Foreign Aid to Countries with a State Sponsored Religion: Is this a good idea?

SPC David S. — Wed, 20 May 2015 23:44:16 -0400

As budgets are tightening and national debt is increasing is the concept of foreign aid to other nations especially one's with a state sponsored religion a good use of your tax payer dollars? As the US does not permit religious sponsorship domestically why are we sending aid to other nations that have national religions where 30 have laws stating that their heads of state must be of a defined religious faith? The congressional research service stated that the foreign aid to Israel has been "based on common democratic values, religious affinities, and security interests." Are we not sponsoring religious states with this financial and military assistance with tax dollars?

Some details of the countries receiving aid and how they voted in the UN:

Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time
Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time
Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time
United Arab Emirates votes against the United States 70% of the time.
Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.
Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Oman votes against the United States 74%of the time.
Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time.
Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.
Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time.
India votes against the United States 81% of the time.
Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time.
Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time.

Also on a side note we give foreign aid to China, not much but we borrow this money from China in order to give it back to them.

http://www.foreignassistance.gov/web/rgaintro.aspx

Response by SPC Charles Brown made May 20 at 2015 11:52 PM

SPC Charles Brown — Wed, 20 May 2015 23:52:17 -0400

Um, no! State sponsored religions are oppressive to their citizens. That is not what America is about.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made May 21 at 2015 12:02 AM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Thu, 21 May 2015 00:02:04 -0400

** Warning: Commencing Rant **

Frankly, I think the whole idea of foreign aid to ANY country needs to be seriously reevaluated. We are rolling in debt and, no doubt, borrowing money to give to other countries as foreign aid. Meanwhile, back at home, our political leadership is looking for ways to cut domestic spending and telling us that "we're broke" and that cuts to "entitlements" that we've paid into all our lives are inevitable. Hey, I'm all for charity but I see no reason why we shouldn't be taking care of the home front first.

** Rant Concluded (with apologies if I've offended anyone) **

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 21 at 2015 12:55 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 May 2015 00:55:39 -0400

My only response is that the infographic is somewhat misleading at least about Lebanon. Remember that in many of these countries religion is as much about heritage and ethnicity as it is about belief. The Lebanese constitution requires at least three groups (going by memory on the exact number) to be represented in government with the president being a Christian, because they are a minority. It was a good idea that hasn't worked as well as the French hoped it would when they imposed it on the Lebanese.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 21 at 2015 7:01 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 21 May 2015 07:01:57 -0400

The issue with Foreign Aid is one of "cheaper money."

It's cheaper for us to give money than to spend money. I know this sounds silly, but... hear me out.

If the US Spends $100 that costs us $100 real dollars, and gets us exactly that. However, if we give that same $100 to another country... they are able to get wildly different results using the spending power of their own economy. That $100 could be worth $10,000 instead (this is not an exaggeration). Even with corruption on the far side, we are better off "keeping out" and "buying goodwill" than going in.

So what we do is give them a fraction of what we would spend to get the same result. Let's say it is that 1:100 ratio. We give them $1 (which gives them $100 US buying power on their side) rather than spending $100. This actually SAVES us money. I know it's counter intuitive but it keeps us from going over there for significantly longer, as it builds goodwill over generations.

But Aaron, what about Religion? Ignore Religion! England "technically" has a State Sponsored Religion but no one brings that up, so does a solid portion of European Countries. Quite a bit of it is just lip service, and can be ignored, and is.

Our overarching goal is always Global Stability. Less Global Wars, Less Regional Conflicts, Less Troops being put in harms way. Spending money this way does that.

Like I said, it seems counter intuitive at first glance, but the idea is akin to yard maintenance. You are essentially hiring an outside contractor to to maintain an area at a cheaper cost than you can do yourself, so you have more money in the long run.

Response by CDR Private RallyPoint Member made May 21 at 2015 8:55 AM

CDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 May 2015 08:55:19 -0400

Remember what the purpose of foreign aid is. Some is humanitarian, but a lot of the political reason is for influence. Yes, we don't "own" the country's vote in the UN; however, we do have a channel for discussion and a carrot to dangle to incentivize them to support us on things that we view as really important.

If we only supported people with our same beliefs, we wouldn't be able to influence those who we want to help get closer to our beliefs.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 21 at 2015 10:08 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 May 2015 10:08:14 -0400

There is value in building a friendship with the populace and helping them to develop an thrive, even when the nation themselves are corrupt or oppressive. But I agree that the status quo isn't making anyone happy; certainly not on this side of the fence.

I'm not sure I can really add anything to the comments below. Our little back-and-forth kicked of a great discussion. Well done, sir.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made May 21 at 2015 10:46 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Thu, 21 May 2015 10:46:52 -0400

The following US states forbid atheists from holding public office.
Isn't the same thing as "State Sponsored Religion"

Arkansas, Article 19, Section 1
Maryland, Article 37
Mississippi, Article 14, Section 265
North Carolina, Article 6, Section 8
South Carolina, Article 17, Section 4
Tennessee, Article 9, Section 2
Texas, Article 1, Section 4

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2020 1:40 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 May 2020 13:40:38 -0400

Foreign aid is not just a "here have money and be happy". It is used as a diplomatic tool to influence populations and governments. There is always a US interest in it. It even falls under military operations like HADR and DSCA.