AID NOW SMART DEVELOPMENT IN PRACTICE
“D” is for Different: Why Diplomacy and Development are not the same, and why it matters President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and even Secretary Gates say they want to elevate development alongside diplomacy and defense as one of the “3 Ds” of US foreign policy. We know defense provides security, but what are the roles of diplomacy and development and how are they different from one another? How are diplomacy and development different? Although they often coincide, protecting US interests overseas does not always mean fighting poverty. In general, diplomacy is the management of relations with other countries for US strategic and political interests. Development is making investments to save lives and fight poverty in countries or communities, with the ultimate goal of supporting sustainable economic, political, and social institutions. In concrete terms, diplomacy and development differ in four key areas: mission, targets, activities, and measures of success. Table 1. All nonmilitary activity is not alike Diplomacy Development What’s the mission? Maintain favorable economic and political relationships abroad Save lives and support long‐term poverty reduction What’s the target? Political leadership and citizens where geostrategic interests are greatest Populations where potential for impact on poverty and human suffering is greatest Examples: • Meet with foreign government representatives • Negotiate treaties • Determine when and how economic sanctions are used • Provide assistance to US citizens abroad • Place media pieces in foreign outlets • Organize professional and academic exchanges Examples: • Oversee local water sanitation project • Train nurses in clinic to treat HIV/AIDS and prevent spread of other diseases • Expand market access for poor farmers in developing countries • Administer grants/contracts to NGOs and compile reports on money spent on projects • Train parliamentarians • Fund elements of the national development plan of a responsible government The strength of the relationship with the US and support for US political priorities Progress in terms of saving lives, reducing poverty, and creating equitable economic growth What do we do? How do we measure success? Smart Development in Practice | Aid Now
AID NOW Why do these differences matter? These clear differences between diplomacy and development suggest that US diplomats and development professionals use distinct skills and methods to reach their goals. Conflating diplomacy with development risks leading these professionals astray from their respective core competencies. The two disciplines also require distinct strategies, planning, capacity, and leadership to protect their goals and functionality and ensure the effectiveness of US foreign policy. Farmers like these growing
rice in West Bengal, India,
benefit from technical
assistance provided by the
US Agency for International
Development (USAID).
Sandipan Majumdar /
Photoshare
This does not mean that development and diplomacy efforts should not be coordinated. Development professionals need to be able to work with US diplomats, and vice versa. Successful development leading to improved infrastructure or decreased social unrest through poverty reduction can also make diplomatic and defense efforts more effective. In that same vein, weak and fragile states cannot effectively manage global security concerns like drug trafficking, money laundering, infectious diseases, and illegal migration. But this coordination must occur in a way that does not detract from the US government meeting either its development mission or its diplomatic mission. Even with strong advocates for development in both Secretaries Gates and Clinton, our developmental priorities need their own strong leadership, strategy, professionals, and resources in order to accomplish our US government development mission. The US government needs to invest both in diplomacy and in strong development leadership—
leadership with the authority to oversee independent policy and budgeting functions—if we are to meet our goals of saving lives and reducing global poverty. “The missions and personnel requirements
of the two organizations are different. The
State Department often has to deal with
pressing issues and naturally views
development dollars as only one of the
possible tools at hand. State Department
officers are superb diplomats, negotiators,
political observers, and policy analysts.
USAID, in contrast, is an operational and
program-management agency focused on
achieving sustainable economic growth
abroad; its staffers are aid professionals
with the technical and managerial skills to
get their work done.”
—J. Brian Atwood, M. Peter McPherson, and Andrew Natsios, “Arrested
development: Making foreign aid a more effective tool,” Foreign Affairs,
November/December 2008.
To learn more, visit www.reformaid.org Smart Development in Practice | Aid Now