James Politi’s piece (Report, February 14) on the US Senate approval of a $95bn security bill emphasises a critical issue. The “deepening rift” now present, not only among Republican senators, but also among lawmakers in the House of Representatives highlights the current stalemate of America’s leadership when it comes to global affairs and raises questions about its ability to promote stability worldwide.
The battle over foreign aid seems to be a recurring issue, as over the past 50 years the portion of funds allocated to the international affairs budget has hovered around a mere 4 per cent of total discretionary spending (funds that are subject to annual approval by Congress).
This budget proportion sustains American diplomacy initiatives, funds the State Department, and supports the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Peace Corps.
The Biden administration’s ambitious budget for this fiscal year aimed to bolster global aid, but future allocations may shift, especially given Republican pledges to reduce government spending and the tightening grip of Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda within the Republican party.
In a period marked by severe geopolitical volatility, foreign aid stands as a backbone for stability. And amid all the rhetoric around the need for fiscal restraint, it’s imperative to recognise the dividends that adequately funding the foreign aid budget yields. For foreign aid enhances America’s ability to use its soft power and is pivotal in navigating complex humanitarian challenges.
US assistance has had a remarkable record of achieving global development outcomes. Just think of the Marshall Plan and how it helped shape postwar western Europe, strengthening America’s ties with those countries.
Investing in foreign aid and international relations through adequate funding is therefore not just prudent but essential for safeguarding America’s interests and global stability.
Giovanni Coeli
Padua, Veneto, Italy
