New media organization Vox was recently able to sit down with US President Barack Obama for a very in depth two-part interview on domestic policy and foreign policy. First of all, I highly recommend giving the entire conversation a look, because it is a rare opportunity to see a journalist grill Obama with such a vast number of questions.

But I want to take the time to highlight one part in particular for my fellow global citizens.

I’m all about breaking down assumptions and in the segment above, Obama brings up a common misconception that the majority of Americans--and probably most of the global north--share. Only 1.3% of the US budget is dedicated to Foreign Aid.

Vox.com | Pie graph from Vox interview with President Barack Obama

Not even 2 percent! Personally, I think that’s crazy. I understand that taxpayers don’t want all of their money going to benefit other people, let alone other countries, but still, only 1.3 percent? In the scheme of things it doesn’t seem like a lot to complain about.

I was one of those people Obama mentions that assumes over 20% of the budget is going to other countries. That was until one of my college professors proved me wrong. He continued to tell us that the US is not the only developed country that allocates just a sliver of it’s budget to international affairs.

Fun fact actually, in 1970, the world’s richest countries promised to spend 0.7% of its GNP (Gross National Product) on Official Donor Aide. That goal was supposed to be reached over 40 years ago and almost all of the 22 nations that made the promise have yet to follow through. They’ve failed to reach their obligations of reaching the 0.7% target, and in fact most hang around 0.2% - 0.4%. Our international fingers are crossed that maybe this will be the year that changes...maybe.

The US donates the most in terms of amount, but as a percentage of its GNP, it is one of the lowest contributors to foreign aid. This is because the US economy is so large-which should mean the nation has more to give.

I get it though, the US has enough problems at home, Americans want to focus on their own country before helping others. I understand the argument but here’s another idea-- why can’t we do both?

We can.

The US in particular is looked to for leadership and assistance when conflict breaks out. I guess that happens when you’re the most powerful nation in the world. BUT that doesn’t mean the US has to answer every call for help. The US can land somewhere in the middle. (Obama speaks to this tension in another video where he shares his opinion on the line between idealist and realist foreign policy.)

This goes for when providing international assistance aid as well. As Obama shares in the interview, there is a huge separation between military spending and donor spending. The perception is that one is for protection and the other is simply charity. But cultivating underprivileged communities can often be a benefit for the US, even if it doesn’t seem so on the surface.

Not convinced? Let’s take peacekeeping for example. Operations are struggling to meet the demands of today’s conflicts and as a result, aggressors are winning the battle. US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power gave insight during a lecture into the what the US interest would be in supporting UN intervention both through funding and military support. (The part I’m talking about starts around 1:45.)

Violence can quickly create instability, displace millions of people, and disrupt economic markets, which can quickly affect neighboring countries and nations around the world.

Conflicts weaken societies and attract extremists and terrorist groups to the region. The US public has a special concern for terrorism, and efforts taken to thwart its expansion are seen to be in the best interest of the country. The task is to see military AND aid as collaborative action to stop terrorism.

Countries may be separated by borders, but the world’s problems pay no mind to crossing them. Personally, I think that regardless of whether a move plays to my country’s advantage or not, we must always hold on to our values as global citizens. I think Samantha Power put it perfectly:

“We do not want to live in a world where more than 9,000 kids are recruited in less than a year to become child soldiers, as has happened recently in South Sudan.”

We need to find the common ground between providing for others and protecting ourselves.

----

 Alex Vinci

Editorial

Demand Equity

Mythbuster: Obama tells us how much the US actually gives to foreign aid