The year 2009 has ushered in a new executive administration in the United States, and with it a rejuvenation of all administrative bodies of government at the federal level. Such a rejuvenation is exactly what the US foreign assistance system needs. There are a lot of important questions to be answered about the future of how the US manages its foreign aid, among them:

 

• What role will the Department of Defense play in foreign assistance in the years to come? Particularly, how will AFRICOM evolve?
• Will we see greater centralization of foreign assistance programs (e.g. rolling MCC and PEPFAR into USAID)?
• What will happen to State/f? Will it be strengthened? Or will USAID regain its autonomy as the ultimate agency of foreign aid?
• And most importantly, what priority will the Obama Administration give to foreign assistance? Can we expect sweeping reforms? A cabinet-level position?

 

 

Granted, the President has a lot on his plate right now with the worldwide economic recession and his domestic development agenda. But his Kenyan roots, his JFK-esque idealism, and his service on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (which has had many hearings on foreign assistance reform of which both then-Senator Obama and then-Senator Biden were privy to) all give a shimmer of “hope” that foreign assistance reform will not stray far from the top of the President’s agenda.

 

Based on the President’s actions to-date, as well as the people he has surrounded himself with and all of their rhetoric, we can surmise a few expected answers to the aforementioned questions.

 

The Role of DOD in Foreign Assistance

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has been a long proponent of the separation of military and international development. Here are some quotes:

 

“The Department of Defense has taken on many of (the) burdens that might have been assumed by civilian agencies in the past. … [F]orced by circumstances, our brave men and women in uniform have stepped up to the task, with field artillerymen and tankers building schools and mentoring city councils – usually in a language they don’t speak. … But it is no replacement for the real thing – civilian involvement and expertise.”

-Robert Gates – Nov. 26, 2007 – Kansas State University

 

“My hope is that one consequence of my speaking out on this issue will create a more favorable climate here on the hill for approval of this increase in the capabilities of the Department of State.  Same way with the Agency for International Development.”

-Robert Gates – Feb. 6, 2008 – Testimony Before the House Armed Services Committee

 

“And I think the more that we have seen military personnel pressed into service to carry out tasks that they recognize are better performed by civilian experts — even though our folks do a good job of it — they would be the first to admit that when the real experts come in, it’s a huge force multiplier.”

-Robert Gates – April 15, 2008 – Testimony Before the House Armed Services Committee

 

With respect to AFRICOM, Secretary Gates has admitted there has been failure in the public image of the rollout effort, and that AFRICOM is something he treads lightly on.

 

“…I see it focused more on things like peacekeeping, on professionalizing the military, on improving their own indigenous capabilities, the relationships between the military and civilians in a democracy. There may be some areas of humanitarian assistance, whether it’s the equivalent of what we did after the tsunami or after the Pakistani earthquake or what we’re trying to do with Burma, there are going to be situations where the military is going to be the first in and have to deal with problems initially and where they then should be replaced by civilians with the expertise in dealing with the humanitarian disasters and so on where we are the ones that really only have the capability.”

-Comments by Secretary Gates at American Academy of Diplomacy on May 14, 2008

 

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made similar comments about transitioning DOD development assistance programs back to the State Department and USAID. She said during her mid-January confirmation hearing before the Senate Arms Committee, “When a young Army captain gets cash to go build a school, that’s foreign aid. That’s not war fighting.”

 

Based on this, as well as President Obama’s own calls for a stronger civilian “national security” force (eg. foreign service officers), we can expect that there will be a decisive shift of power from DOD to State with respect to foreign assistance.

 

The Organizational Hierarchy of Foreign Assistance: MCC, PEPFAR, USAID, State/f, et al

This is really the million (or in this case multi-billion) dollar question. There are many that argue that Secretary of State Clinton will not be willing to cede foreign assistance funding from the State Department’s budget. (FYI: USAID is currently under a division of the State Department called State/f). Secretary Clinton made a stop at USAID on January 23^rd 2009, stating in her remarks, “I believe in development, and I believe with all my heart that it truly is an equal partner, along with defense and diplomacy, in the furtherance of America’s national security.” This hints toward the idea that USAID should be an equal partner at the table along with State and Defense, right? Well, as she continues her remarks, Sec. Clinton continues to allude to the subservient position of USAID under State. She briefly notes the callings for organizational reform, but does not provide anything in terms of what to expect. (UPDATE: In earlier remarks upon her arrival at the State Department, Clinton said, ”There are three legs to the stool of American foreign policy: defense, diplomacy, and development. And we are responsible for two of the three legs.” Does this contradict what she told USAID? And does this mean that State will retain authority over USAID?)

 

 

There has been very little publically said about organizational reform among Administration officials since the election. For some insight, we can look to remarks and commitments made during the campaign. A “Fact Sheet” on Foreign Policy, Democratization, and Development from the Obama campaign site states:

 

Barack Obama and Joe Biden have called for the creation of a civilian assistance corps, and they will reform the infrastructure that manages U.S. foreign assistance. Today, what we call “foreign aid” is spread across 25 government agencies, programs, and initiatives, with too little of our taxpayers’ resources getting to the problem and no single person within our government responsible for directing and managing what should be one of our most powerful foreign policy tools.

 

From this we can expect greater centralization of foreign assistance agencies/programs/initiatives with one “single person…responsible for directing and managing” the foreign aid apparatus.

 

The Center for US Global Engagement released a series of recommendations for the new President (as many think-tanks do) regarding first-step policy changes in foreign assistance. One includes the creation of an independent US development agency. Here is their recommendation:

 

Explore Creation of Independent U.S. Development Agency. The goal should be a capable, independent development agency that best consolidates programs, enhances policy and operational coherence, and increases the efficiency and effectiveness of our foreign assistance investments. Options include an independent, Cabinet-level agency, such as the UK Department for International Development; a new, independent non-Cabinet agency, such as the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) or Ex-Im Bank; or a sub-Cabinet agency, along the lines of a modernized, empowered USAID.

 

This raises questions about the possibility of a new international aid agency, but I think a revamped and modernized (and empowered) USAID is the most likely of the options. On January 28^th 2009, President Obama appointed Alonzo Fulgham as “Acting Administrator” of USAID. The appointment raises some curious questions about what is to come. Why not nominate a full-on Administrator unless an organizational overhaul is in the air?

 

 

What Priority Will Foreign Assistance Get under Obama Administration?

There are interesting dynamics at play leaning in the favor of high priority foreign assistance programming, funding, and reform. First is the President’s family heritage in Nairobi, Kenya. His position and status today is entirely due to benevolence of US foreign assistance – in particular, President Kennedy’s airlift program that allowed the current President’s father to leave Kenya and be educated in the United States. President Kennedy is a hero of Obama’s and there are pictures of him in the Obama’s Chicago household. Furthermore, Obama spent part of his life living in Indonesia – a very poor country plagued with corruption and poverty.

 

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is surely to some degree influenced by the work of her husband’s Clinton Global Initiative. It will be interesting to see what role that plays out in the coming months and years.

 

Emphasis on foreign aid and foreign aid reform during the campaign was high, but since election night very little has been said. In fact, at the date of this publication there is nothing on the White House website about African policy or development policy aside from a (small) reiteration of campaign promises to double foreign aid, cutting extreme poverty and hunger around the world in half by 2015, and increasing US diplomatic presence around the world (oh and Mexico City Policy, of course).

 

There is much to see with respect to foreign assistance reform and reorganization in the coming years. There is very high potential for some drastic changes that could be for the betterment of how the US executes foreign aid and approaches international development. I do believe, though, that if these reforms are to take place, it must be within the next year. The President needs to arrange his “house” in order to execute his mission. If we wait too long, the earlier mentioned winds of “rejuvenation” will have passed and any organizational reform will be messy. “Hope for Change”.