What Are the Different Types of Military Financial Assistance?

In 1961, the US Congress passed a new amendment to the Foreign Aid Act, and the same year established the International Development Agency to take over the investment guarantee business. In 1969, the United States revised the Foreign Aid Act again to establish an Overseas Private Investment Company (OPIC). It is an independent agency within the federal executive branch. , Has now become a specialized agency in charge of US private overseas investment guarantees and insurance.

Foreign Aid Act

Right!

In 1961, the US Congress passed a new amendment to the Foreign Aid Act, and the same year established the International Development Agency to take over the investment guarantee business. In 1969, the United States revised the Foreign Aid Act again to establish an Overseas Private Investment Company (OPIC). It is an independent agency within the federal executive branch. , Now in charge of U.S. Private Overseas

In 1961, the US Congress passed a new amendment to the Foreign Aid Act, setting up the International Development Agency to take over investment in the same year

first part

Chapter 1-Policy; Development Assistance Authorization

Section 101. General policies. --- (1) The United States Congress believes that basic

In the 1960s, with the further development of the Cold War, the struggle between the two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, was not only confined to the contest of military power. The third world and developing countries became the focus of their competition. Foreign aid has become an important tool in American diplomacy. After Kennedy came to power, he focused US foreign policy on developing countries, formulated a new Foreign Aid Act, and shifted the focus of foreign aid from military aid to economic aid. Beginning with the Foreign Aid Act of 1961, US foreign aid policy and US foreign policy have entered a new stage of development.

There is a peculiar phenomenon in the development of US foreign aid policy: it is almost a wave every ten years, and every decade has a new theme.

I. Post-war period: Fighting for strategic space

The first wave of U.S. foreign aid began at the end of World War II. The main symbols were the aid to the Greek Civil War in 1946, the Marshall Plan in 1947, and Truman's "Fourth Point Plan" in 1949. The "Western Hemisphere Strategy" in an era of dramatic changes.

The aid to the Greek Civil War was a turning point in the history of US foreign aid. In the 19th century, American politics was mainly domestic politics. During the historical period of natural disasters in Ireland in 1845 and famine in Russia in 1881, some people in the United States proposed the US government to provide assistance, but they suffered from the US Congress for "unconstitutional" reasons. Refuse. The two world wars changed the political concept of the United States, and gradually brought the United States out of isolationist public opinion. Not only did it launch its aid program to Latin America, but it also provided strategic aid to the communist Soviet Union during the two world wars.

After the end of World War II, President Roosevelt's "great idea" on economic and political cooperation between the United States and the Soviet Union came to naught, and the West began to snatch strategic ground with the new adversary of the Soviet Union worldwide. American strategists then proposed Strategic ideas for solidifying the "Western Hemisphere". When the United Kingdom informed the United States that it was unable to maintain its economic and security commitments to Greece and Turkey and the Soviet Union was likely to go south to the Mediterranean, the United States immediately replaced the United Kingdom and began a large-scale aid program for the Greek and Turkish governments, blocking them. The revolutionary movement there strangled the Western strategic front lines of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. Truman described the Greek Civil War as "a continuation of the struggle between democracy and autocracy" and asked Congress not only to assist Greece and Turkey, but also to try to prevent the Soviet Union from continuing its expansion. Through aid to Greece and Turkey, the United States sent a clear signal to the Soviet Union: The United States interfered in world affairs, and the Soviet Union was not allowed to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere.

The Marshall Plan to aid European reconstruction embodies the same strategic thinking. Official US documents state bluntly that the two basic functions of the Marshall Plan are: first, to help rebuild European countries damaged by war; second, to curb the expansion of communism in Europe. Another indirect purpose is to serve the integration of Western Europe and help American products occupy the Western European market. The presence of American products and influences in Europe are part of the American Western Hemisphere strategy.

US strategic assistance is not limited to competing in Europe and the Soviet Union, but also includes fighting for territory with the Soviet Union in East Asia, South Asia, and the rest of the world. In the surrounding areas of the Soviet Union and China, the United States aided the faltering Chiang Kai-shek clique, the North Korean Lee Seung Wan authorities, and the Vietnamese puppet government. Even the US government itself acknowledges that these aid programs are not a just act, but merely help American "friends" to occupy more places for American forces.

Truman's "Fourth Point Plan" in 1949 is often seen as a milestone in US foreign aid. On January 20, 1949, Truman stated in his State of the Union Address that the purpose of the "Fourth Plan" is to provide developing countries with financial transfer and knowledge and technology. It is special assistance for agriculture, health, education, and hunger relief. "Use our scientific progress and the benefits of industrial development to promote the improvement and development of underdeveloped regions." This marks the first time that the United States has proposed long-term policies and strategies for development issues, and it is also the first time to distinguish economic assistance. And military assistance, although at the time, development and military assistance served the same strategic objective.

When the "Fourth Point Plan" was just put forward, there were still some different opinions in the United States. Republicans, in particular, believe that private enterprises should be used to invest directly in developing countries to bridge the knowledge gap between the West and developing countries, and that government forces should not be used to organize technical assistance projects. But in 1952, the curtain of the Cold War began to open, and the air in the entire foreign aid field also cooled. With the establishment of the two major military camps, the "Marshall Plan" also began to emphasize the content of the United States to help its allies increase the necessary military strength and build collective defense capabilities as soon as possible. The U.S. government has told Congress that the United States could throw Asia and the Middle East to the Soviet Union. This statement has become the main selling point of foreign aid policy. The United States Common Security Act of 1951 was soon passed. Economic and military assistance were recombined, and the Technical Cooperation Agency was subsequently assigned to the Common Security Agency. The United States has also stepped up aid to India, Pakistan and Iran. In 1952, the United States transferred a large amount of funds through bilateral assistance as a supplement to past small-scale technical exchanges. While the United States bilateral aid focused on strategic significance, the World Bank shifted from supporting development in Europe to providing development assistance to Latin America, the Middle East, and South Asia, and began to shift from industrial production to development in the areas of food, education, and health. Truman's "promoting the improvement and development of underdeveloped regions" has thus become the goal of curbing the development of communism in developing countries. Economic aid is just another strategic tool different from military aid.

Although there have been discussions among American economics and political scholars on whether developed countries can benefit from the economic development of less developed countries and how economic assistance should be provided, by the late 1950s and early 1960s, The anti-communist outlook on security has the upper hand in foreign aid policy. This is of course related to the Korean War. The entire US public opinion community tends to regard US military assistance as a security tool, as a means of ensuring short-term and long-term security in changing international relations, and to help recipient countries achieve peace. On the other hand, the rapid development of the Soviet Union poses a serious and real challenge to the world status of the United States: In 1953, the Soviet Union joined the ranks of technical assistance providers of the United Nations external agencies. By 1956, it had replaced the United States and the World Bank as Egypt's Aiders for Swan Dam construction. Competition between the United States and the Soviet Union in foreign aid has grown from Central and Eastern Europe to Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia. As a result, from the "Fourth Plan" of 1949 to the Foreign Aid Act of 1961, security motives dominated US aid policy discussions.

The 1960s: Institutionalization of foreign aid

History enters the 1960s, an iron curtain dividing the east and west has been formed, and the two major political camps are under severe barriers. The Soviet Union was building its economy at an alarming rate, and some former colonial countries in Africa have declared independence. Some countries have joined the socialist movement under the influence of the booming socialist development trend, which has made the Western world, especially the United States, feel communism. Challenges in beliefs and institutions. The missile crisis in Cuba has given the United States a sense of crisis in the backyard.

In this world situation, one of the magic weapons that President Kennedy used to stabilize the Western position and compete peacefully with Moscow is foreign aid. In 1961, the second year Kennedy was elected president, in a speech to the White House to entertain MPs and diplomatic envoys from Latin America, he called on the Western Hemisphere to form a new progressive alliance to meet people's needs for housing, work, Basic needs of the school. In the same year, the United States passed the Foreign Aid Act. The bill authorizes the President to establish the National Development Agency in place of the International Cooperation Agency. This bill became the main legal basis for US foreign aid policy in the years that followed. The Foreign Aid Act establishes the 150th federal budget account, which specifically provides funding for bilateral and multilateral financial and economic assistance, military assistance, and information and cultural exchange. To reduce the Cold War, funding was provided for such assistance, military assistance, and information and cultural exchange. In order to reduce the cold war and give this aid a moral correctness, Kennedy also specifically explained that the United States provided foreign aid to the world's poor countries "not because the Soviet Union also provided foreign aid, but because it was right to do so."

In the year the Foreign Aid Act was passed, the Kennedy Administration established a "Peace Corps" to maintain peace and strengthen friendship in developing countries, and established a "Progressive Alliance" with Latin American countries to promote "land reform" in Latin America. "To offset the impact of international communism and socialist thinking in Latin America through economic assistance and the promotion of social reforms. Kennedy also managed to turn Eisenhower's Cold War aid into development aid, working to expand the impact of the capitalist system in the vast developing world, producing a "trickle down" effect. During the Kennedy administration, US aid allocations have more than quadrupled each year.

The early 1960s were a period of rapid development of western welfare states, and also a period of rapid development of foreign aid. The role of government intervention has been widely acknowledged, and even liberals like Montgomery believe that "free idealism should be regarded as good politics." In the 1960s, most Americans were not particularly rich, but in the political atmosphere of the time, many people were able to actively donate for foreign aid. A Democratic congressman said, "The government is doing more than the model provided by the church. The money spent abroad is not only for missionary purposes, but also for healing, literacy, and many things that can extend life." Even church members seem to agree with this judgment. The chairman of the Christian Council Christian Society Action Committee testified at a congressional hearing that his organization fully supports the government's long-term foreign aid program.

This enthusiastic support of the American government for the United States government has enabled the United States to advance in many regions of the world through foreign aid. The assistance provided by the United States to Africa is a typical example. After the early 1960s, European colonialism withdrew from Africa, leaving a political vacuum there, and some countries (such as Zaire and Ghana) began to turn to socialism and sought assistance from the Soviet Union. To ensure that Africa would not fall to the Soviet Union in its entirety, the CIA of the United States participated in the assassination of Lumumba and has long supported Mobutu's dictatorship through foreign aid allocations. After the Soviet Union gradually withdrew since 1967, US aid to Africa showed a sharp decline.

Also in the 1960s, Western European countries that had resumed economic development began to join the camp of donors. Aid funds have started to flow to developing countries. The establishment of the OECD Development Assistance Committee has played a certain role in restricting bilateral military assistance, strengthening development assistance to developing countries, and communicating information and experiences among aid countries. For the first time, US foreign aid policy has been monitored and reviewed by international organizations. This institutionalized trend reached an important stage in the late 1960s. In 1969, the World Bank appointed an assessment team headed by former Canadian Prime Minister Lester Pearson to comprehensively review foreign aid policies, thereby forming a "Pearson Report" that marked the concept of mainstream foreign aid in the West. The report recommended:

1. Eliminate export obstacles to less developed countries and promote conditions conducive to foreign direct investment;

2. Provide developing countries with foreign aid equivalent to 0.7% of the gross national product of developed countries and maintain an annual growth rate of 6% for less developed countries;

3. Rearrange technical assistance to agriculture, education and population growth;

4. Strengthen and expand the multilateral assistance system through international organizations.

From the perspective of the United States, the high-funded foreign aid and international interventionist policies of the Kennedy Administration era not only failed to win the United States a good international image, but also plunged the United States into many contradictions in many regions of the world. As the United States became more deeply involved in the Vietnam War, the stinking eggs of the US President and anti-war sentiments in the United States rose one after another. Under such circumstances, the newly-appointed President Nixon began to adopt strategies to alleviate the conflict between the East and the West, and held serious negotiations with the Soviet Union on some key issues in an attempt to soften the behavior of the Soviet Union. On foreign aid, President Nixon expressed the hope that developing countries will play a greater role in determining their own development strategies. In 1969, Nixon appointed a team headed by Bank of America President Rudolf Peterson to conduct a comprehensive review of the US foreign aid system. This motion echoes the efforts of the World Bank.

Also in 1969, the International Labour Organization launched the World Employment Project, with the slogan "Improving the quality of life of the poor and providing employment opportunities". In 1970, the OECD set up a task force to investigate the employment of less developed countries. Subsequently, the United Nations participated in this work, which eventually led to the World Bank's involvement in the entire trend in 1973, and the International Development Organization formed in the 1970s A cooperating mainstream force. Although the formation of this mainstream force has a lot of influence in the United States, it has also formed a certain constraint on the US foreign aid policy.

The 1970s: a new direction for U.S. foreign aid

The Peterson report of 1970 stated that the United States should redesign its foreign aid policy so that developing China can set up its own limited goals. The United States should provide corresponding assistance based on the efforts of developing countries, and should strictly separate development and military assistance. , Expand the use of private sector resources, promote public participation, promote multilateral credit institutions to become the main channel for development assistance, stop the decline in official development assistance in the United States, and so on. In September 1970, Nixon submitted a bill to Congress on reforming the foreign aid program based on the Peterson report. The following year, two draft laws were passed to Congress: the National Development and Humanitarian Assistance Act and the International Security Assistance Act. But was rejected by Congress.

The 1970s was a troubled event in the Western world. The depreciation of the US dollar and the protracted Vietnam War shook the confidence of western countries in the capitalist system. The oil crisis in the Middle East in the 1970s only worsened the US economy. As early as May 1969, Nixon claimed in a congressional speech that he himself supported economic, military, and technical assistance because these assistance programs could serve the three purposes of security, market expansion, and favor for the United States. Nixon also proposed three initiatives: 1) the establishment of a semi-private institution (named Overseas Private Investment Corporation) to expand private enterprises, 2) strengthened support for the International Development Bank and increased support for UN technical assistance projects, 3 ) Expand US technical assistance. But in the 1970s, in the vast number of developing countries and regions, hunger spread, food shortages, and frequent wars, the American people began to defy the methods and methods of US development assistance, and the US Congress was particularly impatient. Lawmakers have questioned the ability of US foreign aid to improve welfare quickly among the poorest countries and the poorest. Internal and external pressures led to changes in the US Congress's Foreign Aid Act of 1973.

In 1973, Nixon's bill on foreign aid to Congress again included a new chapter. This chapter demonstrates the political and economic interests of the United States in the developing world, and emphasizes that development work is not only closely related to humanitarian needs, but also to the stability of developing countries and regions. The United States can exchange the energy and raw materials that the United States needs by providing the developing world with the machines and products they sorely need. This bill emphasizes not the role of private enterprises, but how to improve the implementation of foreign aid projects, and proposes to focus bilateral assistance in areas such as health, education, agriculture and family planning, so that developing countries can increase their participation in their own Development work, and the United States should better cooperate with other donor countries and provide substantive help to multilateral aid agencies. Obviously, under the shadow of the worldwide economic recession, it is not a good time to promote the economic liberalism that the Republicans have always advocated.

During the Nixon administration, there were two new slogans for foreign aid. One was to propose foreign aid for human rights, and the other was to emphasize multilateral assistance. In 1973, congressional organizations summarized the general trend of development assistance and proposed: 1. Development assistance is beneficial to the national interests of the United States.

2. Economic development is a good thing in its own right, and it is worthwhile for the United States to invest in this development process.

3. Multilateral assistance has a lower interest orientation than bilateral assistance, so it should play a greater role in development.

4. Trade policies should play a greater role, and barriers to market access for developing country products should be reduced.

5. Private investment should play a greater role in development,

6 Developing countries must play a greater role in developing their own plans and must be accountable for the consequences,

7 The requirements regarding social justice (that is, ensuring that public participation in decision-making and development work benefits those in need) should be taken seriously,

8. Security assistance should be implemented separately from development assistance.

Based on this conclusion, Congress proposed that the US foreign development assistance policy should undergo a comprehensive adjustment, and this adjustment requirement was later referred to as a new direction in the government. This new direction is often referred to as basic human needs. The new direction calls for the division of economic assistance into five budget areas: food and nutrition, family planning and health, education and human resource development, selective development projects, and selected countries and organizations. This direction is completely different from the way of foreign aid in the 1960s, which dilutes the strategic color. The United States Agency for International Development strives to centralize foreign aid in agriculture, rural development, and food production in the course of executing projects. At the same time, it emphasizes nutrition, population control, health services, and low-cost education. This orientation was further strengthened in the Foreign Aid Act of 1974.

The new direction has led to domestic concerns about human development and has evolved into a focus on basic human rights in the United States Congress. By the time Carter became president of the United States in 1976, multilateral development and human needs had become fashionable. This fashion is very close to Carter's own value orientation, so he soon accepted the principle of basic human needs of foreign aid, and on this basis demanded the reconstruction of the moral goal of American foreign aid. In terms of methods, more emphasis is placed on stabilizing the economy and adjusting the political structure, relying more on multilateral organizations, paying more attention to social equality and protecting the environment, and treating human rights as religious beliefs. These practices have been criticized by the United States Congress, where Republican lawmakers have accused the government of bypassing Congressional oversight and conducting fiscal transfers through opaque multilateral organizations. This opposition to the role of government continued to develop and became the soil for the "Reagan economics" of the 1980s.

The 1980s: the free market economy

Reagan and his think tanks believe that the magic of the market can replace government intervention. So when Reagan became president of the United States in 1980, he began to promote a major turning point in the policies of the US government: on the one hand, reducing the welfare state, and on the other hand, reducing foreign aid. The United States wrote in a 1985 memorandum to the OECD Development Assistance Committee: "The United States believes that a policy environment that stimulates the private sector, strengthens local institutions, and adapts technology to the poor can successfully address basic human needs. The most effective way. "

In fact, before Reagan came to power, he had planned a major adjustment in foreign aid policy. Reagan's main think tank, a traditional foundation, advocated that attention should be paid to bilateral aid that better reflects the economic interests and diplomatic goals of the United States, because this can clearly divide the boundaries of American friends. The Reagan Administration's Secretary of State Schultz said: "Our economic assistance program is a key tool of our foreign policy and is directly linked to the national security and economic prosperity of the United States." Thus, in the era of the Reagan administration, multilateralism Aid was hit in the cold.

The Reagan administration changed the new direction that began with the Nixon administration, abandoned the Carter administration s humanitarian preaching, and proposed four pillars, or four tools, of foreign aid:

1. Conduct a political dialogue with the recipient countries on reform issues and seek agreement with the recipient governments on development policies and reform measures;

2. Construction of investment institutions and large-scale development of human resources adapted to the free market economy, and the distribution of rights to private enterprises and volunteer organizations that can promote economic growth, rather than public institutions;

3. Support research and development and transfer of modern technology, especially technological breakthroughs in the fields of biomedicine, agriculture and population control;

4. Develop the private sector and market forces so that they can play a role in solving development problems. For example, relying on commercial credit instead of aid to develop developing countries like India and China.

The four pillars boil down to one core: reducing government and strengthening private enterprises and markets. However, the reduction of the role of the government is not comprehensive. For example, the Reagan administration used a large amount of foreign aid funds to strengthen the military and political structures of the allies, and military aid was again valued. The proportion of military assistance and economic assistance has changed significantly. Foreign military sales (FMS) increased by 200%, military assistance programs (MAP) increased by 600%, and economic support funds increased by 82%. Economic assistance from non-economic support funds fell by 8%, mainly due to the huge reduction in multilateral commitments. Multilateral aid organizations have become abandoned by US policy, and the United States multilateral official development assistance declined from 44% in 1980 to 27% in 1986. Military assistance was mainly provided to Egypt and Israel, and aid was mainly used for communication and training, because Reagan believed that the unstable situation in the Middle East was conducive to the Soviet Union, especially after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, so it increased its support for Egypt, Israel, Turkey and Pakistan's assistance in order to geographically stop the Soviets from going south and guarantee the US's supremacy in the local area.

In addition to these four pillars, the US foreign aid policy of the 1980s has five major priorities, namely:

1. Peace plan for the Middle East, Israel and Egypt. The program received more than 40% of total US foreign aid allocations.

2. Maintain military bases that are vital to US security. About one-fifth of the aid is provided for this reason, with recipient countries including Spain, Portugal, Greece, Turkey and the Philippines.

3. Support for allies facing the Soviet Union or the Communist camp, such as South Korea, Thailand and Pakistan, received about 1/12 of aid allocations.

4. Promote economic development and alleviate human suffering, mainly for aid to Africa.

5. Help to establish democracy in the Central American allies.

Therefore, the Reagan Administration's foreign aid policy is not to weaken, but to strengthen the political connotation of foreign aid. However, the political orientation of this foreign aid is strategic, and the method is to develop the capitalist system by mobilizing the enthusiasm of individuals and promoting economic liberalism. In order to compete with the opposing socialist system.

In addition to a clear political orientation, the Reagan administration also emphasized that the foreign aid policy must establish an "uninterrupted channel of industrial and defense strategic raw materials" and insisted on "constructive integration" of some recipient governments for the United States' National interest services have once again become the focus of foreign aid.

In the 1980s, many foreign aid agencies in the United States regarded the promotion of local and foreign private sectors as a key condition for measuring the success of development cooperation. The Reagan Administration's foreign aid system even established a private enterprise office specifically, with research on how to privatize public companies as a central task. In terms of specific assistance to recipient countries, there are even provisions for at least two privatization projects each year. The United States has invested $ 24 million in this four-year privatization package.

In the 1980s, American foreign aids not only emphasized linking with the free market economy and promoting private enterprises, but also helped American companies invest and develop overseas. In this regard, the United States' foreign aid focuses on the traditional areas of strength of the United States, such as nutrition, agriculture, energy, health, and human resources. The US Agency for International Development spends about $ 250 million annually on technology transfer projects, mostly in agriculture (pest and disease control, farming technology) and health (reducing infant mortality). USAID supports training centers, research institutes, cooperatives, a large number of government organizations, and other organizations in these tasks.

V. 90s: global strategy and political conditions

In the early 1990s, the world pattern changed suddenly. With the end of the Cold War, the disintegration of the Soviet Union, a line drawn by the Cold War, and all strategic relations and foreign policies confronting the Soviet Union need to be readjusted, including the US foreign aid policy.

The first thing that the US foreign aid policy lost after the Cold War was the political premise: it no longer needed to compete with the Soviet camp for poor friends, so foreign aid to Africa was first reduced, especially those provided for strategic purposes. Bilateral aid to Pakistan, Morocco and other countries has plummeted, and Zaire has quietly disappeared from the list of US military aid.

At the same time, there is a debate in the US Congress on foreign aid policies. The members of Congress who advocate reducing foreign aid are from the Democratic and Republican parties. Most of them have expressed dissatisfaction with the recession and actively advocated to reduce the government's fiscal deficit. The atmosphere of "peace dividend" permeated the American political air in the early 1990s, making foreign aid an unpopular topic. The Bush administration s 3 trillion national debt and 218.5 billion fiscal budget have made Bush unable to rightfully propose a new foreign aid policy. Of course, US assistance to the Middle East has not been fundamentally affected. In addition to the confrontation with the Soviet Union, the Jewish community in the United States has enough power to force the United States to maintain a strong presence.

U.S. foreign aid appeared to have generalized interests in the 1990s. Many foreign interest groups were active inside and outside Capitol Hill. Polish-American pressure groups continued to grow. The Balkan turmoil caused the United States to invest 500 million US dollars in aid. Bosnia and Herzegovina.