The Foreign Service Journal, September 2008

S E P T E M B E R 2 0 0 8 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 51 riting in the March issue of the Foreign Service Journal (“Don’t Reinvent the Foreign Assistance Wheel”), Professor Gordon Adams asserts that the “F” process, the Bush adminis- tration’s new approach to for- eign assistance planning, constitutes a meaningful step toward aligning aid with U.S. strategic foreign policy goals. Prof. Adams also describes the new process as an attempt to strengthen the efficacy of civilian tools of statecraft. Released to great fanfare as the cornerstone of the administration’s doctrine of transformational diplomacy, the F process promised greater strategic coherence in the use of development and diplomacy as instruments in support of the ambitious goal of “helping to build and sustain demo- cratic, well-governed states … that conduct themselves responsibly.” In reality, however, F represents a modest planning and programming exercise, undertaken jointly by the State De- partment and the U.S. Agency for International Develop- ment, affecting only a portion of U.S. foreign assistance. As such, it falls well short of the comprehensive reform of American foreign assistance that growing numbers of observers agree is needed. More important, contrary to Prof. Adams’ assertion, the choice is not between pursuing the F process or returning to the status quo and, with it, the continued fragmentation of foreign assistance programs. There is broad agreement, reflected in the report of the Helping to Enhance the Liveli- hood of People Around the Globe Commission — written after the F process was already well under way — that the foreign assistance infrastructure is broken and that the sta- tus quo must change. A coalition of development practitioners within the exec- utive branch, congressional foreign relations staff, civil soci- ety groups and implementers have rallied behind the call for comprehensive reform through reauthorization of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. And the coming election, with the hope of a shift in U.S. foreign policy, offers an opportunity to move forward with fundamental reform. The Call for Reform Development practitioners seek reauthorization of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 in order to redefine the set of relationships between the executive and legislative branches and key participants, including host-country gov- ernments and civil society, involved in U.S. foreign assis- tance. The aim is to: • Elevate development as the central goal of foreign assistance, with the aim of reducing poverty and promoting improvements across a broad range of secondary indicators such as nutrition, basic education and access to health care; • Emphasize a more holistic view of foreign assistance that looks not only at foreign aid, but considers other factors that affect development, including trade policies, the role of the private sector and efforts to promote institutional capac- W HY THE “F” P ROCESS D ESERVES T HAT G RADE T WEAKING THE CURRENT FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PLANNING PROCESS WILL NOT SUFFICE . I NSTEAD , THE STATUS QUO MUST CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY . W B Y D ENNIS S HIN , C HARLES U PHAUS , T ODD S HELTON AND E VAN E LLIOTT Dennis Shin is a strategic issues adviser for Catholic Relief Services; Charles Uphaus is a retired USAID Foreign Service officer; and Todd Shelton and Evan Elliott are, respectively, the senior director of public policy and public policy coordi- nator for InterAction. All four authors are members of InterAction’s Task Force on Foreign Assistance Reform.