2005 Volume 2005 Issue 143 Pages 45-60,L8
Since the end of the World War II, there have been enormous amounts of international norms vis-à-vis economic development assistance. However, there have been few studies as to how international norms affect states' behavior. Thus, understanding the effect of the international norms on the foreign aid policy is crucial for the advancement of international development cooperation.
Many Constructivists claim that states comply with international norms because they consider them “appropriate.” However, in reality, there are multiple (and often competing) international norms and states choose to comply only with particular international norms. Constructivists presuppose the existence of a unique international norm and hence do not explain how and why states choose certain particular international norms among the many available. Therefore, examining this selection process of international norms by political actors is essential in understanding the influence of international norms in general.
This article examines the legislation of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1973 by focusing on the political process as to how the most “appropriate” norms were chosen. In the Foreign Assistance Act of 1973, the Nixon administration finally enacted two international norms-the BHN norm and poverty alleviation norm to justify its own strategic foreign aid policy. Originally, these two international norms were the justification employed by USAID. At that time, the White House was undertaking foreign aid policy reforms and trying to abolish the bilateral technical assistance program and USAID. Facing the danger of extinction, USAID chose these two international norms as justification for emphasizing the significance of the bilateral technical assistance program and the role of USAID as its implementing institution. USAID succeeded in convincing the Nixon administration and as a result, these two international norms were enacted as an official goal of the U. S. foreign assistance. In fact, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1973 has been ineffective because of the small size of the funds allotted to development aid and because of their strategic use. However, in the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, the same two international norms-the BHN norm and the poverty alleviation norm-were enacted again and substantive funds were appropriated.
This case suggests that if political actors consider the international norms good tools of pursuing their own self-interest, the international norms can enable the legislation of the foreign assistance act and provide a prototype for more future legislation that may be more effective.
