and the nature of foreign policy,” she commented. “The pressure to use money for short-term crisis management, or the war on terror, could be overwhelming.”
It isn't like the development side has been a smashing success.
A State Department official, who asked not to be named, said the goal of the reforms was to make US aid better linked to the administration’s democracy and development agenda. “There is a feeling that we need to be more strategic,” he said. The administration wanted more flexibility in how money was spent, he said, noting that a considerable portion of the US aid budget was heavily “earmarked” by Congress tying aid to particular countries and projects. The Bush administration began the reform process by setting up the Millennium Challenge Corporation which rewards countries with records of good governance. Welcomed as a good concept, it has also been criticised for moving too slowly.
Posted by:lotp

#17  Ufda, Ragnar!
Posted by: lotp   2005-12-12 22:12  

#16  Redneck - their just call her an oreo (black on the outside and white on the inside) and get away with it. Or a 'slave of Bush' or anything but a respectable Doctor or PhD!

After all a black (or woman or 'latino' or ....) simply couldn't have earned all her honors on their own - without Democratic help! (That is the Democratic mindset not mine).
Posted by: CrazyFool   2005-12-12 22:12  

#15  I know what to do with foreign aid.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjöld   2005-12-12 21:47  

#14  Perhaps we should use the money to fund our chunk of the UN and then tell the former recepients that any money not getting through to them was probably stolen by UN Bureocrats and perhaps they should help us straighten out the den of thieves and liars instead of kneejerk voting against the USA because it makes you feel manly and poor.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2005-12-12 11:51  

#13  Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, and Stephen Krasner, head of policy planning, are leading the reforms.
I love it, going to be damn near impossible to play the "Black folks get screwed" card with her in charge.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2005-12-12 10:26  

#12  Way over due. Hopefully now the food and other crap we send to the Norks all over Africa and lots of enemies or dictators ect... The LLL's problem is that they are welfare believers that if you give someone a fish suddenly they will learn how to live you have to show them how to catch a fish or you just create a dependent that the more you take care of the more they mulitple and the more that is needed. Not to mention they begin to think you owe it to them and they dont even appreciate what you give them.
Posted by: C-Low   2005-12-12 09:44  

#11  I worked for a few months at an NGO that was funded by USAID. When I started, my boss gave me a quick sketch of the organization and showed me how the funding and programming were washed through at least 20 stateside 'entities' before it went to the outposts in-country. The coffee, donut, and bagel bills just for the meetings between all these entities in DC alone prolly consumed half the funding. And the big boss had to fly twice a year to the Lagos office because shockingly, the Nigerian accounting systems differed somewhat from international standards.
Posted by: Seafarious   2005-12-12 09:33  

#10  Condoleeza Rice is an active shepherd at State. Granted, it must be much like herding cats, but I can't imagine the diplomatic corp are running as freely as they have in the past. The power to hire and fire is a powerful incentivizer, and I wouldn't mind seeing her stay home for a bit to concentrate on cleaning out that particular Aegean Stable.
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-12-12 09:30  

#9  The proposed reorganisation could lead to a takeover by the State Department of the independent US Agency for International Development.

Oh, yeah, right. So we'll have the fox watching the hen house now. Big deal. State gets a reward for back stabbing the President. I'm so impressed. Next, independent audits by Arthur Anderson.
Posted by: Angomort Ulomoque7221   2005-12-12 09:20  

#8  HAts off to Bush for FINALLY getting to this. .com, you stole our thunder and are exactly right! It's the Taxpayer's money and it shoud serve our interests! Having been forced to work with AID I can tell you it is full of Cindy Sheehan, burkenstock, tree hugging, anything the govt says is wrong, type moonbats!
Carol Lancaster's comments are really taken as the objective statement for AID. Thank god something is about to happen, the agency is extreemly important and completely mismanaged.
Posted by: 49 pan   2005-12-12 08:01  

#7  Perhaps it's time to look into the annual $2 billion we give to Egypt.
Posted by: DMFD   2005-12-12 07:19  

#6  My guess is that it went to the military

But apparently it wasn't delivered in the proper form - a JDAM from 10,000 feet above. Should've shipped with USAF Expedited Inc.
Posted by: Rafael   2005-12-12 02:31  

#5  I was thinking it prolly went toward railroad facilities and maintenance, myself. Heh...
Posted by: .com   2005-12-12 02:23  

#4  Rafael---My guess is that it went to the military. Heh heh heh.....
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2005-12-12 02:16  

#3  Wow, North Korea received $97mil in military assistance. I wonder what that was for.
Posted by: Rafael   2005-12-12 00:59  

#2  Article: Critics in the aid community fear the reorganisation will lead to a politicisation of foreign assistance, where aid will become subordinated to the Bush administration’s drive to promote democracy.

Where aid money goes is a political decision, since we, the taxpayers, provide that funding.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2005-12-12 00:54  

#1  For the benefit of current USAID employees, NGOs, PVOs, recipient countries and everyone else with their hands out or issuing their opinions, would it be imprudent or arrogant to remind them of the fact that it's our money, the tax-payers of America, and that President Bush and VP Cheney are the only elected officials who answer to all Americans?

It's our money. It should serve our interests alone. Everybody else, and that means you, Kofi Anon and Jan Egeland, and your parasitic Vulture Elite UN in particular, can STFU.

Here's where it's gone in the past:
GreenBook
YellowBook

And there are tons of info (Reports and Project History Docs) available at the Development Experience Clearinghouse
Posted by: .com   2005-12-12 00:28  

00:00