As if the horrifying images from the tsunami that
hit Southeast Asia, India, and Africa on Boxing Day weren’t enough, viewers in
so-called “wealthy” nations also had to contend with a little-known UN official
accusing them of being “stingy” in the face of such disasters. It was enough to
make you choke on that leftover turkey and cranberry sauce…
Predictably, US Secretary of State Colin Powell and
other spokespeople for the American government bristled at the accusation, made
by the UN’s Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency
Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland. Standing on their record, Powell, and more
recently, President Bush, argued that the United States has given more foreign
aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in
the world. As for this current crisis, Powell stated that America’s
contribution to disaster relief and rebuilding would likely run into the
billions of dollars.
So what was Egeland talking about then? Clearly, the
US is the star player when it comes to foreign aid. According to 2003 figures
released by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
the United States government budgeted nearly $16 billion to foreign aid. That
is nearly double what the next largest contributor—Japan—earmarked for such
causes ($8.9 billion), and four times what Canada budgeted ($2.2 billion). So,
taken on a raw dollar level, Powell and Bush’s claims cannot be disputed. When
it comes to disaster relief and economic development, the United States is the
undeniable leader. And remember, these figures do not even include the billions
of dollars given by individual citizens through private charities and
foundations.
But the dollar figures begin to lose some of their
dazzle when you examine foreign aid spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic
Product (GDP). This brings us closer to what Egeland was trying to get at. When
rated according to this criterion, the United States plunges to number 22 on
the list, contributing just 0.14 percent of its GDP to foreign aid. Japan
doesn’t do much better at 0.2 percent (placing it at number 19), and even
Canada’s 0.26 percent contribution fails to place it in the top ten (they’re
ranked at number 13). Leading the pack is Norway (Egeland’s home country),
which contributes 0.92 percent of its GDP to foreign aid. Still shy of a single
percentage point, but, proportionally speaking, well over six times what the
United States gives. If the American government decided to match the Norwegians
next year, their foreign aid giving would leap to over $100 billion—about half
of what it is costing them to fight the war in Iraq. And if all of the 22
richest nations in the world gave just one percent—never mind the 10 percent
Egeland suggested they give when he appeared recently on CNN’s Anderson
Cooper 360°—the globe would literally be awash in foreign aid dollars. In
fact, there may even be a surplus!
While Egeland’s comments have probably inspired more
feelings of bitterness than generosity among Americans (further souring the
already tepid relationship between the US and the UN), no one can dispute the
validity of his criticism. When the world’s governments met at the Earth Summit
in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, they agreed to a program, known as Agenda 21, which
called on the world’s 22 richest nations to meet a foreign aid target of 0.7
percent of their GDP. As of 2003, only six nations had met or exceeded this
target, including Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Sweden.
With countries like the United States and Canada giving only one-fifth of this
amount twelve years after the agreement was signed, it only makes sense that
someone would point out our failure to meet such an important obligation. Such
comments may make us angry, and they could have been delivered in a more
diplomatic fashion, but that does not mean they are without truth. I do not
believe that Americans, Canadians, Japanese, Norwegians or citizens of the
other 22 richest countries in the world are stingy people. A little
self-involved maybe, but not the type to turn a blind eye to a brother or
sister in need. That said, I think we could all get by on a little less and
give away a little more. That includes both governments and individual citizens.
So, rather than become angry and defensive when
confronted with this fact, why not take up Egeland’s challenge and prove him
wrong? I am sure nothing would make him happier. After all, we are facing one
of the largest humanitarian disasters in modern history. The priority right now
should be on helping those in need, not pointing fingers or defending
ourselves. As nations and as individuals, we would all do well to search our
hearts and ask if we are truly doing all that we could be doing in the face of such
pressing needs.
I do not believe there is not some magic number or
percentage of our personal income or GDP that, if reached, will alleviate us of
all further responsibility. How much or how little you give is a matter between
you and God. So while you are busy searching your own heart, take some time to
search God’s heart as well. Don’t worry: I highly doubt that He will accuse you
of being stingy, as Egeland did. God is much more likely to inspire you with a
vision of what the world can become if we contribute even a little bit more
than we do currently. I would like to inspire you with that same vision as
well.
You may already contribute regularly to one or more
global relief organizations. If so, we encourage you to channel your extra
relief funds through them. If not, you may want to consider contributing to the
Global Aid Network (GAiN), a relief
organization that demonstrates the love of God to hurting and needy people
around the world through relief and development projects.
In addition to increasing your own personal giving, I
also encourage you to contact your local, state, provincial, and national
government officials, urging them to increase the amount of money your nation
contributes to foreign aid and development. If we all work together like this,
even the little bit that we do will add up to a whole lot.