Friday, February 11, 2005
Strings attached
Jeanne at Body and Soul notes that despite the Bush Administration's pledge to increase the United States' tsunami relief pledge to $950 million, it's still all about US.
The U.S. government places conditions on its foreign aid that require most relief and development assistance materials and services to be purchased from U.S. companies and agencies. The last time the the government revealed any data on this issue—back in 1996—72 cents out of every U.S. foreign aid dollar was spent on U.S. goods and services.
This arrangement might strike most U.S. taxpayers as a fair and just arrangement. Why shouldn’t the nation’s economy and its companies get something out of money the government spends on foreign aid?
For starters, this arrangement makes aid less productive. Requiring that foreign aid benefit U.S. companies often means that precious resources are used buying more expensive goods or services; while valuable time is wasted transporting these goods to the region. This hurts poor countries, including those devasted by this disaster of monumental proportions.
Countries that receive aid also have less control and decision-making on how to spend aid money. For example, countries like Malaysia or Sri Lanka, where the staple diet is rice may get shiploads of sorghum, or wheat, because these items are available from U.S. company stockpiles. What’s worse, goods like sugar or roofing sheets that may have been secured in the region, injecting much-needed vigor into the regional economy, are ignored as U.S. materials are imported at top dollar.
posted by chris at 1:11 PM
------------------
|
