blog logo image

Posts Tagged ‘QDDR’

What do you think about USAID’s role in the QDDR?

Thursday, March 11th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Today, Alyssa Rosenberg at GovernmentExecutive.com posed two questions about the heightened media attention around the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in relation to the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), set to release mid-term findings by the end of the month.  See her post below:

“This may be an idle thought, but for those of you out there who keep a close eye on the State Department, I’d appreciate some insight into this question: are questions of USAID’s staffing and budget dominating the coverage of the strategy review under way there because they are the critical questions? Or because USAID has aggressive stakeholders and its roles is very much enhanced because of Haiti, etc.?”

Let us know how you would answer her questions by leaving a comment below.

A Conservative Perspective on Foreign Assistance Reform – Part 2

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010
Bookmark and Share

mark_green_profileIn a piece published in The Daily Caller, former Representative Mark Green (R-WI), who also served as Ambassador to Tanzania from 2007-2009, calls on Congress to maintain support for a strong International Affairs Budget and follow through on foreign assistance reform, saying: “…there’s no denying the fiscal challenges that our elected leaders have on their plate. But there’s also no denying how much of a difference our foreign assistance programs are making in key parts of the world. I hope that our leaders keep these thoughts in mind as the budget season—and political season—moves forward.”

Ambassador Green, now the Managing Director of the Malaria No More Policy Center, has spoken out strongly on foreign assistance reform before, including in a video recently posted on the MFAN website and a Washington Times opinion piece last August.

MFAN Statement: Obama Administration International Affairs Budget Request Further Strengthens Development

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010
Bookmark and Share

February 1, 2010 (WASHINGTON)This statement is delivered on behalf of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network (MFAN) by Co-Chairs David Beckmann and George Ingram:

MFAN strongly supports President Obama’s FY 2011 International Affairs budget blueprint, which reinforces the President’s commitment to ensuring that “development is established and endures as a key pillar of U.S. foreign policy”  by requesting  increases for foreign assistance programs.  Even at this challenging time, we believe robust funding for development is critical, because the complex problems we are trying to solve in Haiti, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere cannot be addressed solely with military firepower or diplomatic outreach.  We must continue to focus on alleviating poverty, fighting disease, and creating economic opportunity in the developing world, in order to improve people’s lives and help set them on a path towards self-sufficiency.

The challenging atmosphere surrounding this budget demands that policymakers do everything possible to make U.S. foreign assistance more effective and accountable.  Building on the unprecedented momentum created at all levels of government in 2009, we urge the Obama Administration to drive foreign assistance reform to a successful conclusion so that we are getting the best results possible for the people in developing countries we are working with, as well as U.S. taxpayers.

We eagerly await the findings and recommendations from two major Administration reviews – the White House’s Presidential Study Directive on Global Development Policy (PSD) and the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR).  We call on the Administration to work closely with Congress on House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Berman’s (D-CA) anticipated rewrite of the outdated Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s bipartisan effort to pass the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act of 2009 (S.1524), which would strengthen the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Dr. Rajiv Shah’s leadership and create new transparency and accountability measures for foreign assistance.  We stand ready to work with both branches on this important and transformative drive towards reform.

For more information, contact Sam Hiersteiner at shiersteiner@gpgdc.com or visitwww.modernizingforeignassistance.net.

Friday Afternoon Special: Congress Carrying the Flag on Reform

Friday, January 29th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

From Josh Rogin at ForeignPolicy.com:

As officials at the State Department and USAID continue to wrangle over what to do with America’s top development agency, lawmakers are pushing their own ideas for reform. Soon, the State Department could have its first authorization bill since 2002, a policy blueprint that could include significant input from Capitol Hill.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee leaders John Kerry, D-MA, and Richard Lugar, R-IN, introduced a State Department policy bill for both fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2011 today. The introduction comes just days before the release of the administration’s fiscal 2011 State Department budget request and in the middle of important foreign operations policy reviews both at State and in the White House.

“This is the first time in eight years that the Foreign Relations Committee will pass a State Department authorization bill, and we do so at a critical moment,” Kerry said in a statement. “This is precisely the moment when our investment in diplomacy is most needed and this bill provides our diplomatic corps with essential tools, authorities and resources to succeed in the tough jobs we continually require of them.”

Here is the text of the bill and a fact sheet put out by the committee.

The question remains whether or not this authorization bill will become the vehicle for the Kerry-Lugar foreign aid reform bill that their committee marked up in November. That legislation has very different ideas of how to structure USAID than what’s expected to come out of the two main reviews related to U.S. development policy, State’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review and the NSC’s Presidential Study Directive on Global Development.

Lugar gave a major speech on the Senate’s ideas about foreign aid reform at last night’s gala event hosted by the Society for International Development, where he emphasized the Senate’s view that development and diplomacy should be distinct and separate.

“Differences of opinion exist with regard to who should be performing development functions and how these activities should be integrated into our broader foreign policy efforts. We have not reached a consensus within our government on who should be doing what, where, when and why,” Lugar said.

“As we debate these issues, we should keep in mind that diplomacy and development are two distinct disciplines. Although diplomacy and development often can be mutually reinforcing, at their core, they have different priorities, resource requirements, and time horizons.”

Lugar’s message was basically directed at State Department officials who have been talking about the “integration” of development and diplomacy, an idea that the development community is resisting. Lugar also said USAID must have control over its own budget and policy formations, both functions that were stripped from the agency during the Bush administration.

State’s Policy Planning chief Anne-Marie Slaughter tried to allay the fears in the development community about the upcoming QDDR in remarks at an event Thursday hosted by the U.N. Development Programme.

“Integrating is not the bad word that many people fear it is. It doesn’t at all mean collapsing development and diplomacy into one another or subsuming one to the other,” she said.

But she would not say whether she supported USAID having the authority to made budget or policy decisions on its own.

Best of 2009: Congressional Hearings on Foreign Assistance Reform

Monday, January 25th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

The second installment in our “Best of 2009” series features a recounting of key foreign assistance reform-related hearings from the House and Senate over the past year.  MFAN Principals testified before several key committees, offered expert opinions on the structure and vision for foreign assistance reform, and helped shape the debate in Washington on U.S. development policy.  See quotes with links to full testimony from MFAN Principals below:

Senate

“Alleviating Global Hunger:  Challenges and Opportunities for U.S. Leadership”

March 24, 2009 – Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Panel I - The Honorable Daniel R. Glickman, the Honorable Catherine A. Bertini, MFAN Co-chair David Beckmann, Robert Paarlberg.

Panel II - Edwin C. Price, Gebisa Ejeta.

“The Obama administration, especially Secretary Clinton, is actively considering what is needed to make our aid programs better coordinated and more effective…But right now, people outside the beltway don’t have a very effective way to urge their senators to show their support for the Committee’s work for foreign assistance reform. We need a bill or resolution they can ask their senators to cosponsor.” (Beckmann)

“USAID in the 21st Century”

April 1, 2009 – Senate Foreign Relations Committee

The Honorable Andrew S. Natsios, MFAN Principal Steve Radelet, MFAN Principal Carol Lancaster.

“For our development policies and programs to contribute to the U.S. smart power agenda, we need to be smarter about who sets our development policies, how they inform the decision-making process and where they sit within the U.S. government.” (Radelet)

“There is more consensus today than ever before among our political leadership, public officials, scholars and policy analysts and the American public that promoting development abroad should be a key element in US foreign policy – along with diplomacy and defense.” (Lancaster)

“The Case for Reform:  Foreign Aid and Development in a New Era”

July 22, 2009 – Senate Foreign Relations Committee

MFAN Principal Peter McPherson, MFAN Co-chair David Beckmann, Jeffrey D. Sachs.

“While foreign assistance is part of overall U.S. foreign policy, development must have a strong voice to articulate how a development strategy strengthens foreign policy goals.” (McPherson)

“When we try to achieve defense and diplomatic goals with the same dollars, aid is usually much less effective in reducing poverty. In my mind, that’s the basic reason we need a strong development agency, with its own capacity to plan and carry out programs. These programs should be coordinated with other foreign policy purposes, but distinct from them.” (Beckmann)

House

“Foreign Assistance Reform:  Rebuilding U.S. Civilian Development and Diplomatic Capacity in the 21st Century”

June 25, 2008 – House Committee on Foreign Affairs

The Honorable Howard L. Berman, MFAN Principal Peter McPherson, MFAN Principal J. Brian Atwood

“Because of these staff cuts, USAID has been forced to move from an implementation to a contracting agency…The existing situation means less coherence in the overall effort, less flexibility and diminished leverage with other private and public donors.” (McPherson)

“Diplomacy and development are mutually reinforcing assets in preventing conflict, but they are distinct missions requiring very different mandates and resources. Unfortunately, these two missions have been pitted against one another as rivals for a limited resource base within the foreign affairs budget (the 150 account).” (Atwood)

“Building a 21st-Century Workforce”

February 25, 2009 – House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations

Thomas Pickering, Prudence Bushnell, MFAN Principal Jim Kunder.

“The Role of Civilian and Military Agencies in the Advancement of America’s Diplomatic and Development Objectives”

March 5, 2009 – House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations

John Hamre, MFAN Principal Nancy Lindborg, Gordon Adams, George E. Moose.

“…we now must turn more effectively to the challenge of “complex development” in countries burdened by a potent combination of deep poverty, insecurity and weak governance. The solution in these environments is not humanitarian in the sense of saving lives, but rather adapts the fundamentals of development practice to the challenges of these complex environments.” (Lindborg)

“Striking the Appropriate Balance:  the Defense Department’s Expanding Role in Foreign Assistance”

March 18, 2009 – House Committee on Foreign Affairs

The Honorable Howard L. Berman, General Michael W. Hagee,  MFAN Principal Nancy Lindborg, MFAN Principal ReubenBrigety, the Honorable Philip L. Christenson.

“We now have a pivotal political moment, with an emerging and welcome bi-partisan consensus in Washington and beyond around the idea of “smart power – the notion that America’s foreign policy is best served when there is a more balanced application and funding of the now familiar “Three Ds” of Diplomacy, Defense, and Development.” (Lindborg)

“Development assistance is not just a moral good or a matter of enlightened self-interest. It is in our vital national interests. There is no greater evidence of this than the military’s increasing involvement in this sphere.”(Brigety)

“U.S. Assistance to Africa:  A Call to Foreign Aid Reform”

April 23, 2009 House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Africa & Global Health

The Honorable Donald M. Payne, Earl Gast, Ousmane Badiane, MFAN Principal Steve Radelet, Meredeth Turshen, Bill O’Keefe.

“We can, and must, do better with our foreign assistance. But we must also bear in mind that foreign assistance alone will not be enough to achieve U.S. foreign policy goals…Getting a bigger bang for our development bucks requires being smarter about our development strategy, legislation and organizational apparatus.” (Radelet)

“Hearing on USAID: Management Challenges and Strategic Objectives”

April 28, 2009 – House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform, Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement

Mike Walsh, MFAN Princpal Jim Kunder, MFAN Co-chair George Ingram, Thomas Melito.

“While we perform many important humanitarian and development services around the world, it is notable that there is not a comprehensive model for foreign aid from the United States that addresses, worldwide, our nation’s strategic goals and the needs of the developing world.” (Kunder)

“The trend toward focusing on the results of development projects is a good thing. We should care about whether our developmentdollars are invested in ways that improve peoples’ lives.” (Ingram)

“A Call to Action on Food Security:  the Administration’s Global Strategy”

October 29, 2009 House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Africa & Global Health

The Honorable Donald M. Payne, Thomas Melito, Helene Gayle, Julie Howard, MFAN Co-chair David Beckmann, Richard Leach.

“The appetite for meaningful reform of our food security efforts – and more broadly our foreign assistance programs – is large right now. But the window of opportunity for enacting reform is small. We must collectively capitalize on this rare moment in history to help poor people around the world.” (Beckmann)