blog logo image

Posts Tagged ‘State Department’

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.

Kenyan Ambassador to the U.S. Shares His Thoughts on Effective Foreign Assistance

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Ambassador OgegoAs part of an ongoing dialogue with developing world voices, Kenya’s Ambassador to the U.S., Peter N.R.O. Ogego, recently spoke with MFAN on his experiences working with bilateral and multilateral donors and how to reform foreign assistance and aid programs to have a greater impact at fighting poverty and disease, promoting economic growth and innovation, and creating sustainable, accountable societies and governments.  Ambassador Ogego articulated six principles of aid effectiveness that should be considered when reforming foreign assistance:

  • Greater partnership between donors and recipients of aid. Ambassador Ogego spoke extensively of the problems in the 1970s and 80s in Africa when both bilateral and multilateral aid was provided on a conditional basis with little recipient country consultation, and how the conditionality of aid, as in the Millennium Challenge Corporation model, continues to impact effectiveness.
  • Better coordination among donors in country and inside the beltway. This synchronization of aid efforts needs to be transparent so as not to confuse the recipient country agents.
  • Emphasis on capacity-building. The Ambassador noted that it is not only a question of providing equipment and technicians to jump-start development efforts, but the level at which donors will transfer the technology and skills to local society.
  • Coherent and cohesive assistance policies and programs. Too often donors are unclear in describing their programs and aid packages, which results in wasted energy, resources, and ultimately money.  More fundamentally, he argued these policies should be based on recipient country needs and not donor interest.
  • Flexible time frame. Outstanding circumstances and shifting priorities may affect what kind of aid is needed and when.
  • Standard system of review of aid efforts (or Donor Performance Assessment). The Ambassador suggested that just as outside groups monitor how recipient countries handle aid, the donors themselves should be subject to self-review to determine best practices and streamline efforts.

For the most effective foreign assistance, Ambassador Ogego called on Washington to listen to officials on the ground – including Ambassadors like himself and country directors – and to have the understanding and ability to be flexible in their mission.  To garner more public support for U.S. aid efforts, the Ambassador suggested that the U.S. recognize it’s part of a “global village” and use its abundance of resources and technology to lead a proactive and conscious delivery effort, offering our best to those parts of the world struggling to reach their potential.  After all, a growing, peaceful Kenya is good for the world.

Gen. James Hill and Adm. Robert Natter Talk ‘Smart Power’ in St. Petersburg Times

Thursday, February 4th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

See the article below by General James T. Hill and Admiral Robert Natter on the importance of using all three elements — the three “D’s” — of U.S. power to protect American interests here and abroad:

St. Petersburg Times

Might Plus ‘Smart Power’

Gen. James T. Hill and Adm. Robert J. Natter

February 2, 2010

As officers in the U.S. military, we were honored to be able to devote our careers to keeping America safe. We are proud to have served in the best and strongest military in the world, but our decades of experience have taught us that military might alone is not enough to protect the United States.

Today, some of the most serious threats facing our country from around the world come from poverty, disease, weak and failing states, and a lack of economic opportunity. Keeping America safe still requires a strong military. But more than ever, we must utilize all three tools of our national power — defense, diplomacy and development. Often called “smart power,” this approach is absolutely essential for American security, prosperity and global leadership.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has been an outspoken proponent of increasing U.S. diplomacy and development capabilities, saying, “When it comes to America’s engagement with the rest of the world, it is important that the military is — and is clearly seen to be — in a supporting role to civilian agencies. Our diplomatic leaders — be they in ambassador’s suites or on the seventh floor of the State Department — must have the resources and political support needed to fully exercise their statutory responsibilities in leading American foreign policy.”

Gates’ support for U.S. civilian agencies has been echoed by bipartisan leaders on Capitol Hill, senior officials in the Obama administration, and members of the military at the Pentagon and abroad.

We know personally the value of development and diplomacy. When we served in the armed forces, we each saw firsthand the important roles the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development play in sustaining and enhancing the military mission on the ground. The military does its job in bringing peace to armed conflict, but our civilian-led programs help ensure military progress results in longer-term security.

Over the past weeks, we have all watched Haiti struggle to recover from a devastating earthquake. But in the midst of this tragedy, Americans can be proud of the brave men and women in uniform working side-by-side with our development experts and diplomats. By putting the “smart power” approach to work, the American response to crisis is stronger and more effective.

Diplomacy and development are not just important for national security — they have a real impact on the economy, too. Florida exported over $52 billion in goods overseas in 2008, which was an 87 percent increase over 2004. Given that developing countries are America’s fastest growing markets, U.S. investments in countries overseas that enhance and build better trade are critical to Florida’s economy.

Our nation’s development and diplomatic efforts are funded by the International Affairs Budget. This covers programs that save lives, strengthen alliances, and improve opportunities for American businesses overseas — and it’s less than 1.5 percent of the entire federal budget. Programs funded by the International Affairs Budget help people in countries all over the world have a greater chance at peace, health, security and prosperity. In doing so, they make Florida and the nation both safer and more prosperous.

For too long, our nation’s development experts and diplomats have had neither the resources nor the support to do their jobs with the greatest impact possible. A robust International Affairs Budget can make development and diplomacy initiatives more effective, and help ensure U.S. civilian institutions are able to serve as strong, capable partners with the U.S. military.

The good news is there is bipartisan support to increase the International Affairs Budget and to elevate our engagement with the world. As members of Congress begin their work on the next budget, it is imperative that our state’s congressional delegation supports efforts to adequately fund our “smart power” tools — it’s in the best interests of Florida, our country and in building a better, safer more prosperous world.

Gen. James T. Hill served as commander of the U.S. Southern Command, 2002-04. Adm. Robert J. Natter served as the commander in chief of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet, 2000-03. Both are members of the National Security Advisory Council of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition. Gen. David Petraeus is speaking Wednesday at an event sponsored by the coalition and the Tampa Bay Council of World Affairs and Commerce.

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.

Noteworthy News – 1.29

Friday, January 29th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

This weekly posting includes key news stories and opinion pieces related to foreign assistance reform and the larger development community.

News on Haiti:

  • Agreement on Effort to Help Haiti Rebuild (The New York Times, January 26) Concerned about corruption and wobbly Haitian leadership, international donors agreed Monday during a meeting in Montreal on a 10-year rebuilding effort for earthquake-damaged Haiti, one that would create an even better capital city and that the government said would cost $3 billion.  [Clinton]: “Sometimes people have pledging conferences and pledge money, and they don’t have any idea what they’re going to do with it. We actually think it’s a novel idea to do the needs assessment first and then the planning and then the pledging.”
  • Clinton: Critics of US Haiti Relief Misguided (AP, January 26) ”Some of the international press either misunderstood or deliberately misconstrued what was a civilian and military response, both of them necessary in order to be able to deliver aid to the Haitians who desperately needed it,” Clinton told a gathering of State Department employees.
  • MFAN-related: A Better Week for Haiti – And With These Reforms, a Far Better Future (Huffington Post-Charles MacCormack, January 29) Drawing on Save the Children’s recent study Insights from the Field: Haiti, I believe four key reforms are needed to fulfill the promises of the Montreal commitment to rebuild Haiti:  1) Invest in Haitian institutions. Rebuilding infrastructure matters, but promoting human development matters even more. 2) Encourage the private sector’s role in development. 3) Empower one U.S. agency to oversee all development work in Haiti. 4) Increase accountability through transparency.

Other News:

  • Congress weighs in on foreign-aid reform (FP Blog-Josh Rogin, January 29) 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.  “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.”
  • Audit deems Pakistan aid program a failure (FP Blog-Colum Lynch, January 28) The two year-old development program for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) was designed to help improve living standards in one of Pakistan’s poorest and most politically unstable territories. So far, only $15.5 million has been spent on the initiative.  “It has not achieved the goal of improving the capacity of FATA governmental institutions to govern,” according to the audit, which was produced by the inspector general’s office in Manila, the Philippines. And it “did not increase the capacities of [local] NGOs to promote good governance, although some progress was made.”