ABSTRACT

The sharp dichotomy in the style of foreign aid-divided between the dispensing of vague, philosophical statements and specific, pragmatic actions in response to foreign threats—was continued after World War II. Although foreign assistance programs multiplied in number and expense, and changed in character, there was scarcely a debate to articulate the implications of a long-range commitment to foreign aid. Nothing for example, comparable to the extensive public and private discussions about establishing the United Nations or stationing troops in Europe during peacetime. First, the somewhat haphazard political debate over foreign aid is itself significant, for it reflects the fact that the practitioners of aid have rarely tried, in public at least, to establish clearly the temporal, financial, and political limits of the program. It remains uncertain whether the notions of the man in the street about foreign aid are only slightly more hazy than those of the policy-makers themselves.