Unlock the editor’s summary for free
Roula Khalaf, editor of the FT, selects her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
It is disgusting to read the boast of the richest man in the world that “we spent the weekend feeding Usaid in the wooden splinter.” That this poses constitutional and legal problems for the Republic of the United States is quite clear. In fact, it is evident that those who are now in charge would be very happy to get rid of such exhausting restrictions in total. But there are also moral problems. Should the United States effort to help the poorest in the world have been fed in a “woodchipper”? The answer is “no.”
As Paul Krugman points out in a Exceptional recent piece In his substitute, the United States made a great effort after World War II to be a great and different type of power: he sought to create allies, not tributaries; economic development, not predation; global institutions, not imperial rule; And international law, not the old idea of ”could do the right thing.” There were inevitably a lot. But in general, the United States has been a surprisingly benign and successful hegemon.
The explosive growth of world trade, the emergence of China and India once improvised, the peaceful fall of the Soviet Union and, no less important, The decline in the proportion of human beings living in extreme poverty, 59 percent in 1950 to 8.5 percent in 2024, despite A triple of the world population – They are proof of their success. The United States must be greatly proud of its achievements as a world leader, and not try to imitate the bullying of Vladimir Putin’s Russia. (See graphics).
The United States Agency for International Development, then, is part of something much bigger. The United States also played a decisive role in the creation of the World Bank, the IMF, the UN, the General Agreement on Rates and Commerce, the International Development Association and NATO, without ambiguities, both then and now, a defensive alliance.
The underlying idea was that the world would be a better place if we recognized our shared interest in peaceful cooperation. Why would someone want to sacrifice this ideal for a return to the competition of the nineteenth century among the great imperialist powers that culminated in two world wars, Stalinism and fascism? Do pathogens or climate recognize international borders? Is the war between nuclear powers even thinkable? Can any country really be an island? Can humanity, having destroyed this planet, really find a rescue on the sterile planet of Mars?
The attack in Usaid is a sample of madness that now overwhelmed the United States. But it is revealing. His budget was 0.7 percent of federal expenditure and 0.15 percent of GDP In fiscal year 2023. its destruction is mostly symbolic. According to Musk, Usaid is a “nest of viper of radicals of the left that hate the United States.” USAID spends things like AIDS Relief and Family Planning in the poorest countries in the world. So what radical leftist Marxist launched the President’s emergency plan for AIDS relief? George W Bush, that’s the one. Even if this attack demonstrates only one interruption, it will do a lot of damage.
Unfortunately, this comes in a bad time for economic development. Like the last of the World Bank Global economic perspectives Notes, not only the slowdown in global economic growth, but the performance of low -income developing countries has become particularly worrying.
“Putting up to the advanced levels of income of the economy has constantly weakened [emerging market and developing economies] During the first quarter of the 21st century, ”argues the report. This is the result of successive shocks, slowing down reforms and a more adverse external environment, characterized largely by “major political uncertainty and adverse trade policy changes.”
“The rapid growth supported by national reforms and a Benign Global Environment allowed many low -income countries. . . reach the average income range in the first decade of this century. Since then, the rate at which low -income countries graduate to the average income state has marked significantly. ” The growth in real income per head in these countries has simply become anemic. That is partly due to internal conflict and in part to adverse external developments, including the world financial crisis, pandemic, unexpected jumps in the prices of essential products and higher interest rates.
As a result, the report argues, through a wide range of development metrics, today’s low -income countries are behind those who subsequently became middle income in 2000. Now they are also more susceptible to clashes related to Climate change
When considering the difficult situation of the poorest countries, it is necessary to understand them. They lack resources to provide medical or necessary care education. Thus, according to him World BankHealth spending per person in high -income countries is more than 50 times larger than in low -income, in real terms, and education spending is more than 150 times larger. In addition, the cost of interest in debt has increased to more than 10 percent of government income in low -income countries, partly due to the need to borrow in crisis and partly due to high interest rates .
A world with more prosperous, healthier and more stable countries is a better one to live, not only morally, but practically. The main instruments to achieve these purposes remain multilateral institutions. If the United States will move away from its last wisdom, it depends on the rest of us to create a multilateral path to follow, while we hope that the United States finally finds a path back to light.
Shafik Minouche He has argued persuasively for serious rethinking. In fact, there are many global challenges ahead, as he points out. But there is a glorious opportunity. Eliminating the scourge of the extreme poverty of our planet is now temptingly close. But we are failing. We must strive more. This long -term objective is too close to be abandoned.