One year ago, the U.S. Agency for International Development was dismantled, and numerous global programs, including essential humanitarian aid, were halted. This significant change highlights a troubling trend. Donor countries such as the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany reduced aid budgets by a notable 23 percent, or $40 billion, last year. These reductions may have serious consequences, with predictions of over 9.4 million preventable deaths by 2030.
Foreign aid remains a crucial U.S. foreign policy tool. As the head of the World Food Program and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, we witnessed how effective U.S. assistance can prevent disease outbreaks, provide food, and rescue individuals affected by disasters or conflicts. Aid not only keeps Americans safe and strengthens global leadership but also creates jobs and new trade relations. Additionally, it saves taxpayers money.
Despite the benefits, significant realities cannot be ignored. The drastic cuts to America’s aid budget and the dissolution of USAID reveal shortcomings in the foreign assistance system. To preserve this instrument of foreign policy, we must make strategic decisions about funding. Aid money should target causes that clearly promote U.S. interests and garner public support. Identifying new, efficient methods of delivering aid that support self-sufficiency is crucial.
Revitalizing bipartisanship around foreign assistance is necessary. This should be embedded in programs as a key element of assessment alongside effectiveness and accountability. Through rigorous prioritization of American interests, efficient delivery, and public support, we can reinforce this national security tool on a robust foundation for the future.
While foreign aid faces political challenges in Washington, public opinion across America differs. A recent poll by Echelon Insights, supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, shows that 54 percent of people across political affiliations favor foreign aid. Eight in ten believe reform and strengthening, rather than elimination, is the way forward.
Support increases significantly when specific aid programs are highlighted. Humanitarian relief and preventing disease outbreaks have backing from 90 percent of respondents. Similarly, addressing global health and economic development garners support of 84 percent and 81 percent, respectively. Americans’ enduring commitment to international assistance is motivating, and it propels our dedication to this cause.
We have agreed to co-chair a bipartisan Commission on the Future of Foreign Assistance. This commission will introduce policies to overcome partisan opposition and fundamentally reform foreign aid. Comprising former Congress members and senior officials with decades of experience, the commission will be supported by think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution. We aim to engage Americans and international leaders to gather input and devise effective strategies.
The analysis will expose past program failures and examine why foreign aid faced such harsh budget cuts. For too long, explanations for aid were vague. A more defined link to national interests is necessary. As President Ronald Reagan once said, “any retreat from our responsibilities endangers both our ideals and interests.” We must implement innovative ideas to support development and provide urgent relief, safeguarding Americans and national security.
Despite the challenges ahead, we trust in American creativity and determination. As retired General James Mattis remarked, “If you don’t fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition.” Creativity, honesty, broad support, and political will are paramount, and this commission is poised to harness these resources effectively. American innovation and optimism will be crucial to our success.
David Beasley is a former governor of South Carolina who recently served as the executive director of the World Food Program. Ben Cardin is a former senator from Maryland who served as the chair of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Leave a Reply