The articles reflect both ASEAN and USAID’s prudent forecast for growth in the Southeast Asian region–one that is environmentally friendly and acknowledges the region’s vulnerability to climate change. As the region develops, organizations USAID And ASEAN remain committed to sustainability, equity, and ultimately, circular economy. USAID has undertaken multimillion-dollar climate initiatives, collaborating with sectors of ASEAN, to ensure that Southeast Asian countries are the face of their own economic expansion.
Given that USAID has generated billions from the private and public sector to stimulate the Southeast Asian economy, it is clear that–for whatever reason–people are invested in seeing the region develop. Another question, however, pertains to how the money will be allocated. Which countries demand the most attention? The articles talk about ASEAN as if it concerns a single, homogenous country or body that is going to be accounted for equitably. But it certainly cannot be that simple.
The harsh reality is that donors who are bound to USAID have agendas and want to see their dollars directed to a specific recipient and for a specific purpose. In a course I took last semester, I learned that, particularly in the foreign aid industry, there are very rarely any acts of pure altruism. While aid is typically meant to achieve a win-win for both the donor and the recipient, rarely are these wins equal. That said, the nature of USAID is first and foremost to appease its donors simply to ensure that funding will continue. As a result, nations that do not fit these agendas are often left underfunded.
The likelihood that donors from the United States are funneling money into the region purely to see it develop is unlikely, but the upside is that they are collaborating with rather than imposing an agenda on sectors of ASEAN themselves. Yet, looking at China’s BRI and investment in Africa’s developing countries suggests that perhaps the United States is trying to rival its counterpart’s influence in the Eastern world. But as we discussed in class, it is debatable whether or not this is a considerable endeavor. Ultimately, it is critical that organizations investing and overseeing growth in the Southeast Asia remain careful to ensure that they do not do more harm than good and undermine the region. It is critical that they do not become blinded by their own personal motivations.
A potentially more concerning layer of the ecosystem of agencies involved in Southeast Asia is how the money will be distributed. USAID plans to invest $150 billion in “climate finance” in the region by 2030. Yet, each country in the region differs so greatly from the other that it makes it difficult to be decisive with these dollars. Are USAID and ASEAN equipped to cater to the needs of each nation in the region as equitably as they plan to, or will some countries fall behind others?
Written by Gibran Varahrami
https://asean.org/our-communities/asean-socio-cultural-community/environment/
https://www.usaid.gov/asia-regional/fact-sheets/confronting-climate-crisis-southeast-asia-regional-approach