UK Surpasses US as World Bank Donor

"U.S. Now No. 2 Donor To Fund for Poor Nations"
By Anthony Faiola, The Washington Post, December 15, 2007.

Lead: "Forty-five rich and middle-income nations agreed yesterday to provide a record $25.1 billion to the World Bank for generous-term loans and grants to the world's poorest countries. But for the first time since Dwight D. Eisenhower pushed for the creation of the bank's arm for helping the poorest of nations, the United States will no longer lead its anti-poverty charge." The United Kingdom is the largest donor in this replenishment of the International Development Association. "Overall, the contributions pledged by the 45 nations were up 42 percent from the IDA's previous global fundraising effort, in 2005." U.S. influence in the World Bank will not be reduced since voting power there factors in cumulative donations made over decades.

Tha article also incorrectly states:

The United States, which provided $22.7 billion in development assistance last year, remains the world's most generous nation in foreign aid.

Is a millionaire who donates a dollar more generous than a beggar who donates his last dime? I don't think so.

The United Kingdom with a GDP of $2.346 trillion pledged $4.3 billion over three years; the United States with a GDP of $13.16 trillion pledged $3.7 billion. The United States is now 21st of 22 wealthy nations in percentage of GDP donated to foreign assistance. It gives only 59 cents per $1,000 of GDP. It gives $22.91 per person in foreign assistance, making it 18th in the list of per capita donors. Many nations are more generous than the United States, the United States is the largest donor only because our large, rich population has so much; a scrooge-like percentage of our GDP is still a whole lot of money.

I am glad to see the United States increase its contributions to IDA. However, I fear that increase is less a sign of the increased generosity, but rather a sign of the failure of the Bush administration's foreign aid initiatives. The Millennium Development Corporation has transferred so little of its allocated resources to developing nations that the Congress is withholding appropriations. The integration of USAID more fully under the State Department, together with other Bush administration actions has drawn criticism not only from Democrats but also from the Republican side of the Senate.

Read the World Bank press release on the Replenishment.

Of course, what is being announced is a pledge, made by the administration. Due to the system of checks and balances in our constitution, the Congress has to appropriate the money to fulfill that pledge. Those appropriations will I suppose come mostly during the term of the next administration: President Bush will not have to figure out where to get the money to fulfill that pledge.

The Better World Campaign reports that (as of September):

The U.S. government is by far the largest debtor to the United Nations and is falling further behind in dues payments to the UN and its affiliated agencies......the U.S. began 2007 with $863 million in structural arrears at the United Nations – $200 million more than last year. This is debt that the U.S. has no plans to pay off.

President Bush visiting USAID Headquarters in 2005.