U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean: Recent Trends and FY2013 Appropriations
Congressional research reportApr 5, 2013
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and
the Caribbean: Recent Trends and FY2013
Appropriations
-name redactedAnalyst in Latin American Affairs
-name redactedSpecialist in Latin American Affairs
April 5, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R42582
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Summary
Geographic proximity has forged strong linkages between the United States and the nations of
Latin America and the Caribbean, with critical U.S. interests in the region encompassing
economic, political, and security concerns. U.S. policymakers have emphasized different strategic
interests in the region at different times, from combating Soviet influence during the Cold War to
advancing democracy and open markets since the 1990s. Current U.S. policy toward the region is
designed to promote economic and social opportunity, ensure citizen security, strengthen effective
democratic institutions, and secure a clean energy future. As part of broader efforts to advance
these priorities, the United States provides Latin American and Caribbean nations with substantial
amounts of foreign assistance. In recent years, the State Department, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs appropriations measure has been the primary legislative vehicle through which
Congress reviews U.S. assistance and influences executive branch policy toward the region.
Trends in Assistance
Since 1946, the United States has provided over $148 billion (constant 2010 dollars) in assistance
to the region. Funding levels have fluctuated over time, however, according to regional trends and
U.S. policy initiatives. U.S. assistance to the region spiked during the 1960s under President
Kennedy’s Alliance for Progress, and then declined in the 1970s before spiking again during the
Central American conflicts of the 1980s. After another decline during the 1990s, assistance to the
region remained on a generally upward trajectory through the first decade of this century,
reaching its most recent peak in the aftermath of the 2010 earthquake in Haiti. Aid levels for the
region have fallen in each of the past two fiscal years, however, as Congress has sought to trim
the foreign aid budget.
FY2013 Obama Administration Request
The Obama Administration’s FY2013 foreign aid budget request would have continued the recent
downward trend in assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean. The Administration requested
some $1.7 billion for the region to be provided through the State Department and the U.S. Agency
for International Development (USAID). Beyond the assistance provided through the State
Department and USAID, many Latin American and Caribbean nations will continue to receive
additional aid from agencies such as the Department of Defense, the Inter-American Foundation,
the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the Peace Corps.
Congressional Action
In May 2012, the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations marked up their annual
appropriations bills for the State Department, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (H.R.
5857 and S. 3241). Funding in the FY2013 House bill was 11.8% lower than the Administration’s
request, and funding in the Senate bill was 4.7% lower than the Administration’s request. It is
unclear how much foreign assistance each of the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean
would have received under the two bills, however, since appropriation levels for individual
countries and programs are generally not specified in the legislation or accompanying reports.
Ultimately no action was taken on these measures. Congress delayed floor consideration of
FY2013 appropriations bills until after the start of the new fiscal year and the November 2012
elections, instead enacting a six-month continuing resolution that would expire in March 2013
(P.L. 112-175). In March 2013, before the continuing resolution expired, Congress approved new
Congressional Research Service
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
legislation (P.L. 113-6) funding federal programs through the end of FY2013. Under that
measure, State Department and Foreign Operations accounts were funded at the same level as in
FY2012 with some exceptions. Funding, however, was also subject to the budget sequestration
cuts set forth in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25) and the American Taxpayers Relief
Act (P.L. 112-240). While sequestration reduced State Department-Foreign Operations funding by
about 5%, those reductions will be applied at the account level, and as a result, country-level
allocations for FY2013 are not yet available.
Note: The FY2013 foreign aid statistics cited in this report reflect the Administration FY2013
request for assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean. The discussion and analysis
throughout this report reflect comparisons of the Administration’s FY2013 request with FY2012
aid estimates. Discussion of FY2013 legislative action focuses on bills reported by the House and
Senate Appropriations Committees, but never considered by Congress.
Congressional Research Service
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
Trends in U.S. Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean ...................................................... 2
Comparison to Other Regions of the World .............................................................................. 3
Types of Assistance ................................................................................................................... 4
Top Recipients ........................................................................................................................... 6
FY2013 Request for Latin America and the Caribbean ................................................................... 7
Mexico and Central America ..................................................................................................... 9
Caribbean................................................................................................................................. 14
Andean Region ........................................................................................................................ 18
Brazil and the Southern Cone .................................................................................................. 21
Regional and Centrally Managed Programs ............................................................................ 23
Other U.S. Agencies Providing Foreign Assistance....................................................................... 26
Department of Defense ............................................................................................................ 26
Inter-American Foundation ..................................................................................................... 28
Millennium Challenge Corporation ......................................................................................... 29
Peace Corps ............................................................................................................................. 31
Potential Issues for Congressional Consideration.......................................................................... 31
Budget Priorities and Constraints ............................................................................................ 31
Inter-Agency and Donor Coordination .................................................................................... 34
Political Will and Program Sustainability ............................................................................... 36
Legislative Action on FY2013 Appropriations .............................................................................. 37
March 2013 Update ................................................................................................................. 39
Figures
Figure 1. U.S. Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean: FY1946-FY2010 ......................... 2
Figure 2. Regional Distribution of U.S. Assistance: FY2008 and FY2012 ..................................... 4
Figure 3. U.S. Assistance by Account: FY2008-FY2013 ................................................................ 6
Figure 4. Sub-regional Distribution of the FY2013 Request ........................................................... 9
Figure 5. Map of Central America and the Caribbean ................................................................... 14
Figure 6. Map of South America ................................................................................................... 21
Tables
Table 1. U.S. Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean by Account: FY2008 and
FY2011-FY2013 ........................................................................................................................... 5
Table 2. Top Recipients of U.S. Assistance: FY2008 and FY2011-FY2013 ................................... 7
Table 3. U.S. Assistance to Mexico and Central America: FY2011-FY2013 ................................ 11
Table 4. U.S. Assistance to the Caribbean: FY2011-FY2013 ........................................................ 16
Table 5. U.S. Assistance to the Andean Region: FY2011-FY2013................................................ 19
Congressional Research Service
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Table 6. U.S. Assistance to Brazil and the Southern Cone: FY2011-FY2013 ............................... 22
Table 7. U.S. Assistance Provided through Regional and Centrally Managed Programs:
FY2011-FY2013 ......................................................................................................................... 26
Table A-1. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program and Account: FY2011 .................................. 40
Table A-2. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program and Account: FY2012 Estimate ................... 42
Table A-3. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program and Account: FY2013 Request .................... 44
Appendixes
Appendix. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program and Account: FY2011-FY2013 .................... 40
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 45
Congressional Research Service
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Introduction
Foreign assistance is one of the tools the United States has employed to advance U.S. interests in
Latin America and the Caribbean, with the focus and funding levels of aid programs changing
along with broader U.S. policy goals. Current aid programs reflect the diversity of the countries in
the region. Some countries receive the full range of U.S. assistance as they continue to struggle
with political, socioeconomic, and security challenges. Others, which have made major strides in
democratic governance and economic and social development, have largely outgrown U.S.
assistance but continue to receive some support for new security challenges, such as
strengthening citizen security and combating transnational organized crime. Although U.S.
relations with the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean have increasingly become less
defined by the provision of U.S. assistance as a result of this progress, foreign aid continues to
play an important role in advancing U.S. policy in the region.
Congress authorizes and appropriates foreign assistance to the region and conducts oversight of
aid programs and the executive branch agencies charged with managing them. Current efforts to
reduce budget deficits in the aftermath of the recent global financial crisis and U.S. recession
have triggered closer examination of competing budget priorities. Congress has identified foreign
assistance as a potential area for spending cuts, placing greater scrutiny on the efficiency and
effectiveness of U.S. aid programs. Spending caps and across-the-board cuts that were included in
the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25)1 could place downward pressure on the aid budget
for the foreseeable future.
This report is an overview of U.S. assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean. It briefly
examines historical and recent trends in aid to the region. It then provides a detailed look at the
Obama Administration’s FY2013 request for State Department and USAID-related assistance to
Latin America and the Caribbean, and describes support provided by other U.S. agencies in order
to draw a more complete picture of U.S. assistance to the region. It also examines key Latin
America and Caribbean funding provisions in the FY2013 foreign aid appropriations bills and
potential issues for congressional consideration.
Report Notes
Bilateral Assistance: Except where otherwise indicated, aid figures in this report refer only to bilateral
assistance administered by the State Department and USAID. U.S. assistance programs in the region that are
administered by the Department of Defense, the Inter-American Foundation, the Millennium Challenge
Corporation, and the Peace Corps are discussed separately (see “Other U.S. Agencies Providing Foreign
Assistance”). Some countries also receive assistance from multilateral organizations that the United States supports
financially, such as the Organization of American States. Multilateral assistance is not discussed in this report.
Acronyms: In this report, the following acronyms correspond to foreign assistance accounts specified in annual
appropriations legislation: DA=Development Assistance; ESF=Economic Support Fund; FMF=Foreign Military
Financing; GHP=Global Health Programs; IMET=International Military Education and Training; INCLE=International
Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement; MRA=Migration and Refugee Assistance; NADR=Nonproliferation Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related programs; and P.L. 480=Food For Peace.
1
For more information on the provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2011, see: CRS Report R41965, The Budget
Control Act of 2011, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
1
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Trends in U.S. Assistance to Latin America and the
Caribbean
The United States has long been a major contributor of foreign assistance to countries in Latin
America and the Caribbean. U.S. assistance to the region spiked in the early 1960s following the
introduction of President Kennedy’s Alliance for Progress, an anti-poverty initiative that sought to
counter Soviet and Cuban influence in the aftermath of Fidel Castro’s 1959 seizure of power in
Cuba. After a period of decline, U.S. assistance to the region increased again following the 1979
assumption of power by the leftist Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Throughout the 1980s, the United
States provided considerable support to the Contras, who sought to overthrow the Sandinista
government, as well as to Central American governments battling leftist insurgencies. U.S. aid
flows declined in the mid-1990s following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the end of the
Central American civil conflicts, and the spread of electoral democracy throughout the region.
Figure 1. U.S. Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean: FY1946-FY2010
(Obligations in billions of constant 2010 U.S. dollars)
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Military Assistance
Economic Assistance
Source: USAID, U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants: Obligations and Loan Authorizations, July 1, 1945-September 30,
2010 (Greenbook), April 2012.
Notes: Includes aid obligations from all U.S. government agencies.
U.S. foreign assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean began to increase once again in the
late 1990s and remained on a generally upward trajectory through the past decade. The higher
levels of assistance were partially the result of increased spending on humanitarian and
development assistance. In the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch in 1998, the United States provided
Congressional Research Service
2
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
extensive humanitarian and reconstruction aid to several countries in Central America. The
establishment of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in 2003 and the
Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) in 2004 provided a number of countries in the region
with new sources of U.S. assistance.2 More recently, the Obama Administration has placed greater
emphasis on fostering broad-based economic growth in the region and (initially) requested higher
levels of aid for development efforts. The United States also provided significant amounts of
assistance to Haiti in the aftermath of its massive January 2010 earthquake (see Figure 1).
Nevertheless, the vast majority of the increase in U.S. aid though 2010 was directed toward
counternarcotics and security programs. Beginning with President Clinton and the 106th Congress
in FY2000, successive Administrations and Congresses have provided substantial amounts of
foreign aid to Colombia and its Andean neighbors in support of “Plan Colombia”—a Colombian
government initiative to combat drug trafficking, end its long-running internal armed conflict, and
foster development. Spending on counternarcotics and security assistance received another boost
in FY2008 when President Bush joined with his Mexican counterpart to announce the Mérida
Initiative, a package of U.S. counterdrug and anticrime assistance for Mexico and Central
America. In FY2010, the Obama Administration split the Central America portion of Mérida into
a separate Central America Regional Security Initiative (CARSI) and created a similar program
for the countries of the Caribbean known as the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI).
After more than a decade of generally increasing aid levels, U.S. assistance to Latin America and
the Caribbean has again begun to decline. U.S. aid to the region has decreased each year since
FY2010, and would continue to do so under the Obama Administration’s FY2013 request.
Comparison to Other Regions of the World3
As the absolute level of U.S. assistance to the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean has
begun to decline, so too has the proportion of U.S. aid going to the region. Between FY2008 and
FY2012, U.S. assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean fell from $2.1 billion to an
estimated $1.9 billion, a 10% decrease. U.S. aid to East Asia and the Pacific and Europe and
Eurasia also declined substantially; however, aid to South and Central Asia increased 46%, aid to
the Middle East increased 27%, and aid to Africa increased by a little over 1% during the same
time period. These variations reflect changes in the world and shifting priorities in U.S. foreign
policy. As economic growth and democratic governance have improved in many Latin American
and former Soviet states in Eastern Europe, the United States has shifted its resources toward
development efforts in Africa and countries of strategic importance to U.S. anti-terrorism
operations, such as Afghanistan and Pakistan. As a result of these trends, U.S. assistance to Latin
America and the Caribbean as a proportion of total U.S. foreign assistance dropped from 10% in
FY2008 to under 8% in FY2012 (see Figure 2).
2
For more information on PEPFAR and the MCC, see CRS Report R42776, The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR): Funding Issues After a Decade of Implementation, FY2004-FY2013, by (name redacted) and
CRS Report RL32427, Millennium Challenge Corporation, by (name redacted).
3
For more information on U.S. foreign assistance globally, see: CRS Report R40213, Foreign Aid: An Introduction to
U.S. Programs and Policy, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
3
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Figure 2. Regional Distribution of U.S. Assistance: FY2008 and FY2012
(Percentage of total U.S. assistance)
Source: CRS calculations based on U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, Fiscal Year 2010, May 28, 2009; and FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012.
Notes: Based on appropriated levels. Figures include supplemental appropriations, Iraq and Afghanistan. The
FY2008 appropriations figures are included as a point of comparison since the FY2008 budget was the last to be
approved during the Bush Administration, and the last to be approved before the financial crisis. The FY2012
figures are estimates and may change.
Types of Assistance
U.S. foreign assistance to countries in Latin America and the Caribbean serves a variety of
purposes. Since taking office, the Obama Administration has dedicated a greater proportion of aid
to the region to development and humanitarian assistance programs. Development assistance,
provided primarily through the Development Assistance (DA) and Global Health Programs
(GHP) accounts, seeks to foster sustainable broad-based economic progress and social stability in
developing nations. Such funding is often used for long-term projects in the areas of economic
reform, democracy promotion, basic education, human health, and environmental protection.
Humanitarian assistance is devoted largely to the immediate alleviation of humanitarian
emergencies. This includes most food assistance provided through the Food for Peace (P.L. 480)
account and assistance for refugees and internally displaced persons funded through the
Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) account. USAID manages most development and
humanitarian assistance programs; however, the State Department administers the MRA account
and manages a portion of the global health account that mainly addresses HIV/AIDS (under the
PEPFAR program).
Another significant portion of U.S. assistance to the region is provided through the Economic
Support Fund (ESF) account. The primary purpose of ESF is promotion of special U.S. economic,
political, or security interests. The account generally funds programs that are designed to promote
political and economic stability, and in practice, ESF-funded programs are often indistinguishable
from those funded through the development and humanitarian assistance accounts mentioned
above. USAID manages ESF funds in conjunction with the State Department.
In addition to its support for economic, social, and political development efforts, the United States
funds a number of security assistance programs in the region designed to address security
concerns. Funding provided through the International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
(INCLE) account supports counternarcotics and civilian law enforcement efforts as well as
Congressional Research Service
4
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
projects designed to strengthen judicial institutions. U.S. assistance designed to counter global
threats such as terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is provided through the
Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, De-mining, and Related programs (NADR) account. The United
States also supports Latin American and Caribbean militaries by providing equipment and
personnel training through the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and International Military
Education and Training (IMET) accounts. The State Department manages the INCLE and NADR
accounts. It also administers the FMF and IMET accounts, which are implemented by the
Department of Defense.4
Table 1. U.S. Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean by Account: FY2008 and
FY2011-FY2013
(Appropriations in millions of current U.S. dollars)
Account
FY2008 (Actual)
FY2011 (Actual)
FY2012 (Estimate)
FY2013 (Request)
DA
247.3
361.5
333.4
348.9
GHP (State)
145.0
203.3
189.4
175.2
GHP (USAID)
134.2
131.0
105.5
86.8
MRA
25.4
57.1
53.9
47.2
P.L. 480
138.4
95.0
48.0
40.0
ESF
554.2
435.1
465.5
434.2
INCLE
655.4
506.2
593.3
476.5
NADR
16.3
25.2
20.5
13.3
FMF
185.1
84.5
70.3
62.4
IMET
11.6
14.5
15.7
14.4
Total
2,112.9
1,913.3
1,895.4
1,699.0
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Years 2010 and
2013; FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012; and Fiscal Year 2012 Congressional Spending Plan: Central
America Regional Security Initiative, June 19, 2012.
Notes: The FY2008 appropriations figures are included as a point of comparison since the FY2008 budget was
the last to be approved during the Bush Administration, and the last to be approved before the financial crisis.
The FY2012 figures are estimates and may change.
As total aid levels to the region have declined in recent years, Congress and the Administration
have gradually shifted the balance of the remaining assistance toward development and
humanitarian assistance and away from security assistance (see Figure 3 below). In FY2012,
over $730 million in U.S. aid to the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean was provided
through aid accounts (DA, GHCS, MRA, and P.L. 480) designed to support development and
humanitarian assistance programs. This represents nearly 39% of total U.S. bilateral assistance to
the region, up from 33% in FY2008. Another $466 million, or almost 25% of total assistance, was
provided to the region through the ESF account to support U.S. strategic interests. As a proportion
of aid, ESF remains roughly unchanged from 2008. The United States also provided nearly $700
million in FY2012 through aid accounts (INCLE, NADR, FMF, and IMET) designed to support
4
Additional U.S. assistance provided by the Department of Defense is discussed below; see: “Department of Defense.”
Congressional Research Service
5
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
security efforts in Latin American and Caribbean countries. This represents approximately 37% of
total U.S. bilateral assistance to the region, down from 41% in FY2008.
Figure 3. U.S. Assistance by Account: FY2008-FY2013
(Appropriations in billions of current U.S. dollars)
3.5
IMET
FMF
NADR
3
2.5
INCLE
2
1.5
ESF
1
MRA
P.L. 480
GHP-USAID
GHP-State
0.5
DA
0
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012 (est.)
FY2013 (req.)
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Years 2010-2013;
FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012; and Fiscal Year 2012 Congressional Spending Plan: Central
America Regional Security Initiative, June 19, 2012,
Notes: The increase in aid in FY2010 is mostly attributable to a large supplemental assistance package for Haiti
in the aftermath of the January 2010 earthquake. The FY2012 figures are estimates and may change.
Top Recipients
Haiti, Colombia, and Mexico have been the top regional recipients of U.S. foreign aid in recent
years. The United States has provided Haiti with high levels of aid for many years as a result of
the country’s significant development challenges. In the immediate aftermath of the massive
earthquake that struck Haiti in January 2010, the United States provided the country with
extensive humanitarian relief. Since then, U.S. assistance has focused on the establishment of
long-term development in key sectors such as energy, infrastructure, basic services, and
governance. As noted above, Colombia has received considerable levels of aid since FY2000
through “Plan Colombia.” U.S. aid to Colombia has been on a downward trajectory in recent
years, however, as the security situation in Colombia has improved, the country has begun taking
on financial and operational responsibility for the programs, and the United States has shifted the
emphasis of its assistance away from costly military equipment toward economic and social
development efforts. U.S. assistance for Mexico is designed primarily to support the country’s
Congressional Research Service
6
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
fight against transnational criminal organizations. As in Colombia, aid levels have declined
somewhat as the focus of U.S. assistance has shifted away from the provision of security
equipment to rule of law programs. In FY2012, the United States provided an estimated $357
million for Haiti, $379 million for Colombia, and $330 million for Mexico. Together, these
countries received over 56% of all aid to the region (see Table 2 below).
Table 2. Top Recipients of U.S. Assistance: FY2008 and FY2011-FY2013
(Appropriations in millions of current U.S. dollars)
Country
FY2008 (Actual)
FY2011 (Actual)
FY2012 (Estimate)
FY2013 (Request)
Haiti
378.0
380.3
357.2
340.0
Colombia
551.3
453.2
379.0
331.8
Mexico
405.9
178.1
330.1
269.5
Guatemala
62.9
110.2
95.2
93.6
Peru
91.0
96.6
82.6
73.7
Honduras
40.5
56.0
57.0
58.2
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Years 2010 and
2013; and FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012.
Notes: The FY2008 appropriations figures are included as a point of comparison since the FY2008 budget was
the last to be approved during the Bush Administration, and the last to be approved before the financial crisis.
The FY2012 figures are estimates and may change.
FY2013 Request for Latin America and the
Caribbean5
The Obama Administration’s FY2013 foreign aid budget request would continue the recent
downward trend in assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean. The Administration has
requested approximately $1.7 billion for the region. If Congress appropriates funding at the
requested levels, Latin America and the Caribbean would receive about 10% less assistance than
the region received in FY2012 and about 11% less than the region received in FY2011. In
comparison, the Administration’s budget request calls for a 0.1% increase over FY2012 levels for
foreign operations worldwide. The proposed cuts for the region are widespread, with funding for
every account—with the exception of Development Assistance—decreasing as compared to
FY2012. Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, and Guyana would see some of the largest cuts in
percentage terms, while Colombia and Mexico would see the largest absolute declines in
assistance. El Salvador, which was selected by the Administration for its “Partnership for Growth
Initiative,”6 is the only country in the region that would receive a substantial increase in aid.
5
Information in this section is drawn from: U.S. Department of State, FY2013 Congressional Budget Justification,
Foreign Operations, Annex: Regional Perspectives, April 2012; and FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24,
2012.
6
The principles behind the Partnership for Growth Initiative are to (1) focus on broad-based economic growth; (2)
select countries with demonstrated performance and political will; (3) use joint decision-making and prioritization of
activities; (4) support catalytic policy change and institutional reform; (5) leverage U.S. government engagement for
maximum impact; and (6) emphasize partnership and country ownership.
Congressional Research Service
7
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Even as total aid to the region would decline, the Administration’s request would continue the
gradual shift in emphasis of U.S. aid to the region away from security assistance toward
development and humanitarian assistance. Taken together, accounts that provide development or
humanitarian assistance would receive over $698 million, or 41% of the total aid request for the
region in FY2013. Nevertheless, the request represents a 4% decrease in total funding for
development and humanitarian assistance compared to FY2012, and a nearly 18% decrease
compared to FY2011. The Obama Administration has also requested some $434 million to be
provided to the region through the Economic Support Fund (ESF) account. This would be a 7%
decline from FY2012, but roughly equal to the amount provided to Latin America and the
Caribbean in FY2011. Funding for ESF represents 26% of the Administration’s FY2013 request
for the region. If Congress fully funds the request, $567 million, or 33% of U.S. aid, would go to
accounts that provide security assistance. U.S. security assistance for Latin America and the
Caribbean would decrease by about 19% compared to FY2012 and 10% compared to FY2011
(see Table 1 above).
Looking at the distribution of assistance within the Western Hemisphere, 36% of the
Administration’s request is dedicated to Mexico and Central America. This sub-region has
become a greater focus of U.S. aid once again as a result of deteriorating security situations in
several of the countries and improving conditions elsewhere in the hemisphere. Another 29% of
U.S. aid to the region would go to the Caribbean, while 27% would go to the Andean nations of
South America. Brazil and the countries of the Southern Cone of South America, which are some
of the most developed in the hemisphere, would receive just 1% of U.S. assistance for the region.
The final 7% of the request is dedicated to regional programs and accounts that span more than
one sub-region (see Figure 4 below).
Congressional Research Service
8
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Figure 4. Sub-regional Distribution of the FY2013 Request
(Percentage of total U.S. assistance to the hemisphere)
Regional and
Centrally-Managed
Brazil &
Programs
Southern Cone
7%
1%
Mexico and Central
America
36%
Andean Region
27%
Caribbean
29%
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012.
Notes: “Regional and Centrally-Managed Programs” include: Migration and Refugee Assistance, the USAID Latin
America and Caribbean Regional program, the USAID South America Regional program, and the State Western
Hemisphere Regional program—excluding the funds allocated to the Central America Regional Security Initiative
(CARSI) and the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI). The funds for CARSI, CBSI, and the USAID Central
America Regional program are included in the figures of the corresponding sub-regions.
Mexico and Central America
Background. Taking into account obligations from all U.S. agencies, the United States provided
Mexico and the countries of Central America7 with foreign assistance worth $27.5 billion in
constant 2010 U.S. dollars (or $18.9 billion in current, or non-inflation-adjusted, dollars) between
FY1980 and FY2010.8 Over 91% of the aid provided was in the form of economic assistance,
with the remainder in military assistance. El Salvador accounted for 33% of the U.S. assistance
provided over the 31-year period, followed by Honduras (17%), Guatemala (13%), Mexico
(11%), Costa Rica (10%), Nicaragua (9%), Panama (5%), and Belize (1%).
7
For the purposes of this report, "Central America" includes all seven countries of the isthmus: Belize, Costa Rica, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama.
8
All U.S. aid statistics and percentages for FY1980-FY2010 are drawn from the “Green Book” maintained by USAID
online, and include all U.S. economic and military assistance, using constant 2010 U.S. dollar amounts of obligated
(committed) funds from all agencies. See: USAID, U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants: Obligations and Loan
Authorizations, July 1, 1945 - September 30, 2010, available at: http://gbk.eads.usaidallnet.gov/index.html.
Congressional Research Service
9
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
U.S. assistance to the sub-region has declined in each decade since the 1980s. As noted above,
Central America was a major priority for U.S. foreign aid during the 1980s as the United States
sought to combat Soviet influence and support allied governments fighting leftist insurgencies.
The United States provided Mexico and Central America with $12.8 billion (constant 2010 U.S.
dollars) in assistance over the course of the decade—43% of which went to El Salvador.
Assistance declined considerably during the 1990s as the Cold War and civil conflicts came to an
end. Although several countries in the sub-region received substantial amounts of U.S. assistance
for reconstruction in the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch in 1998, total aid for the 1990s amounted
to $7.6 billion in 2010 U.S. dollars, a 41% decline from the previous decade.
U.S. aid to Central America and Mexico declined again between FY2000 and FY2009 to about
$5.9 billion in 2010 U.S. dollars. Despite the decline, several countries in the sub-region
benefited from new aid initiatives. El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua were awarded MCC
compacts, and Mexico—which had not been a major recipient of U.S. assistance—began
receiving large amounts of aid through the anticrime and counterdrug program known as the
Mérida Initiative. In FY2010, Mexico and Central America received almost $1.3 billion (constant
2010 U.S. dollars) in U.S. assistance, 57% of which went to Mexico.
FY2013 Appropriations Request. Looking more recently at foreign aid appropriated for the
State Department and USAID through the annual State Department and Foreign Operations
appropriations measure, Mexico and the countries of Central America received $532.4 million in
current U.S. dollars in assistance in FY2011 and an estimated $696.2 million in FY2012. The
Administration’s FY2013 request for the sub-region is $619.8 million, a $76.4 million (11%)
decrease from the FY2012 estimate (see Table 3 below).
Under the FY2013 request, Mexico would receive $269.5 million in U.S. assistance. This would
be a $60.6 million (18%) decrease compared to the FY2012 estimate. Nevertheless, Mexico
would still account for over 45% of aid to the sub-region as a result of substantial U.S. support for
its efforts to combat transnational organized crime. According to Assistant Secretary of State for
Western Hemisphere Affairs Roberta Jacobson, the decline in U.S. assistance to Mexico is a result
of a shift in the Mérida Initiative from providing expensive pieces of security equipment, like
helicopters, to providing less costly training and capacity building programs.9
In FY2013, U.S. assistance would provide technology, training, and equipment to strengthen
Mexico’s law enforcement entities at the federal and state levels, and combat transnational
criminal organizations. U.S. assistance would also support a variety of justice sector reform
efforts, such as the ongoing transition from a written, inquisitorial system to an oral, adversarial
system. Support for the Mexican military would include human rights training and equipment to
improve intelligence and communications capabilities. Small amounts of aid would support
partnerships with Mexican universities, institutional reforms designed to increase private sector
competitiveness, and climate change mitigation efforts. Since FY2008, Congress has required the
State Department to withhold 15% of FMF and INCLE assistance for Mexico until certain human
rights conditions are met.10
9
Roberta S. Jacobson, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, testimony before the U.S.
Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, Western Hemisphere
Budget Review 2013: What Are U.S. Priorities?, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., April 25, 2012.
10
For more detailed information on Mexico and U.S. policy, see CRS Report R42917, Mexico’s Peña Nieto
Administration: Priorities and Key Issues in U.S.-Mexican Relations, by (name redacted); CRS Report R41349,
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
10
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Table 3. U.S. Assistance to Mexico and Central America: FY2011-FY2013
(Appropriations in millions of current U.S. dollars)
Country/Program
FY2011 (Actual)
FY2012 (Estimate)
FY2013 (Request)
Mexico
178.1
330.1
269.5
Belize
0.4
0.7
1.0
Costa Rica
0.7
0.7
1.8
El Salvador
29.8
29.2
41.8
Guatemala
110.2
95.2
93.6
Honduras
56.0
57.0
58.2
Nicaragua
24.1
13.5
13.1
Panama
3.0
2.8
3.7
USAID Central America
Regional
28.6
32.1
29.7
CARSI
101.5
135.0
107.5
Central America Subtotal
354.2
366.1
350.3
Total Mexico and
Central America
532.4
696.2
619.8
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012; FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012; and Fiscal Year 2012 Congressional Spending Plan:
Central America Regional Security Initiative, June 19, 2012,
Notes: CARSI is funded under the State Department’s Western Hemisphere Regional program. The FY2012
figures are estimates and may change.
Like Mexico, the countries of the so-called “Northern Triangle” of Central America—Guatemala,
Honduras, and El Salvador—face considerable challenges in combating transnational organized
crime. As lower-middle-income developing economies, however, they have additional
development problems to address and fewer resources with which to do so. Most security
assistance for these countries is provided through the Central America Regional Security
Initiative (CARSI), which is discussed below.
Guatemala would receive about $93.6 million in U.S. assistance under the FY2013 request, a
$1.6 million decrease compared to the FY2012 estimate. Nearly 60% of the request is in
Development Assistance, which would fund a wide variety of projects. These include efforts to
build trade capacity, support environmental conservation, strengthen the education system,
combat trafficking in persons, and promote the rule of law and good governance. Aid to improve
food security and increase access to quality health care constitutes another 36% of the request for
Guatemala. The final 4% of U.S. assistance requested for FY2013 would provide training and
equipment to the security forces to improve their capabilities and control the borders. There have
been conditions on U.S. assistance to the Guatemalan military since 2005, when a 15-year
(...continued)
U.S.-Mexican Security Cooperation: The Mérida Initiative and Beyond, by (name redacted) and (name redacted);
and CRS Report RL32934, U.S.-Mexico Economic Relations: Trends, Issues, and Implications, by (name redac
ted).
Congressional Research Service
11
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
suspension of such aid was lifted. U.S. assistance would also continue to support the International
Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG by its Spanish acronym).11
Honduras would receive $58.2 million in U.S. assistance under the FY2013 request, a $1.2
million increase over FY2012. The vast majority of aid (84%) is requested under the DA account
to support efforts to decentralize governance and improve service delivery, ensure transparency in
the November 2012 primary elections, improve the quality of the education system, and
implement a country-led food security strategy. Health assistance would support Honduras’s
national HIV/AIDS strategy and efforts to reform the national health system to improve quality
and effectiveness. Training and equipment for the Honduran security forces would seek to
improve civil-military relations and strengthen government control over remote areas of the
country. The State Department is required to withhold 20% of the assistance appropriated in
FY2012 for the Honduran security forces until certain human rights conditions are met.12
Under the FY2013 request, El Salvador would receive $41.8 million in U.S. assistance. This
would be an increase of $12.6 million, or 43%, over the FY2012 estimate. El Salvador is one of
four countries worldwide selected to participate in the Obama Administration’s Partnership for
Growth initiative,13 which seeks to foster sustained economic growth and development in topperforming low-income countries by analyzing constraints on growth and targeting assistance to
overcome them. A July 2011 bi-national study identified crime and insecurity and a lack of
competitiveness in the tradable sector as the two greatest constraints on growth in El Salvador.14
About 93% of U.S. assistance for El Salvador in FY2013 was requested through the DA account.
This funding would support the implementation of security and justice sector reforms as well as
government and civil society efforts to reduce corruption and prevent crime. It would also support
efforts to strengthen the basic and higher education systems, and improve public administration
and private sector competitiveness. Additional assistance would provide training and equipment
to the Salvadoran security forces to strengthen their control over land and maritime borders and
improve their counternarcotics and humanitarian relief capabilities.15
U.S. assistance to Nicaragua would decrease by $390,000 under the FY2013 request, and would
remain almost 46% lower than it was in FY2011. U.S. aid to the country has declined
substantially in recent years as a result of difficult relations with President Daniel Ortega and
concerns about the erosion of democratic governance. Almost 92% of the request for Nicaragua
would be funded through the DA account. The majority of these funds would be directed toward
democracy promotion projects, such as providing training and technical assistance to emerging
democratic leaders, civil society groups, independent media, and local governments. Other DA
funds would be used to promote market-oriented economic policies and improve resource
11
CICIG is a U.N.-backed entity that was established to support Guatemalan institutions in the identification,
investigation, and prosecution of illegal security groups and clandestine organizations, some of which have been tied,
directly or indirectly, to the Guatemalan state.
For more detailed information on Guatemala and U.S. policy, see CRS Report R42580, Guatemala: Political, Security,
and Socio-Economic Conditions and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted).
12
For more detailed information on Honduras and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report RL34027, Honduras-U.S. Relations,
by (name redacted).
13
The other countries selected for the initiative are Ghana, Philippines, and Tanzania.
14
U.S. Department of State, Partnership for Growth: El Salvador Constraints Analysis, July 19, 2011, available at:
http://photos.state.gov/libraries/elsavador/92891/PFG/ES%20Constraints_Analysis.pdf.
15
For more detailed information on El Salvador and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report RS21655, El Salvador: Political and
Economic Conditions and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
12
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
management. Some U.S. assistance would be provided to the Nicaraguan military, which the State
Department maintains has remained an independent, non-political force, and a strong
counternarcotics partner.
The USAID Missions in Belize and Costa Rica closed in 1996, and the USAID Mission in
Panama is expected to close in September 2012.16 Nevertheless, these countries continue to
receive small amounts of U.S. assistance. Together, they would receive $6.4 million under the
FY2013 request, a $2.3 million (56%) increase over the FY2012 estimate. This assistance
includes equipment and training for the countries’ respective security forces that is designed to
enhance their abilities to combat drug trafficking and other potential security threats. Belize,
Costa Rica, and Panama also benefit from the regional programs discussed below.17
In addition to these bilateral country assistance programs, the FY2013 request includes $29.7
million for USAID’s Central America Regional program. The regional program receives
funding through the DA and GHP accounts, and supports Central American priorities. Nearly
55% of the assistance provided through the regional program would support programs to prevent
HIV/AIDS transmission and provide care and treatment for those living with the disease in
Central America. The regional program also supports trade capacity building efforts designed to
improve Central American nations’ abilities to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the
Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR).18
Environmental initiatives, such as climate change mitigation and coastal and marine resource
management projects, receive funding through the regional program as well.
The Central America Regional Security Initiative (CARSI) would receive $107.5 million
under the FY2013 request. CARSI was originally created in FY2008 as part of the Mérida
Initiative, but was reformulated as a separate program in FY2010. Congress appropriated $496.5
million for the initiative between FY2008 and FY2012. CARSI funds a variety of activities
designed to support U.S. and Central American security objectives. U.S. agencies provide partner
nations with equipment, technical assistance, and training to improve narcotics interdiction and
disrupt criminal networks that operate in the region as well as in the United States. CARSI also
provides support for Central American law enforcement and justice sector institutions, identifying
deficiencies and building their capacities to ensure the safety and security of the citizens of the
region. Additionally, CARSI supports prevention efforts that seek to reduce drug demand and
provide at-risk youth with educational, vocational, and recreational opportunities. CARSI is
funded through the State Department’s Western Hemisphere Regional program. Some CARSI
assistance is provided to the nations of Central America bilaterally and some supports regional
projects. It is unclear how much CARSI funding each nation receives since the State Department
has not provided a public breakdown of CARSI funding by country.19
16
Mark Feierstein, USAID Assistant Administrator for Latin America and the Caribbean, “A New Approach for a
Changing Hemisphere,” USAID Frontlines, March/April 2012.
17
For more detailed information on Panama and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report RL30981, Panama: Political and
Economic Conditions and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted).
18
For more information on CAFTA-DR, see: CRS Report R42468, The Dominican Republic-Central America-United
States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA DR): Developments in Trade and Investment, by (name redacted).
19
For more information on CARSI, see: CRS Report R41731, Central America Regional Security Initiative:
Background and Policy Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
13
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Figure 5. Map of Central America and the Caribbean
Source: CRS
Notes: Central America is pictured in light green and the Caribbean is pictured in dark green.
Caribbean
Background. From FY1980 through FY2010, the United States provided almost $14 billion in
assistance in constant 2010 U.S. dollars (or about $10.4 billion in current or non-inflationadjusted dollars) to the Caribbean, a diverse region that includes some of the hemisphere’s richest
and poorest nations.20 The overwhelming majority of aid, about 95%, was economic assistance,
while the balance was military assistance. In the 1980s, aid to the region amounted to about $5.5
billion in 2010 U.S. dollars, with the majority going to Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, and
Haiti. Aid to the region also included a significant program for Eastern Caribbean countries in the
aftermath of the 1983 U.S.-led military intervention in Grenada. In the 1990s, U.S. assistance to
the Caribbean declined to about $3 billion in 2010 dollars. In that decade, Haiti’s share of U.S.
aid to the Caribbean increased to about 46% of the total, followed by Jamaica (22%) and the
Dominican Republic (15%). From FY2000 through FY2009, U.S. assistance to the Caribbean
increased to almost $3.9 billion in 2010 dollars, with assistance to Haiti accounting for 52% of
20
The Caribbean includes some 13 island nations and 2 nations geographically located on the north coast of South
America, Guyana and Suriname, that have characteristics more common of Caribbean nations and participate in
Caribbean regional organizations. Located in Central America, English-speaking Belize also participates in Caribbean
regional organizations, but is the beneficiary of regional U.S. assistance programs for Central America. Assistance to
the country is therefore included in the section of this report covering Mexico and Central America. All U.S. aid
statistics and percentages for FY1980-FY2010 are drawn from the “Green Book” maintained by USAID online, and
include all U.S. economic and military assistance, using constant 2010 U.S. dollar amounts of obligated (committed)
funds from all agencies. See: USAID, U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants: Obligations and Loan Authorizations, July 1,
1945 - September 30, 2010, available at: http://gbk.eads.usaidallnet.gov/index.html.
Congressional Research Service
14
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
the total, followed by the Dominican Republic (almost 13%) and Jamaica (10%). During this
period, HIV/AIDS assistance to the region increased considerably, especially to Haiti and
Guyana, two nations that were designated as focus countries under PEPFAR. The United States
also provided significant assistance for hurricane recovery and reconstruction to several
Caribbean countries, especially Grenada, Haiti, and Jamaica.
Aid to the region increased significantly in FY2010 to almost $1.7 billion (almost three times the
$586 million obligated the previous year) in large part due to Haiti’s devastating January 2010
earthquake that killed an estimated 316,000 people.21 A new Caribbean Basin Security Initiative
(CBSI), also begun in FY2010, increased assistance to most Caribbean countries to support
efforts to reduce illicit trafficking, advance citizen security, and promote social justice.
FY2013 Appropriations Request. Looking more recently at foreign aid appropriated for the
State Department and USAID through the annual State Department and Foreign Operations
appropriations measure, U.S. assistance to the Caribbean amounted to $572 million in current
U.S. dollars in FY2011 and an estimated $522 million in FY2012. The Administration’s FY2013
request is for almost $492 million, a decline of about $31 million or 5.9% from the previous year
(see Table 4). Looking at FY2011 and FY2012 combined, Haiti continued to dominate U.S.
funding to the Caribbean, accounting for about two-thirds of all assistance. Comparatively
smaller assistance programs were for the regional CBSI program, the Dominican Republic,
Eastern Caribbean countries, and Cuba.
For FY2013, Haiti would account for the lion’s share—over two-thirds—of U.S. assistance to the
Caribbean. Support for Haiti’s reconstruction will likely continue to be a major focus of U.S.
assistance to the Caribbean over the next several years as the country rebuilds after the
earthquake. Even before the disaster, efforts to alleviate Haiti’s persistent poverty were a top
congressional concern, as were efforts to promote long-term stability and security and strengthen
democratic processes. The U.S. government’s post-earthquake strategy focuses on four pillars:
infrastructure and energy, food and economic security, health and other basic services, and
governance and rule of law.
Overall management of the assistance program for Haiti is handled by Thomas C. Adams,
appointed by Secretary of State Clinton in September 2010 as Special Coordinator for Haiti.
USAID is the lead U.S. agency providing assistance to Haiti, and works closely with other U.S.
agencies, the Haitian government, other bilateral donors, international organizations, and
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to coordinate ongoing efforts. More than 1.5 million
Haitians were living in tent camps in the aftermath of the earthquake. As of early 2012, about
550,000 people, or 36% of the original number, remained in displaced camps.22 U.S. and
international efforts have also focused on responding to a cholera outbreak that began in the fall
of 2010 and killed almost 7,000 Haitians as of early 2012, with almost half a million people
affected overall.23 One of the general goals of U.S. assistance is to help stimulate economic
growth and create opportunities outside the capital of Port-au-Prince.24
21
USAID, “Haiti – Earthquake and Cholera, Fact Sheet #3, FY2012,” December 12, 2011.
U.S. Department of State, Office of the Haiti Special Coordinator, “Shelter: Two Year Fast Facts on the U.S.
Government’s Work in Haiti,” December 28, 2011.
23
U.S. Department of State, Office of the Haiti Special Coordinator, “Cholera: Two Year Fast Facts on the U.S.
Government’s Work in Haiti,” December 28, 2011.
24
For more detailed information on Haiti and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report R42559, Haiti Under President Martelly:
(continued...)
22
Congressional Research Service
15
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Table 4. U.S. Assistance to the Caribbean: FY2011-FY2013
(Appropriations in millions of current U.S. dollars)
Country/Program
FY2011 (Actual)
FY2012 (Estimate)
FY2013 (Request)
Bahamas
0.2
0.2
0.2
Barbados and Eastern
Caribbean
32.3
34.2
35.2
Cuba
20.0
20.0
15.0
Dominican Republic
37.0
30.1
29.8
Guyana
16.9
10.8
7.0
Haiti
380.3
357.2
340.0
Jamaica
7.6
5.7
5.4
Suriname
0.3
0.2
0.2
Trinidad and Tobago
0.3
0.2
0.2
CBSI
77.4
64.0
59.0
Total
572.2
522.7
492.0
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012; and FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012; and FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May
24, 2012.
Notes: CBSI is funded under the State Department’s Western Hemisphere Regional program. The FY2012
figures are estimates and may change.
Beyond Haiti, the FY2013 foreign aid request includes bilateral programs for the Bahamas,
Barbados and Eastern Caribbean countries, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Jamaica,
Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. U.S. assistance would support efforts to combat HIV/AIDS
in most countries in the Caribbean, where HIV prevalence is estimated at about 1%, higher than
in any other region outside of sub-Saharan Africa.25 Small amounts of IMET would also support
the professionalization of security forces and civilian defense officials throughout the region and
provide training for defense and maritime security forces. Among the largest of these Caribbean
programs in the FY2013 request are the following:
•
In the Eastern Caribbean, a $35.2 million program based out of Bridgetown,
Barbados, would support assistance activities for Barbados and the six countries
of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS): Antigua and Barbuda,
Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the
Grenadines. Almost two-thirds of the aid would support HIV/AIDS programs in
the Eastern Caribbean. The USAID Mission based out of Barbados would also
manage HIV/AIDS programs in Guyana, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago.
DA would support efforts to improve juvenile justice systems, job opportunities
for youth, and global climate change programs.
(...continued)
Current Conditions and Congressional Concerns, by (name redacted).
25
UNAIDS, Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, “Global Report, Fact Sheet, Caribbean,” 2010, available
at: http://www.unaids.org/documents/20101123_FS_carib_em_en.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
16
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
•
In the Dominican Republic, over half of the $29.8 million FY2013 request
would support global health activities focused on HIV/AIDS and maternal and
child health, while DA would fund a variety of projects to strengthen government
institutions and civil society, improve the quality of basic education, improve the
competitiveness of small business, and protect the country’s natural resources
and fragile ecosystems.
•
For Cuba, the Administration is requesting $15 million to continue to provide
humanitarian assistance to political prisoners and their families, strengthen
Cuba’s independent civil society, and promote the flow of uncensored
information to, and within, Cuba. From FY2009 to FY2012, Congress had
appropriated $20 million in each fiscal year for such assistance, although
congressional holds held up the provision of assistance for several months in
2010 and 2011 because of concerns about the effectiveness and conduct of the
program. A USAID government subcontractor, Alan Gross, who had been
distributing communications equipment to Jewish organizations in Cuba, has
been imprisoned in Cuba since December 2009. Gross was convicted in March
2011 of taking “actions against the independence and territorial integrity of the
state,” and sentenced to 15 years in prison. U.S. officials and many Members of
Congress have repeatedly called for Gross’s unconditional release.26
•
In Guyana, the FY2013 bilateral request is for almost $7 million, reflecting a
downward trend in assistance over the past several years as the country’s efforts
to combat HIV/AIDS have improved, including access to HIV prevention,
treatment, and care services for persons living with HIV/AIDS. USAID’s
Mission in Guyana will be closing for budgetary reasons, so the FY2013 program
for Guyana will be managed by USAID’s Mission in Barbados.
•
In Jamaica, the FY2013 bilateral request is for $5.4 million (roughly similar to
that being provided in FY2012) with assistance designed to support basic
education and efforts to adapt to the impact of global climate change. The
country also would receive Caribbean regional HIV/AIDS assistance.
In addition to these bilateral assistance programs, the FY2013 request includes $59 million for
continuation of the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative that supports activities throughout the
Caribbean to reduce illicit trafficking, advance public safety and security, and promote social
justice. The Obama Administration developed the CBSI in 2009 and 2010 through a process of
dialogue with Caribbean nations. Funding for the CBSI has amounted to $203 million since
FY2010, with almost $62 million in FY2010, $77 million in FY2011, and an estimated $64
million in FY2012. Funding for the program is part of the State Department’s Western
Hemisphere Regional program, and has included assistance in the following five areas: maritime
and aerial security cooperation; law enforcement capacity building; border/port security and
firearms interdiction; justice sector reform; and crime prevention and at-risk youth.27 Since the
State Department does not present a breakdown of CBSI assistance by country in its annual
congressional budget justification, it is difficult to determine the overall level of aid that a
26
For more detailed information on Cuba and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report R43024, Cuba: U.S. Policy and Issues for
the 113th Congress, by (name redacted).
27
U.S. Department of State, “The Caribbean Basin Security Initiative,” Factsheet, November 2, 2011.
Congressional Research Service
17
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Caribbean country is receiving or is expected to receive. For a number of Caribbean nations, the
level of U.S. assistance received under the CBSI likely surpasses regular bilateral aid levels.28
Andean Region
Background. From FY1980 through FY2010, the United States provided about $25 billion in
assistance in constant 2010 U.S. dollars (or about $20 billion in current or non-inflation-adjusted
dollars) to the countries of the Andean region of South America—Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador,
Peru, and Venezuela (see Figure 6)—with about 82% of that in economic assistance and the
balance in military aid. Colombia accounted for 45% of the assistance in the three-decade period,
followed by Peru (26%), Bolivia (21%), Ecuador (8%), and Venezuela (almost 1%).29 In the
1980s, assistance amounted to about $3.6 billion in 2010 U.S. dollars, with assistance to Peru
accounting for about 42% of the total followed by aid to Bolivia (almost 29%), Ecuador (18%),
and Colombia (10%). During this period, development and food assistance comprised the
majority of aid to the region.
Since the 1990s, U.S. assistance to the Andean region has focused on narcotics-related assistance
with the goal of reducing the flow of illicit drugs to the United States. In the 1990s, assistance
increased to almost $6 billion in 2010 U.S. dollars, with aid to Peru accounting for 37% followed
by aid to Bolivia (33%), Colombia (22%), and Ecuador (almost 6%). From FY2000 through
FY2009, aid to the Andean region more than doubled from the previous decade to about $14.3
billion in 2010 dollars. Colombia accounted for the lion’s share of assistance during this decade,
almost $8.8 billion in 2010 dollars (61%), as the United States supported Plan Colombia with a
focus on drug eradication and interdiction, alternative development, and support for the
Colombian military in its struggle against leftist guerrillas and rightist paramilitaries. Peru and
Bolivia also received significant amounts of aid, $2.5 billion and $2.1 billion respectively,
although assistance to both countries declined annually during the second half of the decade. In
FY2010, aid to the Andean region amounted to $1.2 billion, with Colombia accounting for almost
70% of the aid, followed by Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador.
FY2013 Appropriations Request. Looking more recently at aid appropriated through the annual
State Department and Foreign Operations measure, U.S. assistance to the Andean region in
current U.S. dollars amounted to $621 million in FY2011 and an estimated $516 million in
FY2012, while the FY2013 request is for $452 million (see Table 5). Looking at FY2011 and
FY2012 combined, assistance to Colombia accounted for 73% of aid to the Andean region.
For the FY2013 request, assistance to the region would decrease about 12% compared to the
FY2012 estimate, with Colombia accounting for nearly three-quarters of the decline in dollar
terms. With the exception of Ecuador, which would receive an increase of about 4%, assistance to
the other Andean countries would, compared to FY2012 estimates, decline as follows—Bolivia
(22%), Colombia (12%), Peru (11%), and Venezuela (50%).
28
For additional information, see the section on the CBSI in CRS Report R41215, Latin America and the Caribbean:
Illicit Drug Trafficking and U.S. Counterdrug Programs.
29
All U.S. aid statistics and percentages for FY1980-FY2010 are drawn from the “Green Book” maintained by USAID
online, and include all U.S. economic and military assistance, using constant 2010 U.S. dollar amounts of obligated
(committed) funds from all agencies. See: USAID, U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants: Obligations and Loan
Authorizations, July 1, 1945 - September 30, 2010, available at: http://gbk.eads.usaidallnet.gov/index.html.
Congressional Research Service
18
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Table 5. U.S. Assistance to the Andean Region: FY2011-FY2013
(Appropriations in millions of current U.S. dollars)
Country
FY2011 (Actual)
Bolivia
41.9
28.3
22.2
Colombia
453.2
379.0
331.8
Ecuador
24.3
20.5
21.3
Peru
96.6
82.6
73.7
Venezuela
5.0
6.0
3.0
621.0
516.4
452.0
Total
FY2012 (Estimate)
FY2013 (Request)
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012; and FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012.
Notes: The FY2012 figures are estimates and may change.
The FY2013 request of $332 million for Colombia accounts for the majority, about 73%, of U.S.
assistance that would go to the Andean region. The $47 million reduction in assistance from
FY2012 is a reflection of progress that Colombia has made in improving its security situation and
its ability to fund programs that had previously been funded by the United States. As noted by
Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs William
Brownfield, the decline in assistance from previous years is a sign of the evolution of U.S.
assistance from once leading assistance efforts to “now supporting Colombia’s sustainment and
nationalization of those efforts.”30 According to the FY2013 request, the United States is
supporting Colombia’s National Consolidation Plan (NCP) that has the goal of re-establishing
state control and legitimacy in areas previously dominated by illegally armed groups. The
strategy employs a phased approach combining security, counternarcotics, and economic and
social development initiatives. U.S. support for the NCP is through the Colombia Strategic
Development Initiative (CSDI) that includes assistance in a variety of areas, including drug
eradication and interdiction; capacity building for the military, national police, and prosecutor
units; alternative development programs; support for Colombian land restitution reforms;
reparations for victims and vulnerable populations; and promoting respect for human rights and
the rule of law and protection of vulnerable citizens. Since 2002, Congress has tied a portion of
U.S. assistance to the Colombian military to efforts by the Colombian military and government
regarding human rights and severing ties with paramilitaries.31
As set forth by the State Department, the proposed $73.7 million in assistance for Peru seeks to
strengthen the country’s democracy through increased social and economic inclusion, improved
governance, and sound environmental stewardship. Almost two-thirds of the aid is from the DA
account, and would fund a variety of projects, including alternative development programs, the
provision of health and education services, decentralization of social services, reforms in basic
education, conservation of natural resources, and poverty alleviation activities targeting rural
30
Ambassador William R. Brownfield, Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs, prepared statement for the U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State,
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Security Challenges in Latin America, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., March 29,
2012, available at: http://appropriations.house.gov/UploadedFiles/HHRG-112-AP04-WState-WBrownfield20120329.pdf.
31
For more detailed information on Colombia and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report RL32250, Colombia: Background,
U.S. Relations, and Congressional Interest, by (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
19
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
areas. Almost one-third of the assistance is from the INCLE account, and would fund programs to
increase drug eradication and interdiction capabilities, improve anti-money laundering efforts,
strengthen the judicial system, and reduce rising drug use.32
The Administration’s $22.2 million FY2013 request for Bolivia continues the downward
trajectory of U.S. assistance over the past several years. U.S.-Bolivian relations have deteriorated
since 2008, when the Bolivian government expelled the U.S. Ambassador and the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA). Since then, President Bush, and subsequently President
Obama, have determined annually, pursuant to the narcotics certification process, that Bolivia has
failed to meet its obligations under international narcotics agreements. At the same time, both
Presidents waived sanctions so that U.S. bilateral assistance programs could continue. For the
FY2013 request, aid would continue to fund health sector activities to reduce maternal and child
mortality and increase the use of voluntary family planning and reproductive health services. Aid
from the DA account would fund activities to strengthen the management capabilities of local
government; support the protection of Bolivia’s biodiversity; and promote sustainable use of
natural resources, goods, and services. Assistance from the INCLE account would provide limited
support for counternarcotics efforts, including monitoring coca cultivation and interdicting drugs
and precursor chemicals.
For Ecuador, a majority of the $21.3 million FY2013 request would come from the DA account
and fund a variety of projects to support alternative development programs, local governments
and the encouragement of citizen participation in democratic processes, broad-based economic
development, and biodiversity conservation. Aid from the INCLE account would support
counternarcotics operations by modernizing the capacity of police and military in interdiction,
evidence collection, stronger port and maritime controls, and increased speed and professionalism
in the prosecution of criminal cases (especially those related to drug trafficking, money
laundering, and trafficking in persons).
With regard to Venezuela, the United States has traditionally only provided small amounts of
assistance because of the country’s oil wealth and relatively high per capita income level. In
recent years, assistance has focused on democracy aid to nongovernmental organizations,
including most recently $5 million in FY2011 and an estimated $6 million in FY2012. The
FY2013 request is for $3 million in democracy assistance, implemented by USAID. According to
the State Department, the assistance seeks to promote broad participation in the democratic
process by promoting good governance, raising awareness about social issues, increasing
confidence in the democratic process, and encouraging citizen participation.33
32
For more detailed information on Peru and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report R42523, Peru in Brief: Political and
Economic Conditions and Relations with the United States, by (name redacted).
33
For more detailed information on Venezuela and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report R40938, Venezuela: Issues for
Congress, by (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
20
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Figure 6. Map of South America
Source: CRS
Notes: The Andean region is pictured in light green; Brazil and the Southern Cone are pictured in dark green.
Guyana and Suriname are traditionally considered part of the Caribbean while French Guiana is a French
territory.
Brazil and the Southern Cone
Background. Taking into account obligations from all U.S. agencies, the United States provided
Brazil and the countries of the Southern Cone of South America—Argentina, Chile, Paraguay,
and Uruguay—with foreign assistance worth $1.6 billion in constant 2010 U.S. dollars ($1.3
billion in current, or non-inflation-adjusted, dollars) between FY1980 and FY2010.34 Over 82%
34
All U.S. aid statistics and percentages for FY1980-FY2010 are drawn from the “Green Book” maintained by USAID
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
21
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
of the assistance provided was in the form of economic aid with the remainder in military aid.
Brazil accounted for 36% of the assistance provided between FY1980 and FY2010, followed by
Paraguay (29%), Chile (17%), Argentina (11%), and Uruguay (7%).
U.S. assistance to Brazil and the Southern Cone has increased in each decade since 1980. Aid was
relatively limited during the 1980s as all five countries in the sub-region were ruled by
dictatorships that engaged in varying levels of repression. Total assistance for the decade
amounted to $254 million in 2010 U.S. dollars, nearly 99% of which was economic aid. U.S.
assistance more than doubled to $523 million in 2010 U.S. dollars during the 1990s as each of the
countries reestablished democratic governance. U.S. assistance to the sub-region increased again
to $741 million in 2010 dollars between FY2000 and FY2009, and in FY2010, Brazil and the
countries of the Southern Cone received $109 million in U.S. aid.
FY2013 Appropriations Request. Through annual State Department and Foreign Operations
appropriations legislation funding for the State Department and USAID, the United States
provided Brazil and the countries of the Southern Cone with $33.3 million in current U.S. dollars
in FY2011 and an estimated $23.9 million in FY2012. The Administration’s FY2013 request for
the sub-region is $14.4 million, a $9.4 million (40%) decrease from the FY2012 estimate. Brazil
accounted for over 70% of the combined appropriations for the sub-region in FY2011 and
FY2012. Although assistance to the country would decline by $11 million (65%) under the
FY2013 request, it would still account for 43% of the sub-region total (see Table 6).
Table 6. U.S. Assistance to Brazil and the Southern Cone: FY2011-FY2013
(Appropriations in millions of current U.S. dollars)
Country
FY2011 (Actual)
FY2012 (Estimate)
FY2013 (Request)
Argentina
0.9
1.4
0.8
Brazil
23.3
17.2
6.2
Chile
1.3
1.2
1.1
Paraguay
6.8
3.7
5.9
Uruguay
1.0
0.5
0.5
Total
33.3
23.9
14.4
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012; and FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012.
Notes: The FY2012 figures are estimates and may change.
Under the FY2013 request, Brazil would receive $6.2 million in U.S. assistance. Since Brazil is
now the sixth-largest economy in the world and is making major strides in reducing poverty, U.S.
assistance to the country is transitioning from supporting development programs in Brazil to
providing assistance designed to promote development in third countries. About one-third of
FY2013 aid would be funded through the DA account and would be used to strengthen the
Brazilian government’s development agency (the Brazilian Cooperation Agency) and implement
(...continued)
online, and include all U.S. economic and military assistance, using constant 2010 U.S. dollar amounts of obligated
(committed) funds from all agencies. See: USAID, U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants: Obligations and Loan
Authorizations, July 1, 1945 - September 30, 2010, available at: http://gbk.eads.usaidallnet.gov/index.html.
Congressional Research Service
22
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
jointly funded projects in other developing countries. Such projects would likely build on Brazil’s
expertise in agriculture, food security, and school feeding programs and focus on priority
countries in sub-Saharan Africa and the Western Hemisphere. About 21% of the FY2013 request
for Brazil would provide a final year of support for HIV/AIDS programs in the country. The
balance of U.S. aid to Brazil (about 47% of the total) would support counternarcotics and other
security efforts in the country, and increase cooperation and interoperability between Brazilian
and U.S. military forces and law enforcement agencies.35
As the poorest nation in the Southern Cone, Paraguay would receive $5.9 million under the
FY2013 request. Over 85% of the assistance for Paraguay would be funded through the DA
account. This assistance is designed to improve justice sector and civil service transparency,
strengthen the oversight capacity of civil society organizations, and help small farmers improve
their productivity and obtain better access to markets. The remainder of U.S. assistance to
Paraguay would be provided through the IMET, FMF, and INCLE accounts to support security
efforts. Training and equipment would be provided to the Paraguayan military to support its
professional development and expeditionary capacity, and aid for Paraguay’s counternarcotics
unit would support demand reduction and drug detection operations.
Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay, which are considered upper-middle-income economies and
have per capita incomes that are over three times higher than that of Paraguay, would continue to
receive small amounts of U.S. assistance in FY2013. The three countries would receive a
combined $2.3 million in U.S. aid. About $1.8 million in IMET would support efforts to
modernize the three countries’ military forces, increase their interoperability with U.S. forces, and
improve their capacities to participate in international peacekeeping missions. Additionally,
Argentina and Chile would each receive $270,000 in NADR funds to improve port security and
export controls and support other anti-terrorism and non-proliferation initiatives.36
Regional and Centrally Managed Programs
There are four regional programs administered by the State Department and USAID that provide
assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean: (1) the State Department’s Western Hemisphere
Regional program, which includes the CARSI program for Central America and the CBSI
program for the Caribbean; (2) USAID’s Central America Regional program; (3) USAID’s Latin
America and Caribbean Regional program; and (4) USAID’s South America Regional program.
Of these, USAID’s Central America Regional program has already been discussed above, as have
the CARSI and CBSI programs (see the “Mexico and Central America” and “Caribbean”
sections). This section focuses on the remaining regional programs that have not yet been
examined as well as assistance to the region provided through State Department centrally
managed programs: international humanitarian assistance funded through the MRA account; and
assistance focusing on efforts to counter transnational crime and drug trafficking funded through
global programs of the INCLE account.
The State Department’s Western Hemisphere Regional program, in addition to providing the
majority of funding for CARSI and CBSI described above, funds hemisphere-wide initiatives to
35
For more detailed information on Brazil and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report RL33456, Brazil-U.S. Relations, by (name
redacted).
36
For more detailed information on Chile and U.S. policy, see: CRS Report R40126, Chile: Political and Economic
Conditions and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
23
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
foster greater economic opportunity and social equity, promote clean energy security and mitigate
the effects of global climate change, and support hemisphere-wide security-related assistance.
The non-CARSI/CBSI portion of the Western Hemisphere Regional program, which includes
funding from the ESF and NADR foreign aid accounts, has declined significantly in recent years,
from $34.7 million in FY2011 to an estimated $21.9 million in FY2012, a 37% decline. The
FY2013 request of $14.4 million continues the decline in non-CARSI/CBSI funding, with a 34%
decline from FY2012.
Funding from the regional program has supported commitments related to U.S. participation in
the Sixth Summit of the Americas held in Cartagena, Colombia, as well as hemisphere-wide
antiterrorism assistance and efforts regarding counterterrorism finance, export controls, border
security, and terrorist interdiction. Over the past several years, the regional program also has
supported the two following policy initiatives:
Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas (ECPA). At the April 2009 Summit of the
Americas, President Obama invited Western Hemisphere governments to join together to
deepen collaboration on energy security and climate change. To date, the ECPA involves
some 40 initiatives, with the United States taking the lead on some, and others being led by
Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, Peru, and Trinidad and Tobago. U.S. funding
supports regional cooperation related to energy efficiency, renewable energy, cleaner fossil
fuels, interconnectivity of electrical grids, reducing emissions from deforestation, and
enhancing country capacity for climate change adaptation. Regional organizations such as the
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the Organization of American States (OAS), and
the Latin American Energy Organization are also supporting the ECPA, as are the World
Bank, the private sector, civil society, and academia.37
Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas. This initiative originally was launched in September
2008 under the Bush Administration to provide a forum to ensure that the benefits of trade are
broadly shared and to expand cooperation on development issues. The partnership currently
involves the United States and 14 other hemispheric nations—Belize, Canada, Chile,
Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico,
Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, and Uruguay—along with the institutional support of the IDB, the
OAS, and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
(ECLAC/CEPAL). The initiative promotes economic growth and opportunity, especially for
marginalized groups such as indigenous peoples, women, and Afro-descendants.38
USAID’s Latin American and Caribbean Regional program consists largely of aid provided
through the DA account and smaller amounts of GHP assistance. Total funding for the regional
program amounted to almost $53 million in FY2011, and an estimated $45 million in FY2012.
The FY2013 request is for almost $46 million. DA funding supports efforts to prevent crime and
violence; strengthen basic and higher education; and help countries take advantage of economic
opportunities, facilitate food security strategies, and mitigate and adapt to global climate change.
GHP assistance complements efforts through bilateral assistance and uses regional approaches to
37
See the website of the ECPA, available at: http://ecpamericas.org/. Also see: White House, “Energy and Climate
Partnership of the Americas,” March 21, 2011, available at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ecpa_factsheet.pdf.
38
See the website of the Partnership, available at: http://pathways-caminos.org/Home/tabid/57/language/enUS/Default.aspx; also see: U.S. Department of State, “Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas, Fact Sheet,” April 8,
2011, available at: http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/fs/2011/158760.htm.
Congressional Research Service
24
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
improve access to health services for underserved groups. The health funding covers activities in
four areas: maternal and child health, family planning and reproductive health, tuberculosis, and
HIV/AIDS.
USAID’s South America Regional program consists of DA and GHP assistance supporting
economic growth, environmental, and health programs. Total funding for the regional program
amounted to about $9.8 million in FY2011 and an estimated $15.6 million in FY2012. The
FY2013 request is for $13.5 million. DA supports the Initiative for Conservation in the Andean
Amazon (ICAA), which focuses on conserving biodiversity and combating deforestation and
forest degradation in the Amazon basin.39 The regional program also supports the Andean Trade
Capacity Building Program, which focuses on improving the ability of Andean countries to
comply with international trade agreements, including those related to labor rights and the
environment, and to increase private sector competitiveness. GHP funding under the regional
program supports the Amazon Malaria Initiative (AMI), begun in 2001, which assists seven South
American countries—Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, and Suriname—in
preventing and controlling malaria in the Amazon Basin.
As noted above, in addition to these regional programs, the State Department also provides
assistance to the region through centrally managed programs that generally are not reflected in socalled all-spigot or country/account summary tables issued by the State Department in its annual
Congressional Budget Justification. For example, the State Department’s Bureau of Population,
Refugees, and Migration oversees all MRA funding worldwide. MRA assistance for Western
Hemisphere countries amounted to $57 million in FY2011 and an estimated $54 million in
FY2012. The FY2013 request is for $47.2 million, about a 12% decrease from FY2012. MRA
assistance for Latin America supports protection and assistance for internally displaced persons
(IDPs) in Colombia as well as Colombians seeking asylum and refugees in neighboring Ecuador,
Venezuela, Panama, and Costa Rica. According to the State Department, the violence in
Colombia has resulted in an estimated 4 million IDPs, refugees, and other persons of concern in
Colombia and neighboring countries. MRA funding also supports regional programs of the Office
of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Committee
for the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in the
Caribbean region. This includes support for Haiti, where the ICRC is providing support for health
care, water systems improvement, and monitoring of prison conditions.
Several other centrally managed programs that provide INCLE assistance worldwide, including to
Latin America, are administered by the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and
Law Enforcement Affairs, although the State Department does not provide a regional or country
breakdown of such assistance under these programs in its annual budget justification. The
Interregional Aviation Support and the Critical Flight Safety Programs provide support services
for counternarcotics aviation programs involving fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft in several Latin
American countries—Colombia, Bolivia, Guatemala, and Peru. INCLE funds also support an
International Law Enforcement Academy in El Salvador and a Regional Training Center in Lima,
Peru. A Central American Anti-Gang program focuses on investigative, legal, and intelligence
capacity; community policing; prevention; and prison management in Central America.
39
See the website of USAID’s ICAA, available at: http://www.amazonia-andina.org/en.
Congressional Research Service
25
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Table 7. U.S. Assistance Provided through Regional and Centrally Managed
Programs: FY2011-FY2013
(Appropriations in millions of current U.S. dollars)
Account/Program
FY2011 (Actual)
FY2012 (Estimate)
FY2013 (Request)
State Western
Hemisphere Regional
213.6
220.9
180.9
[CARSI]
[101.5]
[135.0]
[107.5]
[CBSI]
[77.4]
[64.0]
[59.0]
USAID Central America
Regional
28.6
32.1
29.7
USAID Latin America and
Caribbean Regional
52.8
44.9
45.7
USAID South America
Regional
9.8
15.6
13.5
Migration and Refugee
Assistance
57.1
53.9
47.2
Total
361.9
367.3
317.0
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012; FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid Allocations, May 24, 2012; and Fiscal Year 2012 Congressional Spending Plan:
Central America Regional Security Initiative, June 19, 2012.
Notes: Assistance figures in this table for CARSI, CBSI, and USAID’s Central America Regional programs are
also included in Table 3 and Table 4 covering assistance to Central America and the Caribbean, respectively.
The FY2012 figures are estimates and may change.
Other U.S. Agencies Providing Foreign Assistance
There are a number of U.S. government agencies beyond the State Department and USAID that
provide foreign assistance to the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean. For a variety of
reasons, such as differences in appropriations and reporting timelines, these programs are
discussed separately from those administered by the State Department and USAID. They include
the Department of Defense, the Inter-American Foundation, the Millennium Challenge
Corporation, and the Peace Corps.
Department of Defense
The Department of Defense (DOD) has provided assistance to foreign governments, militaries,
and civilians for many years. In recognition of the agency’s unique capabilities and resources,
Congress has provided DOD with a number of legislative authorities to carry out foreign
assistance efforts. Within Latin America and the Caribbean, DOD recently has provided
humanitarian, counterdrug, and counterterrorism and stabilization assistance. Some of this
assistance differs from traditional foreign aid, as the principal purpose of the activities is to
support the institutional needs of DOD. Many humanitarian assistance programs, for example, are
primarily designed as training opportunities for members of the U.S. Armed Forces. The two
regional combatant commands responsible for DOD operations in the hemisphere are U.S.
Northern Command (NORTHCOM), which includes Mexico and the Bahamas, and U.S.
Congressional Research Service
26
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), which includes the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean.
DOD assistance is funded through the annual Department of Defense appropriations legislation.
Congress has authorized DOD to engage in a variety of humanitarian assistance activities,
transport humanitarian goods, and provide disaster relief and emergency response.40 Under 10
U.S.C. Section 2561, for example, Congress has authorized the Secretary of Defense to expend
funds to transport humanitarian relief and for other humanitarian purposes. In FY2010, the most
recent year for which data are available, DOD provided some $84 million in (§2561)
humanitarian assistance through nearly 200 projects in at least 28 countries in the region. This
assistance ranged from an alert warning system in Chile, to the provision of insecticide-treated
nets in Brazil, to the renovation of health centers in Panama. Haiti was by far the largest regional
recipient of such assistance, receiving $34.8 million in the aftermath of the massive January 2010
earthquake.41
Additionally, DOD assists partner countries in preparing for, and responding to, natural disasters
and other humanitarian emergencies. Given its readily deployable resources, DOD is able to
provide critical, time-sensitive support during humanitarian emergencies. Within 24 hours of the
earthquake in Haiti, for example, SOUTHCOM had deployed an initial assessment team to the
country consisting of military engineers, operational planners, and command and control and
communication specialists. U.S. forces quickly restored air traffic control, enabled round the
clock airfield operations, delivered humanitarian supplies, and provided security for the civilian
population.42 Although USAID is designated as the lead authority for disaster response, DOD is
often the first U.S. agency to respond to humanitarian crises as a result of these capabilities.
Beyond its humanitarian assistance activities, DOD provides a broad range of counterdrug
support to Latin American and Caribbean nations. While Congress (through the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, as amended) has designated the State Department as the U.S. agency
responsible for coordinating U.S. counterdrug assistance, it has granted independent counterdrug
authorities to DOD. Under Section 1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of
1991 (P.L. 101-510), as amended through FY2014, DOD is authorized to support foreign
counterdrug efforts through training, transportation, reconnaissance, intelligence analysis, and
infrastructure construction. Under Section 1033 of the NDAA of 1998 (P.L. 105-85), as amended
through FY2013, DOD is also authorized to provide certain countries43 with various types of
nonlethal equipment to be used for counterdrug activities. In FY2010, the most recent year for
which data are available, DOD provided the region with nearly $435 million in counterdrug
assistance ($382 million under Section 1004 and $53 million under Section 1033). Colombia and
Mexico, which received $129.4 million and $71.6 million, respectively, were the two largest
recipients of DOD counterdrug assistance in the region.44
40
See: 10 U.S.C. §§401, 402, 404, 407, 2557, and 2561.
DOD, Section 1209 and Section 1203(b) Report to Congress on Foreign-Assistance Related Programs for Fiscal
Years 2008, 2009, and 2010, April 2012.
42
For more information on the response of DOD and other U.S. agencies to the Haitian earthquake, see: CRS Report
R41023, Haiti Earthquake: Crisis and Response, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).
43
This includes 13 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean: Colombia and Peru (P.L. 105-85); Bolivia and
Ecuador (P.L. 108-136); Belize, Guatemala, and Panama (P.L. 109-364); the Dominican Republic and Mexico (P.L.
110-181); El Salvador and Honduras (P.L. 110-417); and Jamaica and Nicaragua (P.L. 112-81).
44
DOD, April 2012, op.cit.
For more information on DOD counternarcotics in Latin America and the Caribbean, see the “DOD Counternarcotics
(continued...)
41
Congressional Research Service
27
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
In recent years, some countries in the hemisphere have received additional DOD assistance for
counterterrorism and stabilization activities. Under Section 1206 of the FY2006 NDAA (P.L. 109163), as amended, Congress has authorized DOD to train and equip foreign military and maritime
security forces for the purposes of (1) performing counterterrorism operations and (2) supporting
U.S. military and stability operations. Between FY2006 and FY2009, DOD provided $72.1
million in such assistance to 10 countries in the region. No Latin American or Caribbean nations
received Section 1206 funding in FY2010.45 Under Section 1207 of the FY2006 NDAA (P.L.
109-163), as amended, Congress authorized DOD to fund small-scale security and stabilization
activities to be implemented abroad by the State Department and USAID. Between FY2006 and
FY2010, DOD provided $67.5 million in such assistance to six countries in the region. Section
1207 authority expired at the end of FY2010.46
Inter-American Foundation47
The Inter-American Foundation (IAF) is a small independent U.S. foreign aid agency established
by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-175; 22 U.S.C. §290f) that provides grants for
grassroots development to help poor communities in Latin America and the Caribbean. From
FY1972, when the IAF first began making grants, through FY2011, the agency provided almost
5,000 grants worth $695 million to local and community-based groups in support of a variety of
development projects. Some grants address basic nutrition, water, sanitation, or health care needs
of poor or marginalized groups, while others help start or expand small businesses, create jobs, or
develop skills or access to markets for local products. The grant recipients are expected to
contribute their own resources or mobilize resources from other sources. These additional
resources have amounted to about $1 billion since the agency’s establishment, significantly
exceeding the IAF contributions.
Each year, the IAF typically receives hundreds of grant proposals from grassroots organizations.
In FY2011, it awarded 61 new grants and provided 33 supplements to existing grantees in the
amount of $14.9 million in the following areas: agriculture/food production (35%);
education/training (26%); enterprise development (21%); corporate social investment, cultural
expression, and the environment (5% each); and health and legal assistance (5% each). Grant
recipients were spread throughout the region, with 33% in the Andean region, 24% in Central
America, 15% in the Southern Cone of South America, 13% in Brazil, 10% in the Caribbean, and
5% in Mexico. High priority grantees included women, children and youth, indigenous people,
and African descendants. The IAF also has a fellowship program supporting doctoral students
from universities in the United States to conduct research in Latin America and the Caribbean on
(...continued)
Assistance Programs” section of CRS Report R41215, Latin America and the Caribbean: Illicit Drug Trafficking and
U.S. Counterdrug Programs, coordinated by (name redacted).
45
For more information on Section 1206 assistance and the projects funded in the region, see: CRS Report RS22855,
Security Assistance Reform: “Section 1206” Background and Issues for Congress, by (name redacted).
46
For more information on Section 1207 assistance and the projects funded in the region, see: CRS Report RS22871,
Department of Defense “Section 1207” Security and Stabilization Assistance: Background and Congressional
Concerns, FY2006-FY2010, by (name redacted).
47
Information in this section is drawn from: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign
Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March 9, 2012; IAF, FY2013 Congressional Budget Justification and 2011 Year in
Review (Annual Report), available at: http://www.iaf.gov/; and Robert Kaplan, President of the IAF, testimony before
the U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps and
Global Narcotics Affairs, U.S. Policy Toward Latin America, 112th Cong., 1st sess., February 17, 2011.
Congressional Research Service
28
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
a broad range of issues related to grassroots development. In FY2011, the IAF awarded 15 such
fellowships.
Funding for the IAF amounted to $22.45 million in FY2011 and an estimated $22.5 million in
FY2012. The Administration’s FY2013 request is for $18.1 million, a nearly 20% decline from
FY2012 appropriations. The Administration maintains that despite the cuts in requested funding,
the agency will seek to maintain its current program level by partnering with other U.S.
government agencies and the private sector as well as by reducing overhead costs. For FY2012,
the Administration had requested $19.1 million for the IAF, maintaining that the cut was
necessary to better prioritize scarce foreign assistance funding, but Congress ultimately
appropriated $22.5 million, roughly similar to that provided in FY2011.
Beyond annual congressional appropriations, the IAF also receives additional annual funding
from the Social Progress Trust Fund (SPTF) administered by the Inter-American Development
Bank that consists of repayments for U.S. government loans to Latin American countries under
the Alliance for Progress. The IAF received almost $4.7 million from the SPTF in FY2011 and
$7.5 million in FY2012; the agency will receive $4.2 million in FY2013. According to the IAF,
SPTF funds will diminish significantly in future years as loans are reaching the end of their
payment periods. In FY2017, SPTF funding will be reduced to about $3 million and will decline
further to about $0.5 million or less beginning in FY2019.48
Millennium Challenge Corporation49
The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) was established as an independent government
entity in 2004 to provide economic assistance to developing nations that perform comparatively
well on certain political, social, and economic indicators. Aid provided through the MCC differs
from that provided through the State Department and USAID in several ways, including its use of
a competitive selection process and a pledge to prevent U.S. strategic foreign policy objectives
from influencing country selection. MCC awards compacts (grant agreements) of up to five years
in length that are expected to have a measurable impact, as well as smaller threshold programs,
which are designed to assist countries in addressing areas of weak performance in order to qualify
for future compacts. To date, three Latin American and Caribbean countries—El Salvador,
Honduras, and Nicaragua—have been awarded compacts, and three others—Guyana, Paraguay,
and Peru—have been awarded threshold programs. Together, they have received $886.7 million
in assistance, accounting for almost 9.5% of MCC funding worldwide.50
El Salvador signed a five-year, $461 million compact with the MCC in November 2006. The
compact was designed to develop the country’s northern border region, where more than half of
the population lives in poverty. It included a human development project to improve physical
infrastructure such as water, sanitation, and electricity, and investments in human capital through
education and training. It also included a productive development project that supported small
farmers and small and medium-sized businesses, and a connectivity project that built and
rehabilitated a major transportation artery and secondary roads. The compact was officially
48
Information provided to CRS by the IAF, May 15, 2012.
For more information on the MCC, see: CRS Report RL32427, Millennium Challenge Corporation, by (name redacted).
More detailed compact and threshold program information is available at:
http://www.mcc.gov/pages/countries/region/latin-america.
50
CRS calculations based on MCC data available at: http://www.mcc.gov/pages/countries.
49
Congressional Research Service
29
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
completed in September 2012. In December 2011, MCC announced that El Salvador is eligible to
develop a proposal for a second compact.51 The new compact proposal is expected to be finalized
in 2013.
In June 2005, Honduras signed a five-year, $215 million economic growth compact. The
compact had two components: a rural development project to provide farmers with skills to grow
and market high-value crops, and a transportation project to improve roads and highways to link
farmers and other businesses to ports and major production centers in Honduras. MCC decided to
terminate52 $10 million in unobligated funding for Honduras in the aftermath of the June 2009
ouster of President Manuel Zelaya, reducing the total funding for the compact to $205 million.
Honduras completed the compact in September 2010, and MCC announced in January 2011 that
it would not renew the compact as a result of Honduras’s poor performance on corruption.53
Nevertheless, MCC has declared Honduras eligible for a threshold program of up to $20 million
to address corruption and other barriers to economic growth.54
Nicaragua signed a five-year, $175 million compact with the MCC in July 2005. The compact
focused on the western region of the country, which MCC identified as having the greatest
potential for economic growth. It had three components: (1) a transportation project to connect
regional markets by improving a primary road and two secondary roads; (2) a rural development
project to increase farm productivity through support for farmers and rural businesses; and (3) a
property regularization project to register land ownership. MCC suspended, and subsequently
terminated, $61.5 million in funding for Nicaragua in the aftermath of the country’s disputed
November 2008 municipal elections. The decision reduced total funding for the compact to
$113.5 million. The compact ended in May 2011.
As noted above, MCC has also awarded threshold programs to several countries in the
hemisphere. Guyana signed a two-year, $6.7 million threshold program in July 2007. The
program was designed to assist the country in improving its performance on MCC’s fiscal policy
indicator by supporting the implementation of a new tax system, strengthening the capacity of the
finance ministry, and improving the parliament’s oversight of the budget. Paraguay signed a twoyear, $34.6 million program in May 2006, which concentrated on reducing corruption, impunity,
and economic informality. In April 2009, MCC awarded Paraguay with $30.3 million for a
second two-year program. The second stage of the threshold program focused on reducing
corruption in the law enforcement, customs, health care, and judicial sectors. Peru signed a twoyear, $35.6 million threshold program in April 2009. It was designed to increase immunization
rates and combat corruption.
51
MCC, "Report on Selection of Eligible Countries for Fiscal Year 2012," December 15, 2011, available at:
http://www.mcc.gov/documents/reports/report-2011001095901-fy12-eligible-countries.pdf.
52
MCC funding can be suspended or terminated if the country receiving the assistance (1) engages in activities that are
contrary to the national security interests of the United States, (2) engages in a pattern of actions inconsistent with
MCC selection criteria, or (3) fails to adhere to its responsibilities under the compact.
53
Honduras performs below the median for low-income countries on corruption, which is a “pass-fail” indicator for
MCC compact eligibility.
54
MCC, December 15, 2011, op. cit.
Congressional Research Service
30
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Peace Corps55
Since the Peace Corp’s founding in 1961, almost 65,000 volunteers have served in Latin America
and the Caribbean. At the end of FY2011, almost 2,600 volunteers, about 28% of Peace Corps
volunteers worldwide, were assigned to 22 Latin American and Caribbean countries working on
development projects in six areas: agriculture, business development, education, environment,
health and HIV/AIDS, and youth development. Program funding for Latin America and the
Caribbean amounted to almost $65 million in FY2011 and an estimated $61 million in FY2012.
For the FY2013 budget request, about $60 million will be slated for programs in Latin America
and the Caribbean.
Because of agency budget cuts, the total number of volunteers in the region is expected to decline
to 2,250 at the end of FY2012 and to 1,800 by the end of FY2013. As a result, most countries in
the region with Peace Corps volunteers will see reductions, with the exception of Colombia,
where the Peace Corps reestablished a presence in 2010 after almost 30 years. The Peace Corps
also has plans to close its programs in the Eastern Caribbean countries of Antigua and Barbuda
and St. Kitts and Nevis in FY2012 and in Suriname in FY2013 as the result of the agency’s
Country Portfolio Review. All three of these countries are classified as upper-middle-income
countries by the World Bank because of their relatively high per capita income levels.
At times, security concerns have resulted in the Peace Corps suspending operations in some Latin
American and Caribbean countries. In 2005, the agency withdrew its volunteers from Haiti amid
a spike in violence and has not returned, and in 2008 it pulled out of Bolivia amid growing
instability there and a deterioration in relations with the United States. More recently, in January
2012, the Peace Corps pulled its volunteers out of Honduras because of high levels of violence
and homicides—in December 2011, a volunteer was shot and wounded in the city of San Pedro
Sula during a robbery attempt on a public bus.56 A review of the Honduras program was
completed in February 2012, and the program was formally suspended in September 2012. In
December 2011, the Peace Corps cancelled volunteer training classes for El Salvador and
Guatemala, maintaining that the agency was enhancing operational support to volunteers in these
two countries because of security concerns. Volunteer programs continue in both countries,
however, and the Peace Corps intends to send new volunteers to El Salvador and Guatemala in
2013.
Potential Issues for Congressional Consideration
Budget Priorities and Constraints
The Obama Administration maintains that its four priorities for U.S. policy toward Latin America
and the Caribbean—promoting economic opportunity, ensuring citizen security, strengthening
55
Information in this section is drawn from: Peace Corps, Congressional Budget Justification, FY2012 and FY2013.
For additional information on the Peace Corps, see: CRS Report RS21168, The Peace Corps: Current Issues, by (name
redacted).
56
Freddy Cuevas and Adriana Gomez Licon, “Peace Corps Withdraws from Honduras Amid Surging Violence, Claims
of Rights Abuses,” Associated Press, January 19, 2012; Peace Corps, “Peace Corps Reviews Operations in Honduras,”
Press Release, December 21, 2011.
Congressional Research Service
31
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
effective institutions for democratic governance, and securing a clean energy future57—guide its
foreign aid budget request for the region. Of these, State Department officials emphasize that
success in improving citizen security remains central to achieving other U.S. objectives in the
region. Looking at the almost $1.7 billion request for the region, citizen security programs in
Mexico, Colombia, Central America, and the Caribbean account for 45% of the total. The
Administration argues that these programs emphasize an integrated and multilateral partnership to
strengthen institutions that will build and sustain the rule of law, address the root causes of crime,
and guarantee long-term public security.58 In addition to these citizen security efforts, U.S.
officials maintain that the FY2013 request also prioritizes assistance for Haiti, which would
receive 20% of aid to the region, in order to support the country’s earthquake recovery and other
development efforts including sanitation and health services to prevent and treat cholera and other
water-borne diseases.59
Another way to consider budget priorities toward the region is to look at the FY2013 request by
program area as set forth in the State Department’s Congressional Budget Justification. “Peace
and Security” assistance, which includes counternarcotics, counterterrorism, security sector
reform, and transnational crime assistance, accounts for 30% of aid to the region. The program
area of “Governing Justly and Democratically” accounts for about 24% of aid to the region, and
supports rule of law, human rights, good governance, and civil society projects. More traditional
aid programs under the program area of “Investing in People” account for 23% of assistance, and
include health, education, and aid targeted for vulnerable populations. The program area of
“Economic Growth” includes assistance for a varied array of projects on environment,
agriculture, private sector competitiveness, infrastructure, and trade and investment, and accounts
for about 20% of aid to the region.
As described above, the Administration’s request is about 10% less than the amount provided in
FY2012. The request, according to USAID’s Assistant Administrator for Latin America and the
Caribbean Mark Feierstein, takes advantage of the favorable development trends in the region
where “sound economic management has helped spur economic growth” and “greater access to
education and innovative social programs have reduced poverty and narrowed income
inequality.”60 Because of these positive trends, USAID has plans to close its mission in Panama
this year, manage its programs for Guyana out of the regional Caribbean mission in Barbados,
reduce aid to Colombia and Peru as these countries take over USAID-funded programs, and
57
For an overview of U.S. policy toward the region, see: CRS Report R42360, Latin America and the Caribbean: U.S.
Policy and Key Issues for Congress in 2012, coordinated by (name redacted).
58
Kevin Whitaker, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, prepared statement for the U.S. Congress,
House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Security
Challenges in Latin America, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., March 29, 2012, available at:
http://appropriations.house.gov/UploadedFiles/HHRG-112-AP04-WState-KWhitaker-20120329.pdf.
59
Roberta S. Jacobson, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, prepared statement for the U.S.
Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, Western Hemisphere
Budget Review 2013: What Are U.S. Priorities?, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., April 25, 2012, available at:
http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/112/HHRG-112-FA07-WState-JacobsonR-20120425.pdf.
60
Mark Feierstein, USAID Assistant Administrator for Latin America and the Caribbean, prepared statement for the
U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Programs, Security Challenges in Latin America, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., March 29, 2012, available at:
http://appropriations.house.gov/UploadedFiles/HHRG-112-AP04-WState-MFeierstein-20120329.pdf
Congressional Research Service
32
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
withdraw from some sectors in the region where countries have made progress or where partner
governments, the private sector, or other donors are filling gaps.61
Some Members have expressed concerns about the Administration’s 10% proposed decrease for
Latin America and the Caribbean, questioning whether the resources requested are adequate to
address U.S. interests in the region. There appears to be broad agreement between Congress and
the Administration regarding the importance of maintaining assistance for citizen security and
counter-narcotics efforts in Mexico, Colombia, Central America, and the Caribbean. Some
Members, however, have expressed concerns about declines in assistance for these programs.
Assistance for Haiti’s recovery also appears to be a point of consensus, although some Members
have called for adequate monitoring to ensure transparency and accountability in the assistance
program.62
On the other hand, some Members oppose portions of the Administration’s proposed FY2013
funding for the region. For example, some Members on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
expressed opposition to the President’s Global Climate Change Initiative, which includes $78
million for Latin American and Caribbean countries. At the same time, some Members also
expressed opposition to increases in DA funding for Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua (totaling
$4.6 million for all three countries), which have governments that they assert “continue to
undermine U.S. interests in the region, while also disregarding the rule of law and the
fundamental rights of their own citizens.”63 Some committee members opposed cuts in
democracy funding for Cuba and Venezuela, by $5 million and $3 million respectively, which
they maintain “are vital to help democracy advocates.”64
As noted above (“Legislative Action on FY2013 Appropriations”), House and Senate
Appropriations Committees have marked up their versions of the FY2013 State Department,
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs appropriations measure that respectively would reduce
worldwide foreign aid funding by 11.8% and 4.7% from the Administration’s FY2013 request.
While it is unclear how much assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean would be cut under
either scenario, the House version potentially would mean a significant reduction from the
Administration’s request. More information on House and Senate priorities will become known as
the legislation progresses.
Broad questions for Members of Congress to examine when considering the FY2013 foreign aid
appropriations request for Latin America and the Caribbean might include the following:
•
Does the FY2013 request adequately reflect U.S. interests and objectives in the
region and is the request balanced appropriately among these myriad interests
and objectives?
•
Are there specific metrics in place to evaluate effectiveness of the various
assistance programs?
61
Ibid.
See, for example: U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations,
and Related Programs, Security Challenges in Latin America, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., March 29, 2012; and U.S.
Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, Western Hemisphere
Budget Review 2013: What Are U.S. Priorities?, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., April 25, 2012.
63
“Lesser-Known Areas of Foreign Aid Budget Draw Attention of House GOP,” CQ Today Online, April 13, 2012.
64
Ibid.
62
Congressional Research Service
33
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
•
What aid programs in the region have been most effective?
•
Are there any aid programs that have been judged to be ineffective?
•
What is the potential impact of the Administration’s 10% proposed FY2013 aid
cuts for Latin America on U.S. policy toward the region and U.S. bilateral
relations?
•
If additional cuts are to be made to foreign aid to the region in FY2013 beyond
the Administration’s request, which areas can be identified for reduction with the
least harm to U.S. interests or objectives?
Inter-Agency and Donor Coordination65
As Congress seeks to maximize the impact of scarce foreign assistance funds, it may consider
resource coordination, both among U.S. government agencies as well as with international
donors. U.S. foreign assistance is currently fragmented among a variety of different government
agencies. Although the State Department and USAID continue to manage the majority of
assistance in Latin America and the Caribbean, DOD’s role has grown and several other agencies
also manage or implement aid programs. A February 2012 Government Accountability Office
(GAO) report found that State, USAID, and DOD are not fully aware of each other’s assistance
efforts, and, consequently, the potential exists for unnecessary overlap. GAO maintains that while
there are some initiatives underway to improve the situation, and ad hoc arrangements exist in
certain cases, there is no formal framework for readily sharing information across the three
agencies.66 With better coordination, the various U.S. agencies providing assistance may be able
to ensure that their efforts are complementary and thereby increase the potential impact of their
programs.
Congress might also consider the advantages and disadvantages of closer coordination with other
international donors. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD), the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean received $10.7 billion in official
development assistance67 disbursements from the major international donors in 2010. The United
States provided about $2.7 billion (25%) of the total while other major bilateral donors68 provided
$5.1 billion (48%) and multilateral organizations provided $2.8 billion (26%).69 Some studies that
have attempted to map the programs being carried out in the region by the various donors have
found a lack of coordination, including programs that duplicate efforts or support conflicting
65
For a more detailed examination of donor coordination issues, see: CRS Report R41185, Foreign Aid: International
Donor Coordination of Development Assistance, by (name redacted).
66
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Humanitarian and Development Assistance: Project Evaluations and Better
Information Sharing Needed to Manage the Military's Efforts, GAO-12-359, February 2012, pp. 26-27, available at:
http://gao.gov/assets/590/588334.pdf.
67
The OECD defines official development assistance as “grants or loans to developing countries and to multilateral
agencies which are: (a) undertaken by the official sector; (b) with promotion of economic development and welfare as
the main objective; (c) at concessional financial terms (if a loan, having a grant element of at least 25 per cent). In
addition to financial flows, technical co-operation is included in aid. Grants, loans and credits for military purposes are
excluded.”
68
The largest bilateral donors to the region included Spain ($1.27 billion), Germany ($913 million), Canada ($810
million), France ($665 million), and Norway ($434 million).
69
“OECD International Development Statistics,” as presented in the OECD iLibrary, May 2012, available at:
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/.
Congressional Research Service
34
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
goals.70 Closer coordination could enable the various donors to ensure that their efforts are
complementary, focus on specific countries or sectors, and thereby use their limited funds for
foreign assistance more efficiently. Such coordination could be difficult, however, as it is unclear
which country or organization might lead the effort and donors may disagree on the division of
labor. Moreover, foreign assistance often has strategic objectives in addition to development
goals. While donors may be able to carry out aid programs more efficiently by focusing on certain
sectors or countries, doing so could negatively affect their strategic interests.
In recent years, the United States has begun working with countries in the region that have been
successful in overcoming their domestic development challenges to provide assistance to third
countries. The United States has signed trilateral cooperation agreements with Brazil, Chile, and
Colombia,71 which are designed to provide the U.S. government and its development partners
with access to new solutions and expertise, and multiply the impact of that expertise by
combining best practices with larger scale financial resources.72 As noted above, some of the
assistance that the Administration requested for Brazil in FY2013 would be used to strengthen the
Brazilian government’s development agency and implement jointly funded agriculture, food
security, and school feeding programs in third countries. Similarly, the report (H.Rept. 112-494)
accompanying the House FY2013 foreign aid appropriations bill recommends $18.6 million be
used to support Colombian government efforts to provide training and technical assistance to
partners in the region and around the world that are facing counternarcotics and law enforcement
challenges. Support for emerging donors, however, has potential benefits and drawbacks. Efforts
such as these could build the capacities of U.S. partners to take on more responsibility for
regional stability and development. Critics assert that providing assistance through foreign
governments raises serious oversight concerns, as doing so could potentially lead to U.S. funds
being used to support activities that would otherwise be prohibited.73
Some questions Members of Congress might consider include:
•
Are there agencies that have comparative advantages in providing certain types
of assistance?
•
Do the intended roles of the various U.S. agencies providing foreign assistance
need to be clarified?
•
Are additional mechanisms to encourage inter-agency coordination necessary?
•
Are there certain types of assistance programs that the United States has a
comparative advantage in providing?
•
Are there countries or development sectors of lower strategic importance that
other donors would be willing to support if the United States concentrated its
efforts elsewhere?
70
See, for example: Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA),
Mapeo de las Intervenciones de Seguridad Ciudadana en Centroamérica Financiadas por la Cooperación
Internacional, June 2011.
71
USAID, “United States and Colombia Partner to Advance Development in Latin America,” Press Release, June 1,
2012.
72
P. Adriana Hayes, “In Development, Three Heads are Better than One,” USAID Frontlines, March/April 2012.
73
See, for example: WOLA, “House Bill Proposes Military ‘Training Laundering’ through Colombia,” May 21, 2012,
available at: http://www.wola.org/commentary/house_bill_proposes_military_training_laundering_through_colombia.
Congressional Research Service
35
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
•
How might building the foreign assistance capacities of regional partners affect
the short-term and long-term interests of the United States?
•
Are there controls in place to ensure that U.S. funds provided through partner
nations are used in accordance with U.S. law?
Political Will and Program Sustainability
When considering foreign assistance levels for Latin American and Caribbean nations, Congress
might examine the issues of political will and program sustainability. According to the State
Department’s first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), the United States
should “assess and monitor host nations’ political will to make the reforms necessary to make
effective use of U.S. assistance to ensure our assistance is being targeted where it can have the
most impact.”74 Unless partner nations are willing to implement complementary reforms and take
ownership and sustain programs as aid is reduced and withdrawn, the results of U.S. assistance
will likely be limited and short-lived.
The nations of Latin America and the Caribbean have a mixed record in terms of demonstrating
political will and ensuring program sustainability. The Colombian government, which has
benefitted from high levels of U.S. assistance for more than a decade, has undertaken numerous
reforms and raised revenue. As a result, the United States is able to carry out a managed transition
of its assistance programs in the country in which aid is slowly reduced as Colombia takes over
financial and technical responsibility.75 Similarly, USAID is closing its mission in Panama, and
closing out its voluntary family planning programs in a number of other Latin American countries
because partner nations have developed the capacity to manage and fund the programs on their
own.76
Despite these successes, numerous GAO reports over the past decade indicate that political will
has often been lacking in the region, especially with regard to raising sufficient government
revenue to sustain efforts initiated with U.S. support. A 2003 study of U.S. democracy programs
in six Latin American nations found “cases in which U.S.-funded training programs, computer
systems, and police equipment had languished for lack of resources after U.S. support ended.”77
Likewise, a 2010 study of counternarcotics programs found that several countries in the region
were unable to use U.S.-provided boats for patrol or interdiction operations due to a lack of
funding for fuel and maintenance.78 Even MCC-funded projects, in which assistance is contingent
on partner nation actions, have run into problems with program sustainability. A July 2011 study
of the MCC compact in Honduras found that the lifespan of roads built to improve small farmers’
74
U.S. Department of State and USAID, Leading through Civilian Power: The First Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review, 2010, p.154, available at: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/153108.pdf.
75
Dr. Rajiv Shah, USAID Administrator, testimony before the U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,
International Development Priorities in the FY 2013 Budget, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., March 6, 2012; and Jacobson
testimony, April 2012, op.cit.
76
Shah testimony, March 2012, op.cit.
77
U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. Democracy Programs in Six Latin American Countries Have Yielded Modest
Results, GAO-03-358, March 2003, p. 4, available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/160/157413.pdf.
78
U.S. Government Accountability Office, International Programs Face Significant Challenges Reducing the Supply
of Illegal Drugs but Support Broad U.S. Foreign Policy Objectives, GAO-10-921, July 21, 2010, p. 6, available at:
http://www.gao.gov/assets/130/125042.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
36
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
access to markets may be relatively limited, as the municipalities where they were constructed
lack the equipment, expertise, and funding for road maintenance.79
As Members of Congress consider foreign aid appropriations for Latin American and Caribbean
countries, they might consider questions such as:
•
Does the country have the capacity to maintain the equipment that is to be
provided?
•
Is there a plan for the host country to eventually take on financial and operational
responsibility for the assistance program?
•
How much assistance will be necessary over what time frame in order to build
the host nation’s technical and financial capacity to sustain these efforts?
•
Has the country demonstrated the political will to implement necessary reforms?
•
Will U.S. assistance be complemented with host nation resources or through
public-private partnerships?
•
Should U.S. assistance be contingent upon host nation reforms or financing?
Legislative Action on FY2013 Appropriations
Appropriations committees in both houses of Congress marked up FY2013 appropriations bills
for the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs in May 2012. The House
Committee on Appropriations held a markup of its bill (H.R. 5857) on May 17, 2012, and
reported it to the full House on May 25. It totaled $48.3 billion, including $40.1 billion for the
core State Department and Foreign Operations budget and $8.2 billion for Overseas Contingency
Operations.80 If enacted, total funding levels in FY2013 would have been 9.6% lower than the
FY2012 estimate and 11.8% lower than the Obama Administration’s FY2013 request. The Senate
Committee on Appropriations marked up its bill (S. 3241) and reported it favorably to the full
Senate on May 24. It totaled $52.3 billion, including $50 billion for the core State Department
and Foreign Operations budget and $2.3 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations. If enacted,
total funding levels in FY2013 would have been 2.3% lower than the FY2012 estimate and 4.7%
lower than the Administration’s request. The Obama Administration called the House bill
“unworkable,” as it went beyond the cuts agreed upon in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L.
112-25).81 The Administration also asserted that the House funding levels would “damage our
national security and force America to face higher costs over the long term from unresolved
conflicts, transnational crime, poverty, and other cross-border threats.”82
79
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Compacts in Cape Verde and Honduras Achieved Reduced Targets, GAO11-728, July 2011, p. 103, available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/330/321708.pdf.
80
Since FY2012, the Administration has divided the international affairs budget request into two parts: the "core"
budget request reflecting "enduring" needs, and Overseas Contingency Operations, described as extraordinary,
temporary costs in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
81
For more information on the Budget Control Act, see: CRS Report R41965, The Budget Control Act of 2011, by (name
redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted).
82
Victoria Nuland, Spokesperson, “Daily Press Briefing,” U.S. Department of State, May 18, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
37
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
It was unclear how much foreign assistance each of the nations of Latin America and the
Caribbean would receive under the two bills since, for the most part, appropriations levels for
individual countries and programs were not specified in the legislation or accompanying reports.
Nevertheless, both of the reports expressed concerns over conditions in the region and noted the
committees’ intentions to provide assistance levels above the Administration’s request to at least
some Latin American and Caribbean nations. The House report (H.Rept. 112-494) stated:
Additionally, to address the immediate security needs in this hemisphere, the Committee
recommendation restores reductions proposed in the request for key countries in Latin
America. The Committee believes it is critical to continue robust support for
counternarcotics and law enforcement efforts, as well as assistance for rule of law and
judicial reform activities in Mexico, Colombia, Central America, and the Caribbean to fight
drug trafficking and violent crime before it reaches the borders of the United States. The
Security and stability of these neighbors directly affects the United States.
The Senate report (S.Rept. 112-172) also expressed concerns about the region and called for
additional U.S. aid:
The Committee notes the daunting challenges facing many countries in Central and South
America due to struggling economies and weak governmental institutions. In addition to
funding levels for specific countries recommended under [the ESF heading], the Committee
directs additional resources be made available above the budget request to strengthen
democratic institutions, including professional and accountable police forces, and to address
the causes of poverty in the region. Additional funds should also be provided under the DA
and INCLE headings.
The committee reports stipulated specific funding levels under certain foreign aid accounts for
some countries and programs. Although they differed in programmatic emphasis, both reports
called for assistance above the requested levels for Colombia and Mexico. For Colombia, the
House report recommended ESF at the requested level, $10 million above the request in FMF,
and $18.6 million above the request in INCLE to enable Colombia to provide training and
technical assistance to partners in the region and around the world. In comparison, the Senate
report recommended $20 million above the request in ESF for alternative development and
institution building, the requested level of FMF, and $3 million above the request in INCLE. For
Mexico, the House report recommended $10.35 million above the request in DA, the requested
levels of ESF and FMF, and $49.5 million above the request in INCLE to support anti-crime and
counternarcotics efforts along the U.S.-Mexican border. The Senate report recommended INCLE
funding at the requested level and $10 million above the request in ESF to support additional
economic development activities along the U.S.-Mexican border.
The House and Senate differed in terms of other priorities. The House report recommended $5
million in ESF for democracy programs in Venezuela, which was $2 million above the
Administration’s request. In contrast, the Senate report supported the Administration’s request for
$3 million, but recommended that democracy programs be administered by the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) instead of USAID or the Department of State. For CARSI, the
House report recommended the requested level of ESF and $10 million above the request in
INCLE. The House report also recommended the requested level of ESF and $9 million above the
request in INCLE for CBSI. The Senate report, on the other hand, supported the requested levels
for both regional security programs. While the House bill would have provided $5 million above
the request in ESF for democracy programs in Cuba, the Senate bill would have capped funding
for such programs at the requested level. Similarly, the Senate report recommended $10 million
above the request in DA for conservation programs in the Brazilian Amazon while the House
Congressional Research Service
38
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
report made no reference to such programs. In addition, the Senate bill would have provided $5.4
million above the request for the Inter-American Foundation, while the House bill would have
funded the agency at the requested level.
March 2013 Update
Ultimately Congress took no action on H.R. 5857 or S. 3241. It delayed floor consideration of
FY2013 appropriations bills until after the start of the new fiscal year and the November 2012
elections, instead enacting a six-month continuing resolution that would expire in March 2013
(P.L. 112-175). In March 2013, before the continuing resolution expired, Congress approved new
legislation (P.L. 113-6) funding federal programs through the end of FY2013. Under that
measure, State Department and Foreign Operations accounts were funded at the same level as in
FY2012 with some exceptions. Funding, however, was also subject to the budget sequestration
cuts set forth in the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25) and the American Taxpayers Relief
Act (P.L. 112-240). While sequestration reduced State Department-Foreign Operations funding by
about 5%, those reductions will be applied at the account level, and as a result, country-level
allocations for FY2013 are not yet available.
Congressional Research Service
39
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Appendix. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program
and Account: FY2011-FY2013
Table A-1. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program and Account: FY2011
(Appropriations in thousands of current U.S. dollars)
DA
GHP
(State)
GHP
(USAID)
MRA
P.L.
480
ESF
INCLE
NADR
FMF
IMET
Total
Argentina
0
0
0
na
0
0
300
300
0
297
897
Bahamas
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
201
201
11,231
14,550
5,750
na
0
0
0
0
0
806
806
Belize
0
20
0
na
0
0
0
0
200
190
390
Bolivia
10,350
0
16,367
na
0
0
15,000
0
0
198
15,198
Brazil
15,000
1,300
4,990
na
0
0
1,000
400
0
631
2,031
Chile
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
500
0
821
1321
Colombia
0
0
0
na
10,443
184,426
204,000
4,750
47,904
1,695
453,218
Costa Rica
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
349
394
743
Cuba
0
0
0
na
0
20,000
0
0
0
0
20,000
Dominican
Republic
18,103
9,250
9,043
na
0
0
0
0
0
600
600
Ecuador
17,270
0
0
na
1,585
0
4,500
0
499
400
6,984
El Salvador
23,904
20
3,086
na
0
0
0
0
1,247
1,521
2,768
Guatemala
49,325
0
18,068
na
38,085
0
3,992
0
499
192
42,768
Guyana
3,000
13,525
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
386
386
0
156,240
26,946
na
44,838
131,000
19,420
0
1,597
220
197,075
Honduras
42,266
1,000
10,988
na
0
0
0
0
998
765
1763
Jamaica
5,350
300
1,200
na
0
0
0
0
0
739
739
Mexico
25,000
0
3,455
na
0
18,000
117,000
5,700
7,984
1,006
149,690
Nicaragua
16,400
897
5,891
na
0
0
0
0
339
538
877
Panama
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
150
2,096
738
2,984
Paraguay
5,500
0
0
na
0
0
500
0
399
407
1306
Peru
49,789
50
9,123
na
0
0
31,500
2,000
3,500
619
37,619
Suriname
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
251
251
Trinidad &
Tobago
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
253
253
Uruguay
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
399
590
989
Venezuela
0
0
0
na
0
5,000
0
0
0
0
5,000
Barbados &
Eastern
Caribbean
Haiti
Congressional Research Service
40
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
DA
GHP
(State)
GHP
(USAID)
MRA
P.L.
480
USAID
Central
America
Regional
17,000
6,171
5,391
na
0
USAID
South
America
Regional
4,530
0
5,289
na
USAID
Latin
America
and
Caribbean
Regional
47,445
0
5,390
State
Western
Hemisphere
Regional
0
0
[CARSI]
[0]
[CBSI]
Total
ESF
INCLE
NADR
FMF
IMET
Total
0
0
0
0
0
28,562
0
0
0
0
0
0
9,819
na
0
0
0
0
0
0
52,835
0
na
0
76,704
109,008
11,400
16,467
0
213,579
[0]
[0]
[na]
[0]
[30,000]
[71,508]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[101,508]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[na]
[0]
[17,000]
[37,500]
[6,400]
[16,467]
[0]
[77,367]
361,463
203,323
130,977
57,084
94,951
435,130
506,220
25,200
84,477
14,458
1,913,283
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012.
Notes: The MRA account is funded regionally. CARSI and CBSI are funded under the State Western
Hemisphere Regional program.
Congressional Research Service
41
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Table A-2. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program and Account: FY2012 Estimate
(Estimated appropriations in thousands of current U.S. Dollars)
DA
GHP
(State)
GHP
(USAID)
MRA
P.L.
480
ESF
INCLE
NADR
FMF
IMET
Total
Argentina
0
0
0
na
0
0
300
300
0
750
1,350
Bahamas
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
190
190
11,640
14,850
6,950
na
0
0
0
0
0
800
34,240
Belize
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
300
200
190
690
Bolivia
6,500
0
14,100
na
0
0
7,500
0
0
230
28,330
Brazil
12,000
1,300
0
na
0
0
3,000
300
0
640
17,240
Chile
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
300
0
855
1,155
Colombia
0
0
0
na
0
172,000
160,600
4,750
40,000
1,665
379,015
Costa Rica
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
315
375
690
Cuba
0
0
0
na
0
20,000
0
0
0
0
20,000
Dominican
Republic
12,300
9,250
7,750
na
0
0
0
0
0
810
30,110
Ecuador
15,000
0
0
na
0
0
4,500
200
450
380
20,530
El Salvador
23,904
0
0
na
0
2,000
0
1,000
1,250
1,050
29,204
Guatemala
46,325
0
17,600
na
25,000
0
5,000
0
500
760
95,185
Guyana
0
10,525
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
315
10,840
Haiti
0
141,240
25,000
na
23,000
148,281
19,420
0
0
220
357,161
Honduras
46,266
1,000
8,000
na
0
0
0
0
1,000
700
56,966
Jamaica
5,000
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
700
5,700
Mexico
33,350
0
1,000
na
0
33,260
248,500
5,380
7,000
1,635
330,125
Nicaragua
9,400
0
2,900
na
0
0
0
0
399
790
13,489
Panama
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
150
1,840
760
2,750
Paraguay
2,500
0
0
na
0
0
500
0
350
380
3,730
Peru
45,000
0
5,000
na
0
0
28,950
1,000
1,980
620
82,550
Suriname
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
240
240
Trinidad &
Tobago
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
180
180
Uruguay
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
465
465
Venezuela
0
0
0
na
0
6,000
0
0
0
0
6,000
USAID
Central
America
Regional
15,500
11,198
5,391
na
0
0
0
0
0
0
32,089
Barbados &
Eastern
Caribbean
Congressional Research Service
42
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
DA
GHP
(State)
GHP
(USAID)
MRA
P.L.
480
ESF
INCLE
NADR
FMF
IMET
Total
USAID
South
America
Regional
11,588
0
4,000
na
0
0
0
0
0
0
15,588
USAID
Latin
America
and
Caribbean
Regional
37,100
0
7,800
na
0
0
0
0
0
0
44,900
State
Western
Hemisphere
Regional
0
0
0
na
0
84,000
115,000
6,850
15,000
0
220,850
[CARSI]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[na]
[0]
[50,000]
[85,000]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[135,000]
[CBSI]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[na]
[0]
[17,000]
[30,000]
[2,000]
[15,000]
[0]
[64,000]
Total
333,373
189,363
105,491
53,855
48,000
465,541
593,270
20,530
70,284
15,700
1,895,407
Source: U.S. Department of State, Office of U.S. foreign Assistance Resources, FY2012 653(a) Foreign Aid
Allocations, May 24, 2012; U.S. Department of State, Fiscal Year 2012 Congressional Spending Plan: Central America
Regional Security Initiative, June 19, 2012
Notes: Funding figures are estimates and may change. The MRA account is funded regionally. CARSI and CBSI
are funded under the State Western Hemisphere Regional program.
Congressional Research Service
43
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
Table A-3. U.S. Assistance by Country or Program and Account: FY2013 Request
(Requested appropriations in thousands of current U.S. dollars)
DA
GHP
(State)
GHP
(USAID)
MRA
P.L.
480
ESF
INCLE
NADR
FMF
IMET
Total
Argentina
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
270
0
544
814
Bahamas
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
180
180
12,600
14,850
6,950
na
0
0
0
0
0
800
35,200
Belize
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
850
180
1,030
Bolivia
7,515
0
9,500
na
0
0
5,000
0
0
200
22,215
Brazil
2,000
1,300
0
na
0
0
2,000
270
0
625
6,195
Chile
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
270
0
810
1,080
Colombia
0
0
0
na
0
155,000
142,000
3,250
30,000
1,575
331,825
Costa Rica
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
1,402
350
1,752
Cuba
0
0
0
na
0
15,000
0
0
0
0
15,000
Dominican
Republic
13,300
9,025
6,750
na
0
0
0
0
0
765
29,840
Ecuador
16,000
0
0
na
0
0
4,500
0
450
360
21,310
El Salvador
39,000
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
1,800
1,000
41,800
Guatemala
56,000
0
17,100
na
17,000
0
2,000
0
750
720
93,570
Guyana
0
6,681
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
300
6,981
Haiti
0
131,543
25,100
na
23,000
141,000
17,500
0
1,600
220
339,963
Honduras
49,000
1,000
4,500
na
0
0
0
0
3,000
650
58,150
Jamaica
5,000
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
398
5,398
Mexico
23,000
0
0
na
0
35,000
199,000
3,950
7,000
1,549
269,499
Nicaragua
12,000
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
399
700
13,099
Panama
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
135
2,800
720
3,655
Paraguay
5,000
0
0
na
0
0
150
0
350
360
5,860
Peru
47,300
0
0
na
0
0
23,300
500
1,980
585
73,665
Suriname
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
225
225
Trinidad &
Tobago
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
180
180
Uruguay
0
0
0
na
0
0
0
0
0
450
450
Venezuela
0
0
0
na
0
3,000
0
0
0
0
3,000
USAID
Central
America
Regional
13,500
10,820
5,391
na
0
0
0
0
0
0
29,711
Barbados &
Eastern
Caribbean
Congressional Research Service
44
U.S. Foreign Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
DA
GHP
(State)
GHP
(USAID)
MRA
P.L.
480
ESF
INCLE
NADR
FMF
IMET
Total
USAID
South
America
Regional
9,500
0
4,000
na
0
0
0
0
0
0
13,500
USAID
Latin
America
and
Caribbean
Regional
38,213
0
7,525
na
0
0
0
0
0
0
45,738
State
Western
Hemisphere
Regional
0
0
0
na
0
85,200
81,000
4,685
10,000
0
180,885
[CARSI]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[na]
[0]
[47,500]
[60,000]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[107,500]
[CBSI]
[0]
[0]
[0]
[na]
[0]
[26,200]
[21,000]
[1,800]
[10,000]
[0]
[59,000]
Total
348,928
175,219
86,816
47,200
40,000
434,200
476,450
13,330
62,381
14,446
1,698,970
Source: U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Fiscal Year 2013, March
9, 2012.
Notes: The MRA account is funded regionally. CARSI and CBSI are funded under the State Western
Hemisphere Regional program.
Author Contact Information
(name redacted)
Analyst in Latin American Affairs
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....
Congressional Research Service
(name redacted)
Specialist in Latin American Affairs
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....
45
EveryCRSReport.com
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the
Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on
issues that may come before Congress.
EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The
reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to
the public.
Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts
who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made
any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.
CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in
the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without
permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a
third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or
otherwise use copyrighted material.
Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public
understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in
connection with CRS' institutional role.
EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim
copyright on any CRS report we have republished.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.