U.S. Must Increase Foreign Aid to Win Over Hearts and Minds
Why does the United States endure the wrath terrorist forces like Al Qaeda?
Various reasons have been presented, from unjust wars and invasions to suspicious alliances. However the most obvious reason eludes us. The United States has the most and gives the least, and when they do rarely are their no strings attached. Were the United States to increase it’s global humanitarian aid spending, attempting to reduce world poverty, this would lead to a dramatic favorable attitude towards the United States and would halt terrorism drastically. Many terrorists who are recruited by organizations like Al Qaeda are easily susceptible to extremist ideology, citing the United States’ materialistic culture which poses a threat to Islamic countries in the eyes of the terrorists. Materialism and lust for wealth are two fundamental sins in Islam and are strictly forbidden. Many participants in suicide bombings are actually well off and not stricken by poverty , however as long as the United States continues it’s generally money driven lifestyle based upon material gains and power, and continues to slight the world’s poor population, than Al Qaeda will be left with a precedent to continue it’s preaching against the United States.
The United States is a contributor of considerably less money to foreign aid than All other G-8 countries proportionate to it’s national GDP. Providing a measly 0.0010% of its GDP going to humanitarian foreign aid, which equates to 9.1 Billions dollars, this number pales in comparison to it’s military spending which tops 500 billion dollars, 10 times more than the next highest country, China. In order to quell Islamic extremism sometimes mistakenly and offensively referred to as fundamentalism, you must quell it’s ideology. Continuing to attack country after country to end a problem that is a global epidemic will only spur increased hostility towards the United States. United States must provide more money for humanitarian aid, producing a ripple effect of generating favorable opinion around the world, and will produce more friends rather than enemies in the U.S. and global war on terror. Should this initiative of increased humanitarian aid to poor countries morph into reality, this would de legitimize the rhetoric of U.S.’s unrelenting for materialism and lust being a threat to Islamic countries and their way of life, which constitutes the fabric of extremist ideology. Another relation potential result would be that countries would be more inclined to support the U.S. global war on terror, because they would be symbolically indebted to the United States. For example, would Israel, a country living on U.S. life support ever dare to go against the United States? No. Or else the 6.72 Billion dollars that they received in 1997, almost equally the total U.S. foreign aid contribution, would evaporate quickly. As the Neoliberalist theory goes, economically interdependent countries do not come in conflict with each other. The independent variables mentioned, are linked in that should one happen it will naturally lead to the other. Should the U.S. provide sufficient humanitarian aid, than people will no longer see the truth in ideology positing that the Untied States is a money hungry power driven country. This will lead to them supporting the war against Islamic extremist groups, which will now be basing their jihad on a lie. People will feel deceived by the terrorists, and will in turn support the United States.
Many would argue that foreign aid to poor nations would have no real effect on ending terrorism, and would not generate any sympathizers towards the United States. The argument that U.S. materialism and wealth is a primary aspect of the Islamic extremist ideology is refuted by many, who point to American military presence as in the greater middle east more important. Besides, most suicide bombers are actually not poverty stricken, as commonly thought, so there is no direct correlation. However, the countries from which most of these people originate are poor. They observe the injustice in the living disparity between their Muslim counterparts and the proclaimed American infidels, and are inspired to sacrifice their lives in helping to end the source of that injustice. Were the U.S. to have a direct impact on improving the state of such countries than this sentiment would be erased. It is already been proven that increased foreign aid will lead to more favorability among people in the countries receiving the aid. Japan, a country that contribute.0035% of it’s GDP and the most of any industrialized nation, has very high favorability in Muslim countries. In Indonesia, which is home to the worlds largest Muslim population, Japan garners a 95% favorability rating while the U.S. has only a 38% favorability rating in that country. Similar results can be seen in countries throughout the Muslim world.
The explanation given is dependent on may variables. The people who receive the aid from the United States ultimately decide whether they will develop more positive perceptions towards the United States and assist the United States in helping end terrorism. The noted statistics above, exhibiting the direct correlation among foreign aid and favorability, devastate opposition argument that increased foreign aid will lead to decreased terrorism. How many terrorist acts have been plotted against Japan, or the Netherlands, or Norway, all countries at the top in terms of foreign aid. None. Should the United States truly be the humanitarian leader of the world, rather than just the economic superpower than the favorability should skyrocket and terrorist acts should also decrease against American interests. The United States has influence over all major decisions over the World Bank. They have the power and capabilities to assist in rebuilding countries with depleted infrastructure and transforming them into functioning allies rather than countries on the brink of famine.
After analyzing the evidence and relationship between favorability , and internal security from terrorism among countries providing considerable foreign aid, I feel that foreign aid to poor countries is a necessity. Not just trivial donations, but serious efforts, investing major time and effort. When the United States offered only 15 million dollars to the victims of the tsunami, the world was shocked and in arms that the United States would show such miniscule generosity. The United States would eventually increase it’s offer and receiving sharp critisicisms from the world community. After looking at countries like Norway and Japan and seeing their through the roof favorability in Muslim countries along with their solid foreign aid and lack of security issues, it is inevitable that foreign aid is a key. The United States has a GDP of 13 trillion dollars, trillions of dollars more than Japan, who has the second highest GDP, and consumes more than energy than China and Japan combined. Yet they give the least foreign aid to impoverished countries? Naturally, any country that continues such a lifestyle will face envy and threat from groups like Al Qeada, who feed off such statisitics. Although the theory is limited in that there are other reasons why the United States is a terrorist threat. It is assuming that people will have improved living standards as a result of American generosity and will respond graciously towards the United States for such help, and no longer support terrorist ideology citing the United States as money grubbing infidels. Certainly their heavy military presence in the middle east is responsible for some anger, and rabid, unrelenting support to Israel also hurts the United States in the middle east. You must continue to partake in some military missions in order to stop groups with violent agendas, and that must coincide with foreign aid. Giving money to foreign aid can only do so much, seeing as Sierra Leone will only be so strong an ally. However, as it currently stands, Arab television stations beam images of mangled Iraqi bodies, caused by U.S. invasion, and these images utilized by extremists to rally support and generate hatred towards the United States, which often happens. The overall point is in order to defeat the terrorists you must not only defeat them militarily but ideologically. The terrorists are clever in their use of media images as propaganda against the United States and Americans continue to see their favorability wane. America does need to give more, not only out of obligation, but because they have to do what they say, and live up to their billing as the leader of the free world. The world is more than just the middle east. The United States is portrayed as being there for oil, and hypocrisy rains supreme. You must be the humanitarian leader of the free world to truly be acknowledged globally as leading the free world, rather than simply senselessly stating it.
