The Urgent Call for Promoting Self-Reliance through Foreign Assistance

By: Gloria Steele
The sudden and rapid dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the precipitous decline in bilateral aid levels between the U.S. and recipient countries in recent years urgently call for an all-out focus on promoting countries’ self-reliance for their own development. Additionally, the unpredictability of foreign aid that is solely focused on advancing donors’ national self-interests requires a concerted effort to accelerate recipient countries’ capacities and commitments to meet their development needs with little or no dependence on foreign assistance.
Self-Reliance: What Is It?
In 2018, under the leadership of Mark Green, USAID launched the “Journey to Self-Reliance” (JSR). It was not a well-understood concept at that time, especially outside of USAID. It was viewed as self-serving, when in fact, it was intended to have the opposite effect. The JSR aimed to equip nations with the tools, knowledge, and resources necessary to create lasting solutions for themselves. Instead of perpetuating dependence on external aid, the strategy’s objective was to foster a sense of ownership and responsibility among recipient countries to identify and meet their unique development needs and priorities. It was anchored on the principle of fostering independence, which has become even more relevant and urgent today.
In his book on the history of USAID, John Norris noted that the JSR strikingly resembled the foreign aid approach favored by Presidents John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s.[1] Their approaches centered foreign aid on strengthening countries’ overall capacities for successful governance. Like the 1960s approach to foreign aid, the JSR aimed to help countries reduce their reliance on foreign aid by prioritizing cross-sectoral capacity building for good governance, promoting resilience, and fostering citizen empowerment. The JSR’s approach was a departure from the principles of the 1973 New Directions legislation, which defined the U.S. government’s foreign assistance approach at that time.[2] The legislation’s focus on meeting basic human needs—while admirable—led to the unfortunate stove-piped, sector-focused development approach that has constrained the resolution of structural and systemic roadblocks to sustainable change.
Building Capacity for Good Governance
Taiwan and South Korea stand out among the most enduring successes of U.S. foreign assistance. In the 1960s, the United States invested heavily on people and institutions, along with structural changes. For example, USAID had a large global international training program that included bringing almost 7,000 foreign nationals for advanced education in U.S. universities.[3] Most of those foreign nationals subsequently assumed important high-level government positions in their respective countries and served as influential advocates for improved policies in economic and social sectors. Good governance—the centerpiece of American foreign aid in the 1960s—played a key role in attracting foreign direct investments, increasing countries’ gross national product, promoting entrepreneurship and advancements in innovations, and eventually promoting development self-reliance. It was also during the 1960s that the United States played a leading role in addressing a potential global food calamity through the Green Revolution.
The 1973 New Directions legislation generated important successes such as smallpox eradication and significant reductions in child mortality. However, by focusing on sector-specific services and commodity delivery, the congressional earmarks made investing in nationwide systems and institution building challenging. The highly successful participant training programs of the 1960s were practically eliminated, weakening the U.S. contribution to capacity building, which played a key role in promoting self-reliance in the 1960s. Notwithstanding the challenges posed by the narrowly focused congressional earmarks, major efforts were made to promote capacity building and systems strengthening as priorities under the JSR.
Promoting Resilience
The COVID pandemic, the ensuing economic shocks, and recent changes in political leanings are reminders that the sustainability of impact is not always guaranteed. For example, the pandemic significantly slowed or reversed the hard-earned progress toward the achievement of the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals. In 2024, the UN reported that development assistance in half of the world’s poorest countries has not returned to its pre-pandemic levels.[4] In the face of setbacks, an important post-pandemic lesson is that country resilience is key. By building self-reliance, recipient nations are better able to develop resilient systems and institutions capable of withstanding adverse circumstances. This resilience not only supports long-term stability but also enables countries to respond more effectively to crises, reducing their dependence on emergency aid and fostering a sense of security and confidence. Among developing nations, Vietnam demonstrated one of the most remarkable examples of resilience during the pandemic. Its capacity to develop and enforce strict containment measures significantly slowed the spread of COVID in the country. As a result of this resilience, its economy grew by 2.9% in 2020, one of the highest in the world.[5]
Fostering Empowerment and Ownership
A key message that emerged during my conversations with development experts in Southeast Asia and Africa through the trilateral dialogue organized by the Asia Society Policy Institute’s Development as Strategy project was the importance of locally led development. Promoting self-reliance as a key goal of foreign assistance includes developing recipient nations’ capacities to lead their own development trajectory. When partner countries feel empowered to lead the planning, implementation, and monitoring of donor-funded development projects, they are more likely to have a sense of ownership and commitment. This empowerment leads to increased participation, resulting in more successful and impactful initiatives. When recipient countries feel empowered, they are also better able to enforce collaboration among donors, which is particularly important at this time of diminished donor resources.
Rwanda serves as a compelling example of the benefits of promoting self-reliance through foreign assistance. Following the devastating genocide in 1994, Rwanda received substantial foreign aid to rebuild its economy and infrastructure. The government of Rwanda wisely used foreign aid to build its own capacity to meet its development needs and reduce its dependence on external support. Through innovative policies and investments in key development institutions such as education, healthcare, and agriculture, Rwanda has achieved remarkable progress. Today, Rwanda is often cited as a model of self-reliant development, with significant improvements in poverty reduction, economic growth, and social well-being.
Conclusion
Despite its numerous benefits, promoting self-reliance through foreign assistance is not without challenges. Long-term commitment to cross-sectoral capacity building has been made difficult by the stove-piped sector-specific legislated allocations that have characterized the U.S. government’s foreign aid. Weak governance has limited the capacity of recipient countries to mobilize domestic resources to fund their own economic and social development, attract foreign direct investments to augment the financing of essential development infrastructure, or promote domestic innovation and entrepreneurship to generate resources needed to reduce reliance on foreign aid. Further, because reduced reliance on donor funding by recipient countries results in reduced grants and contracts, some U.S. and other Western implementing partners view country self-reliance as an existential threat. However, current circumstances compel actions to promote development self-reliance. Despite these challenges, notable successes have been and can be achieved. With significantly diminished bilateral foreign aid, more skillful design of development projects and more concerted effort and commitment by recipient countries will be needed to accelerate countries’ journeys to self-reliance.
End Notes
[1] John Norris, The Enduring Struggle: The History of the U.S. Agency for International Development and America’s Uneasy Transformation of the World (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2021).
[2] Congress.gov. "S.1443–93rd Congress (1973–1974): Foreign Assistance Act of 1973." December 17, 1973, https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/senate-bill/1443
[3] Andrew S. Natsios, "Foreign aid in an era of great power competition," PRISM 8, no. 4 (2020): 101–119, https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/prism/prism_8-4/prism_8-4…
[4] United Nations Development Programme, “Human development report 2023–24: Breaking the gridlock: Reimagining cooperation in a polarized world,” https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents/global-report-document/hdr2…
[5] Era Dabla-Norris and Yuanyan Sophia Zhang, “Vietnam: Successfully navigating the pandemic,” International Monetary Fund (March 10, 2021), https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2021/03/09/na031021-vietnam-succes…