National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council
NJCRAC Joint Program Plan 1994-1995

Guide to Program Planning Of the Constituent Organizations

Foreign Aid

Changing Conditions

While the United States and other western powers face enormous challenges around the globe in securing international assistance for emerging democracies and providing for sustainable development and humanitarian aid to the neediest nations, the foreign aid budget for fiscal year 1994 is $12.9 billion, the lowest figure in over a decade. Declining levels of humanitarian and developmental assistance have led a broad array of human rights, religious, environmental, humanitarian and developmental organizations, as well as some members of Congress, to advocate reforms in the foreign aid program, including a transfer of U.S. aid for military and security assistance to humanitarian and development aid programs.

Background

In its unique position as the only remaining superpower, the U.S. faces numerous challenges and responsibilities around the globe. As nations throughout the world emerge from conflict and struggle to achieve sustainable development and to build democratic institutions, the U.S. has numerous opportunities and obligations to assert leadership within the international community; to ensure that the fragile democratic structures of emerging democracies do not crumble under the weight of religious, ethnic, ideological and economic strife; to support existing democracies, including Israel, that still face both external and internal threats to their security and well-being; and to provide assistance for sustainable development initiatives throughout the developing world, helping to guarantee that these often desperately needy nations are able to embark on their own paths toward democracy, stability and prosperity.

In September 1993, the Congress approved a foreign aid budget for fiscal year 1994 of $12.9 billion, the lowest figure in over a decade. The shrinking U.S. foreign aid budget has led to cuts in humanitarian and developmental aid around the globe and has had an even greater impact on military and economic support funds which have been reduced by 30 percent in the last two years. This erosion in the foreign assistance program weakens the ability of the U.S. to meet its foreign policy goals and to play a leadership role in this area within the international community.

The Clinton Administration is proposing a major overhaul of the foreign aid program, the structure of which has remained unchanged for more than 30 years. Its principal objective is to create a system of foreign aid distribution based on broad policy goals, including promoting peace, stimulating sustainable economic development and helping emerging democracies. While the reform proposal includes goals and values shared by the Jewish community, it nevertheless has generated concerns. These include an increase in executive branch discretion over how the appropriated funds are distributed and the fate of many pro-Israel provisions that heretofore Congress had written into the foreign aid package. In addition, the Administration's placement of aid to Israel solely in the category of promoting peace may not adequately address all of the dimensions of the U.S.-Israel partnership that are advanced through this country's foreign aid program. (See section on U.S.-Israel Relations). The field will be addressing these concerns with the Administration and Congress as consideration of the reform proposal proceeds.

The decline in U.S. foreign assistance also has led a broad array of religious, human rights, environmental, humanitarian and developmental organizations, as well as a number of Members of Congress, to advocate a restructuring of the U.S. foreign aid program. These individuals and groups assert that during the cold war U.S. foreign aid was channeled primarily into security and military assistance. They further argue that with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, this form of aid is no longer as critical, and U.S. foreign assistance should be redirected toward the promotion of sustainable development throughout the world. Taking into account the declining U.S. foreign aid budget, some argue that the most politically feasible way to increase humanitarian and developmental assistance is by transferring aid from the military and security components of the aid package to the development components.

However, such a move is likely to create pressure to reduce the current levels of U.S. assistance to Israel, the preservation of which remains an important U.S. national interest. It is not widely known that more than one-third of Israel's aid immediately returns to the U.S. in the form of loan payments. The peace process may obscure the fact that Israel, an important strategic ally that shares this nation's commitment to democracy and free market economies, continues to face serious security threats from heavily-armed extremist regimes in the region. In addition, the calculated risks Israel may choose to take in order to advance the peace process in some ways may add to Israel's defense burden. Security assistance remains a vital part of the foreign aid program not only because of U.S. national interests in the Middle East, but also in response to various post cold war challenges facing this country in other parts of the world.

The only way to ensure that all of America's pressing responsibilities are met, whether responding to strategic challenges, supporting existing democracies, assisting emerging ones, or funding sustainable development initiatives around the world, is by building greater American public understanding about the importance of a strong U.S. foreign aid program. It is imperative that the public be provided with information concerning the moral, strategic, and political value of U.S. foreign assistance. In addition, a number of traditional coalition partners of the Jewish community have been forging alliances to advocate more humanitarian aid to famine-stricken sub-Saharan Africa and other poor regions, and for assisting emerging democracies throughout the world. The field has intensified its cooperative work with these partners in order to seek ways to address those priority concerns that are shared by the Jewish community. The goal of the field's own efforts and its coalitional activity is to create political conditions that over time can lead to an expansion of the U.S. foreign aid program. Such an expansion would eliminate pressures to have foreign aid discussions focus on the transfer of assistance from one vital area to another.

Priority Strategic Goals

The Jewish community relations field should

• increase efforts to educate the American Jewish community, and the American public in general, about the importance of U.S. foreign aid and its moral, political and strategic value throughout the world;
  

• take the lead in forming alliances with religious, ethnic, environmental, humanitarian, and other groups concerned with U.S. foreign assistance, with the goal of building wider support for an increase over time in the total funds appropriated for foreign aid;
  
  
• continue to support current levels of U.S. assistance to Israel and interpret to policy-makers, groups concerned with foreign aid and the American public the continuing security risks facing Israel as well as the shared global vision of these two democratic allies;
  
  
• work with the Clinton Administration and the Congress in advancing foreign aid reforms that are responsive to the goals and values of the Jewish community as well as its concerns, particularly regarding maintaining important provisions affecting assistance to Israel.