Live Broadcast: U.S. Officials Discuss Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development

Posted by DipNote Bloggers
September 28, 2010
Replay of Discussion on Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development

Update: You can find the video and transcript of the event here.

Secretaries Clinton, Gates and Geithner, Administrator Shah and MCC CEO Yohannes will address the Presidential Policy Directive (PPD) on Global Development at the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition Conference today at 3:00 p.m. (EDT). This event will be live streamed on www.usglc.org.

On September 22, President Obama signed a Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development, the first of its kind by a U.S. administration. The directive calls for the elevation of development as a core pillar of American power and charts a course for development, diplomacy and defense to reinforce and complement one another in an integrated, comprehensive approach to national security.

The Department of State plays a central role in achieving the goals of the PPD. The Secretary of State has responsibility for ensuring that diplomacy and development are effectively coordinated and mutually reinforcing in the operation of our foreign policy. In support of the PPD and the National Security Strategy, Secretary Clinton is overseeing the first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, which will propose steps to strengthen our diplomatic and development capabilities to better meet our foreign policy goals and operationalize our new Global Development Policy across State and USAID.

Comments

Comments

Saber
|
Sudan
September 28, 2010

Saber in Sudan writes:

I do believe that the United States of America is a strong nation that leading the world, I am so delighted about the PPD. As per the wide range of roles and commitments that the USG has fulfilled. This a forward step of the US leadership to building our planet.

Oystercracker
|
United States
September 28, 2010

O.C. in the U.S.A. writes:

I have an idea called ?? University. (Send in ideas for a cute, funny, catchy name after the president and The Secretary of State). Using pre-existing online university programs from top notch technical, agricultural and other schools, (so you don't re-invent the wheel), the developing world can gain certification through this one gigantic online university. Universities could participate if they drastically cut rate their programs, making money on quantity. Graduates secure business training and micro loan funding, paid back at fair interest. Graduates gets free tuition but become a partner with the university in whatever venture they choose. The university has a vested interest of the continued success of their graduates. The university could concentrate on Obama's love of technical education and Hillary's love for business, politics and development or whatever. If money were generated through industries this would serve as a relatively safe investment of American taxpayer money provided the American public watches every penny loaned and spent.

Laura
|
California, USA
September 28, 2010

Laura in California writes:

Hillary, you are an extraordinary human being and the best leader ever! Thank you x being an inspiration x me and millions of women around the world! Please run x President again, there's no one else like you!Just the BEST!

Ron
|
New York, USA
September 29, 2010

Ron in New York writes:

Development with Accountability.....

Transparency and Accountability are essential elements to support the pillar of development.

There has been a bad cycle of development funding for projects in unstable, corrupt and non-democratic regions. The money is stolen, and the projects are undone. If we want to strengthen security via development; we need to ensure we are building on firm ground. Secure the development environmnent first, or risk financing terror while failing in development.

ATaylor
|
District Of Columbia, USA
September 29, 2010

A.T. in Washington DC writes:

A key aspect of meeting such broad development goals will be working on establishing government accountability. Most nations that are in need of dramatic development are those who have been widely criticized for corruption within their governments. Individual countries are going to have to be responsible for establishing unique ways to approach reaching development goals, because each nation faces different obstacles and circumstances. The United States, or any other developed nation, cannot force policy decisions, the countries need to want them. Therefore, for a nation to truly maintain significant development their governments and citizens much reach a mutual agreement on the importance of the goals and how to best implement a strategy.

When governments are corrupt it not only hinders policies that could promote development, but also decreases the likelihood that aid money will reach those who need it most. An even worse scenario is when donors or investors become so skeptical they halt or suspend aid all together. Without aid, development truly will slow. Therefore, countries must first create an outlet in which development can be discussed, debated, and implemented. Once this occurs, nations can begin working together in more transparent and trusting environments. It appears that the Presidential Policy Directive (PPD) will be making attempts to do just that. Strengthening U.S. diplomacy efforts abroad and having a specific strategy in doing so could be a powerful method in encouraging government accountability.

Oystercracker
|
United States
September 29, 2010

O.C. in the U.S.A. writes:

Thanks Ron,
So well expressed. Having federal development teams that come from the American public where the government could fill any needed positions nearly instantaneously is something I envision like a highly skilled, highly mobile and deployable national development corps who could be mobilized in units to oversee massive development projects. Rotating citizens who serve in these positions can then blend easily back into their normal jobs at home. This type of system could ease cyclical unemployment too. If you're not working at home, you're working abroad helping develop other nations or helping to beautify the homefront. Americans are very good at a systems approach to things like when Ford introduced the assembly line. We can get the job done quickly so that trade increases exponentially and America the Beautiful, stays that way.
The only requirement being that citizens who work in this capacity should receive a good salary and Cadillac quality health insurance and drink a pint of beer in President Obama's beer garden which will have gained National status and street cred.
"You drank a beer in Obama's beer garden?""Dang! I want an invite to his beer garden too."

Ron
|
New York, USA
September 29, 2010

Ron in New York writes:

Developement Beyond Borders...

The new vision includes recruiting US development workers who have roots in other countries and regions. Imagine your family is from (fill in the blank)and you are
designing, building a school, an airport, a bridge in the old country....You are really building a future so you have a past. Think how strong that bridge would be.

Ron
|
New York, USA
September 29, 2010

Ron in New York writes:

I can do without Henry Ford; thank you.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
September 29, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Beyond the roll out, and all the aspects of the three D's, I have to say I have not seen such a comprehensive discussion of foreign policy conducted in such an informal manner among the participants, it's nice to see everyone on the same page in their respective positions of responsibility.

I just wanmt to say thanks to one and all because I've been waiting to see this happen for a long time now.

It's been evolving since folks realized no one was prepared to do nation building after 9/11, State/USAID budgets not even keeping up with attrition rates of retiring employees to replace them.

We were caught flat footed on 9/11 in a lot of ways and it's taken until now to bring capacity to bear in full measure.

And that also on the global level of understanding the threats faced by one and all, in a process of harsh realization for many.

Let me applaud the moderator for his probing questions, his wit and ability to put his guests at ease in what I think is a model for future public discourse on policy issues.

Frankly I think my government should do this every week or bi-weekly until hell freezes over or the world's public finally understands America's true intent towards other nations. Let there be no confusion.

It's as if you took the "fireside chat", "Prime minister's question time" in the UK House of Commons, the "Tonight show" format, and blended all of it together in one space with only the fellow from Chicago missing...then I guess it would have been a public cabinet meeting of sorts.

But this was about the next best thing to it.

Oh yeah, I very much appreciate the "non-partisan" emphasis placed on the legislative effort involved.

The only danger I see in being selective is in what happens to the citizens of corrupt governments that are unworthy of development aid?

I mean unless you are going to suggest early retirement might be a good thing for all concerned, all those folks will be flat out of luck and hope.

The President said, "it ain't the man, it's the plan." quoting another , and I'm wondering what the rest of the story is.

EJ

Oystercracker
|
United States
September 29, 2010

O.C. in the U.S.A. writes:

@Ron,
I was promoting the innovative not exploitative part of the assembly line. The use of citizens with a connection to a country is an interesting concept provided you could find enough people from Turkmenistan with DIY skills. We all know that Mexico would be a slam dunk.

Ron
|
New York, USA
September 30, 2010

Ron in New York writes:

No Henry Ford for other reasons. Development should not exact such a cost.

Oystercracker
|
United States
October 1, 2010

O.C. in the U.S.A. writes:

@Ron,
In the absence of money you have to exploit your labor for a time. That's an acceptable price to pay for a better future. The difference in America is that the banks and corporatists were allowed free reign. That threat should have been nipped in bud at the get go.

Ron
|
New York, USA
October 2, 2010

Ron in New York writes:

Development cannot exploit; or it is bound to fail in the long run. The old model of donors imposing their agendas(for control)and recipients giving lip-service (while diverting resources) is over and out.

"Get Go?" No thanks.....you betcha!

Oystercracker
|
United States
October 3, 2010

O.C. in the U.S.A. writes:

Ron, I see it as the lesser of two evils. America only invades a country they need something from. In Afghanistan, they can stick with the Taliban or come over to our side and maybe have a chance of development. There is no benevolence in anything. Its always for a price.

.

Latest Stories

January 27, 2009

Food for Thought

About the Author: David Nelson serves as Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs. Video Text… more

Pages