The wisdom of foreign aid

In the middle of the ongoing war in Ukraine and following the devastating Hamas attack on Israel in October, President Joe Biden recently asked Congress for almost $106 billion in supplemental appropriations to support military and humanitarian aid to both countries. His request included money for U.S. border security and initiatives to deter the threat of Chinese aggression in the western Pacific, and allocated $61.4 billion to Ukraine and $14.3 billion to Israel, respectively. Since both countries are American allies and democracies facing extreme threats from autocratic enemies bent on their destruction, one might think passage of such a request would be axiomatic. After all, the United States spent the entire Cold War from 1947-1991 supporting freedom abroad while leading global alliances against Russia and other enemies overseas, and Republicans in that era dedicated themselves to supporting allies with direct and indirect military assistance for decades. Yet passage is in doubt, largely because the newest incarnation of the Republican Party is no longer unified when it comes to national security.

Newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, quickly politicized the issue by decoupling aid to Ukraine, which extremists in his party oppose, and supporting aid to Israel, which majorities in both the Democratic and Republican party support. Far right Republicans endorsed his position, which reignited simmering debates over the wisdom of American foreign aid and the alleged connection between it and the enormous federal budget deficit.

To put things in perspective, it is worth noting that U.S. foreign assistance totals approximately $60 billion a year, or roughly 1% of overall federal spending annually. Polls routinely show Americans think we commit 25% of our budget to foreign aid, and that we should cut back to 10% or so, but both numbers are absurd. That $60 billion is drawn from an economy that will generate goods and services worth an estimated $23 trillion in 2023. Our collective affluence is so great that Americans are projected to spend $181 billion on snacks, $115 billion on beer, $7 billion on potato chips, $30 billion on legal marijuana, and $220 billion on legal sports gambling.

So, we have the money.

Now, a critic might argue those numbers are misleading. As individuals in a free society, we should be able to buy what we want, they might say, and the fact that we can afford the $60 billion does not by itself mean that we should spend it. And that’s fair to a point. But the pittance we commit to foreign aid buys us security in a manner that our potato chip money does not, and that security can only be purchased by the federal government.

To buy that security, we spend roughly $850 billion a year on defense, or about 3% of our gross domestic product (GDP). That is a ton of money, but as a percentage of our GDP, it is about half of what we spent during the Cold War, and in an increasingly dangerous world it is hardly an example of profligate spending.

We also buy security by arming our allies, especially when they are fighting wars against real or potential enemies of the United States. And make no mistake, Russia is our enemy. Hamas is our enemy. So are North Korea and Iran, at a minimum. And when allies are fighting those real or potential enemies, as is the case in Ukraine and Israel, they erode their power without the sacrifice of a single American life. That is what makes aid to Ukraine and Israel so vital.

And our aid to both Israel and Ukraine has been extensive. Israel typically receives $3 billion a year in aid from the U.S. and since 1948 has gotten more aid from us than any other country. Ukraine has received roughly $75 billion in supplemental military and humanitarian assistance since the Russians invaded their country 18 months ago, an amount some Republicans have said is too high. Yet Ukraine is significantly degrading the Russian armed forces for 1/10 of the money we typically spend on defense in a single year, and $23 billion of that money was not even new spending. Instead, it was the dollar value of existing military equipment sitting in U.S. stockpiles that we sent to Ukraine rather than eventually discard. Our European Union allies have given as well, with EU contributions roughly doubling our own and EU nations sustaining the Ukrainian economy.

Moreover, U.S. foreign aid equates to U.S. jobs. When Congress commits funds to another country, they do not just send them a pile of cash. They typically purchase military or humanitarian goods from U.S. suppliers and then send that equipment to the selected country overseas. That is what they have done with previous aid to Ukraine and to Israel, and that means the aid benefits American companies and American workers.

Then there are the military benefits to the U.S. Clearing our inventories of old military hardware allows our own armed forces to accelerate upgrading their weapons systems. The Pentagon bought a total of 2,200 F-16 fighters, for example, and about 900 are still in service. Some of the others could easily be given to Ukraine, and the USAF wants to do so to speed modernization.

Finally, there is a canard regarding spending that seems to linger in the poorest parts of the United States, and it appears to drive much of the resistance among voters to foreign aid. It is the idea that if we spent less overseas, we could spend more at home. That may sound logical, but the truth is more complicated. First, as noted above, we spend relatively little on foreign aid. And second, Representative Johnson has already indicated the GOP majority in the House wants to cut social programs too, so any money saved from reducing foreign aid is not going to suddenly appear in federal programs designed to assist the working poor. It is false hope to believe otherwise.

Every American should understand that foreign assistance is the most cost-effective way to promote our security abroad. It creates American jobs, supports democratic allies, and thwarts the aggression of oppressive regimes in Russia, the Middle East, and around the world. We should therefore ignore the appeals of shortsighted appeasers willing to kowtow to Vladimir Putin and his ilk and support those who share our values and ask only for the tools needed to fight for their own freedom.

So, please support additional assistance to Ukraine and Israel. And do not complain about foreign aid.

Lance Janda holds a PhD in History from the University of Oklahoma and has more than 30 years of experience in higher education. He is the author of “Stronger Than Custom: West Point and the Admission of Women”, among other works.