ALFRED C. NEAL, President, Committee for Economic Development; Research Director, 1953-54, of the Randall Commission on Foreign Economic Policy
THE fact that foreign policy was a dominant issue in the 1960 Presidential election is probably evidence enough that our foreign economic policies should be critically reëxamined, particularly as they apply to the developing countries. The gap between the economic philosophies of the developed and underdeveloped countries seems to be widening and in most of Asia, Africa and Latin America the expectation of rapid economic development has not been fulfilled. The fact that some of the most dedicated and optimistic practitioners of development call for a large increase in economic aid to achieve an average increase in income of only $2 to $6 per head per year in the developing countries is evidence not only of the intractability of the problem but also of a desperate need for drastic changes in our thinking.
A French economist who had been through the best graduate schools both in his own country and in the United States, and who has had several years' experience with the economic development problems of Middle Africa, recently offered a disturbing appraisal. "Nothing that I have learned," he said, "is of the slightest use to meet the problems of economic development of these countries. And most of the present priorities that everybody gives to their problems are wrong." There is indeed considerable evidence to support the view that the critical breakthroughs in this field of knowledge and policy have yet to be made. The following personal observations, some of which will be anathema to my professional colleagues, represent an attempt to point out some new paths of policy.
The goal of foreign economic policy is to contribute to our foreign policy objectives. From this point of view, the most important goals of foreign economic policy are these:
(a) to promote maximum unity, strength and sustained growth in the free world and especially among our strongest allies. These are mainly the Atlantic countries and Japan, which are the great reservoir of capital, technology and skills in the free world;
(b) to influence developing countries in so far as possible toward the kind of liberal economic system of which we are now part, and away from that of the Soviet bloc, by realizing the rapid development which can be derived from coöperation with the liberal system of the West;
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
More rapid economic development for the less developed areas of the world is something which most of us in the United States want very much. We want it for humanitarian reasons and we want it because we believe it is in our national interest. There is, therefore, great public concern about our programs of assistance to developing areas, and in recent months there has been considerable discussion of the appropriate roles of public assistance and private international investment in contributing to economic development. These are important issues; but it is also important to keep them in perspective. What developing countries do for themselves is more important than what others do for them. In the majority of developing countries the adoption of a framework of law and regulations conducive to the full use by their citizens of productive resources that already exist would probably make a greater contribution toward their development than is now provided by all external assistance from both public and private sources.
When President Kennedy proposed a hemispheric Alliance for Progress to spur economic development and raise living standards in Latin America, he endorsed agrarian reform as a basic part of this effort. Land reform is not altogether new, of course, in Latin America. Simon Bolivar undertook, though with only limited success, to distribute estates seized from Spanish loyalists to the veterans of his revolutionary armies. In Haiti, when the republic was founded, the rebellious slaves killed most of their former masters who did not escape into exile, and the land was distributed among the Negroes. In the Dominican Republic, the Spanish colonial landowners fled before the Haitian armies which invaded the area in 1821, and from that time until the advent of the régime of the late Rafael Trujillo, most of the land remained in the hands of small peasant proprietors. Finally, from time to time during the nineteenth century there were sporadic efforts at land reform; in many Latin American nations, for instance, the church was deprived of its land, which was distributed in one way or another among the laity.
ANY attempt to look at some of the economic problems confronting the Atlantic group of nations over the next ten or fifteen years must take into account the general change in the economic climate which has occurred in the last five years. The long postwar boom ended in the summer of 1957. Before that climacteric the Atlantic group had enjoyed a period of almost continuous prosperity. Demand was high; markets were good; prices were satisfactory; and production was at capacity. Businessmen projected the lines of their graphs upwards and on without a kink. Growth and progress seemed here to stay. Since 1957 it has been a different story. Spurts of prosperity have been succeeded by the languors of recession and stagnation, except among the Six; and even among them the rate of growth has been slowing down and they have begun to be plagued with many of the problems already affecting the rest of the group. It has been a time of growing uncertainties: about maintaining the volume of production, about the erosion of profits, about the status of the two great currencies which, with gold, constitute the media of international settlement. This accumulation of doubts about the future has found expression in the last few months in a major decline in prices in the stock exchanges of the Atlantic group. There is a widespread feeling that a new set of problems has come up which will be with us for a long time and with which we do not know how to deal.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.