In 1992, the United States created an army of 30,000 troops to conduct humanitarian tasks. The mission was an overall failure, and instead of promoting peace, it began to spark war (Ploch 1). This failure brings up the controversial nature of what policy needs to be prioritized first. Two main policies that the United States implements are military aid and development assistance. The instability in the Sahel region of Africa demand military aid to be drafted before development assistance.
What is military aid and development assistance? A common misconception is that military aid will fail to serve all the interests of the citizens in the region. However, military aid comes in a variety of forms. Some of these include foreign military financing, counter-terrorism, and peacekeeping operations. Foreign military financing is a process where one country gives another resources in order to build an arsenal. This also builds the economy of the country providing supplies (West 3). Counter-terrorism is the only direct offensive strategy in military aid. This includes things like special forces raids or drone strikes. However, there are indirect ways to perform counter-terrorism, such as sharing intelligence or providing surveillance (4). Peacekeeping operations, or PKOs, provide troops and firepower from the donor country. The resulting missions are meant to protect citizens or prevent conflict, and they tend to be defensive (3). Development assistance can be defined as aid given to strengthen the economic and health care development of a certain country (5). Unfortunately, these policies do not always prove effective.
Approximately 19 million people are suffering from the famine in the Sahel (“The Sahel: Hungry” 1). Development agen...
... middle of paper ...
...rnment diverted nearly half the food sent to the starving citizens to itself and leaders in 2010 (“Should Development” 2). Military aid creates solutions to this level of corruption. Another form of military aid is officer education and training. The United States can train officials to respect citizens and human rights. This program can lead to an effective military in both combat and morals. In order for these governments to stabilize, military aid must be prioritized first (West 12).
All in all, in order for the countries in the Sahel to thrive in the future, military aid must be prioritized over development assistance. When considering that the development can be used elsewhere, the security needs to be a top priority, and the corruption of the governments in the region, clearly military aid is the only laudable option. Acting indirectly will accomplish nothing.
“History repeats itself”, is a commonly used phrase and it is one that can be found to hold true in many situations. Throughout history there have been many incidents in which mass murder has occurred. A modern day example of mass murder in a conflict that is ongoing is the genocides occurring in Darfur, Sudan. The corrupt government in the country supports a group called the Janjaweed, which is the militia group that is mainly responsible for the large number of Darfur residents that have been murdered, raped, or displaced (1). Although the exact number is not known, most sources estimate around 400,000 people have died and another 2,500,000 have been displaced (1). The conflict started in 2003 and although it is not as severe as it has been in past years the issue still exists and the people of Darfur are still experiencing murder and suffering. The conflict in Darfur has been a topic of discussion for many nations, including the United States. The issue arises of whether or not larger nations, who have more power, should aid in the effort to stop the Darfur genocide. Some believe very strongly that the United States has an obligation to step up and help this country control a largely unethical situation. Others take the opposite argument and have reasons to believe the interests of the United States would be best served elsewhere. The situation is more complex than it initially seems and many factors must be analyzed when considering if the United States is obligated to intervene. At the same time, a conflict of this severity and size cannot be easily contained by a small and struggling nation and sometimes a bigger nation is needed to help with a conflict of this magnitude. Being a world power, the United States has the resour...
In August of 1992, President George Bush Sr. sent US soldiers into Somalia to provide humanitarian relief to those Somalis suffering from starvation. The major problems in Somalia started when President Mohammed Siad Barre was overthrown by a coalition of opposing clans. Although there were several opposing groups, the prominent one was led by Mohammed Farah Aidid. Following the overthrow of Barre, a massive power struggle ensued. These small scale civil wars led to the destruction of the agriculture in Somalia, which in turn led to the deprivation of food in large parts of the country. When the international community heard of this, large quantities of food were sent to ease Somali suffering. However, clan leaders like Aidid routinely hijacked food and exchanged it for weapons leaving thousands to starve to death. An estimated 300,000 Somalis died between 1991 and 1992 (Clancy 234-236). US soldiers were later sent into Somalia to capture Aidid, but when the operation got bloody, displeasing the American public, Clinton withdrew troops (Battersby 151). In The Morality of War, Brian Orend outlines ethical guidelines that should be followed in all three stages of war: jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum. Orend states that a nation can be moral going into war, but immoral coming out of one. Did the US act justly in all facets of the Somali conflict? The United States espoused all the guiding principles of jus ad bellum but right intent, upheld the principals of jus in bello, and clearly failed to uphold several aspects of jus post bellum during the armed humanitarian intervention in Somalia.
Due in part to its tumultuous past, sub-Saharan Africa is a region of the world that is stricken with war, famine, and poverty. Many people in richer parts of the world, including North America and Europe, view helping the people who inhabit this part of the world as their duty and obligation. Both non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and governmental organizations such as the United Nations (UN) alike send humanitarian aid to sub-Saharan Africa. While this aid helps countless individuals and their families, humanitarian aid in sub-Saharan Africa fuels further conflict and enables violent groups, undermining the goals of the aid itself.
As the newest member of the United Nations, South Sudan receives military assistance from 55 countries and police assistance from 39 countries (UN, 2014). Despite the perception of the proper steps towards long-term success, South Sudan has great potential to destabilize the entire region. This perception is based largely on the success of its economy and its ability to provide security and governance to its citizens. We will examine the potential South Sudan has to destabilize North Africa, the Horn of Africa, Central Africa, and South Africa if South Sudan becomes a failed state.
They state, "Aid is a tool for buying influence and policy. " In this sense, the two groups are really only separated by the sizes of their various selectorates, as their motivations for government spending and foreign aid are almost identical. Mesquita and Smith explain how corruption is inherent to power.
In this section, I will provide a brief history of U.S. military involvement on the African continent, starting with the Barbary Wars and working up through the current date. This historical documentation will highlight the change in the role the United States has played in Africa [post 9-11???]. Prior to 9-11, the United States’ interactions were mainly [capture summary here]. Since [?], however, the continent has faced a marked increase in violent extremism and terrorism leading the United States to partner with many African nations in counterterrorism initiatives. These, and other initiatives, mean an increasing number U.S. service members are deploying to Africa to take part in training, humanitarian issues and military operations. These military activities are run by United States African Command, a recently created combatant command.
In response to the recent failure of the international community to prevent the famine crisis in the Horn of Africa since July 2011, Suzanne Dvorak the chief executive of Save the Children wrote that, “We need to provide help now. But we cannot forget that these children are wasting away in a disaster that we could - and should - have prevented” she added, “The UN estimates that every $1 spent in prevention saves $7 in emergency spending.” (Dvorak, 2011).
“Africa is failing to keep up with population growth not because it has exhausted its potential, but instead because too little has been invested in reaching that potential.” Paarlberg backs this claim with evidence that India’s food issue was solved with foreign assistance in development and offers that the solution to Africa’s food shortage is also development and farm modernization endorsed by foreign aid.
The United States is one of the leading suppliers of Foreign Aid in the world, and even though the US gives billions, European countries give aid money to the same countries, this causes many areas of the Middle East, Africa, and Asia to be almost fully dependent on foreign aid. This means that without aid from other countries, they would not be able to support themselves at all. Foreign aid is meant to help countries that are struggling with civil unrest, disease, or natural disasters, it is not meant to help keep the country out of debt, but that is where more and more of the US and The EU’s foreign aid budget is going. The question is, does all this money actually go where it is intended? It should be going towards the government and to help the people, but in many cases, the countries government does not have the resources to properly track the flow of money. The countries in most cases have poor infrastructure and corrupt or oppressive leaders, not always at a national level, but in the towns and cities. So this means there is almost no way to oversee the flow of foreign aid through the country, all we can see is that their situations aren't getting any better and the countries are still impoverished. If this is the case, where are the millions of dollars going? Countries like Afghanistan and Iraq receive the most money from American foreign aid and European aid, yet they are still under oppressive governmental rule and there is still an extreme difference between the rich and poor. Garrett Harding’s theory of “Lifeboat Ethics” exemplifies how not giving aid to others will allow the strongest of society to thrive, while teaching the impoverished to help themselves. He believes that giving aid to poor countries will only make ...
The Democratic Republic of Congo has a population of 58,317,930 citizens (CIA-The World Fact book). Out of the 58,317,930 citizens 3.8 million of them have died through starvation, disease, and fighting (UNICEF). The death toll of Congo has been labeled genocide. The war in Congo drew in the armies of five other African nations. Neighboring Rwanda, Uganda, and allied Congolese rebel groups held control of the east and northeast. The government held the west. The problems of Congo lay in the United Nations hands. The UN peacekeeping force needs the help of other countries. France has prepared the way for 1,000 French troops that would lead a United Nations force to halt the violent conflict in the region (Talbot). Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain has thought of the possibility of sending troops to Congo (Talbot). One question the world asks is where the United States in this situation is. Does the United States have the responsibility to help Congo? The UN cannot sustain violence alone with the help of France. The Democrats and Republicans believe the war in Iraq has crossed out the possibility of intervention in Congo. Human-right groups believe the U.S. should send a small portion of troops to help. Helping Iraq have freedom is important, but Congo is in worse condition. If you look at the conditions in Iraq and the conditions in Congo, you will see that many more people have been lost and still will be lost in years to come. The citizens of Congo cannot afford to lose any more hospitals or schools. Lives need to be spared. Aside from the killing in Congo, women are abused and rapped. I believe the United States should intervene we can no longer watch as poor women and children suffer in their own homes. We can no longer sit around as 15 and 16-year-old boys are drafted away from their parents and family to fight (CIA-The World Fact book). Rwanda and Uganda that have substantial military power are helping and risking their own citizen’s lives. France a much closed-minded country has even recognized the major massacre going on in Congo. It is clearly understandable that the war in Iraq has taken a great toll on America but, the war in the Democratic Republic of Congo has taken much larger toll on Africa and we need to lower the stress for them.
Worldwide, 870 million people — about one in eight— are hungry. That is nearly three times the population of the United States. It is hard to imagine in the modern world that a country cannot feed its people, but in 1984, the Ethiopian Famine took over one million lives. There were many causes that contributed to the complications faced in Ethiopia. These problems received major attention in the global Community. The famine drastically changed people’s lives because of the lack of food and resources and affected Ethiopia to our present day.
Many people in the world wonder why the United States spends so much money on its military force, defending allies, and countering terrorism. The United States foreign aid, and its policies regarding the defense of other countries have always been in place, but few truly realize what would happen if the United States withdrew its help from other countries. The economy of the entire world would collapse. Russia and China would immediately assert themselves over Asia, causing further instability in the Middle East. Simply put, the first act of foreign aid by the United States to another country can be viewed as a trap. The United States wanted to save the ideal of democracy and keep the peace but, in doing so, couldn’t return to the way it was
Sheeran, Josette. “Preventing hunger: sustainability not aid.” Nature 479.7374 (2011): 469+. Academic OneFile. Web. 6 Feb. 2014.
Anderson, M. B. (1999). Do no harm: How aid can support peace—or war. London, England: Lynne Rienner Publishers
Without access to outside food the population in poorer countries drops and is “checked” by crop failures and famines. But access to outside food could be a problem because “if they can always draw on a world food bank in time of need, their populations can continue to grow unchecked, and so will their “need” for aid”(333). Poorer countries’ populations could surpass richer countries, then poorer countries will receive even more resources and give basically nothing, while the rich receive even less but give