A key Senate panel showed its disdain for the Trump administration’s proposed steep cuts to the foreign aid budget—first by agreeing to spend more than what the president had asked for and then by issuing a report condemning the president’s “”apparent doctrine of retreat”
The Senate Appropriations Committee agreed unanimously last week to spend about $51 billion on foreign aid, which is roughly $11 billion more than the administration’s request for fiscal year 2018 but still about $6 billion less than what was budgeted this year. An accompanying report, submitted by foreign operations subcommittee chairman Lindsey Graham, condemned the administration for overlooking the importance of soft power with its proposal to reduce USAID and State Department funding by about 30 percent.
“The administration’s apparent doctrine of retreat, which also includes distancing the United States from collective and multilateral dispute resolution frameworks, serves only to weaken America’s standing in the world,” the committee report read
Far from representing “a message of American strength and resolve,” it added, the budget would abandon allies, eliminate thousands of diplomatic positions, and reduce funding for critical programs.
“The lessons-learned since September 11, 2001, include the reality that defense alone does not provide for American strength and resolve abroad,” it said. “Battlefield technology and firepower cannot replace diplomacy and development.”
The administration proposal reduced funding for global health programs, diplomatic security, and some humanitarian aid programs. It also reduced money for “key allies and countries of strategic importance,” the committee report noted, including Georgia.
Senators agreed to increase funding for democracy promotion assistance, global health programs, and embassy security, among other areas.
Trump administration officials have fended off criticism of the budget since its blueprint introduction months ago.
“It is not a soft power budget,” Office of Management and Budget director Mick Mulvaney said in March. “This is a hard power budget. And that was done intentionally.”
In the report, lawmakers censured OMB for “arbitrarily” setting the funding level without consulting the State Department, USAID, or other agencies. It also criticized the haphazard release of the budget proposal.
“When the budget was publicly released, the absence of a communications strategy caused confusion and concern in foreign capitals regarding the proposed, unjustified cuts—and allowed America’s competitors, notably the People’s Republic of China [PRC] and Russia, to hijack our national security narrative,” the report said.
