There is little doubt that the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and birth of democratic governments in eastern Europe (as well as the economic and military unification of Europe), should call into question the purpose of Cold War institutions and policies. After all, times change, and new challenges arise that require a different objective.

Yet, much of US foreign policy seems locked in bipolar, Cold War-esque policies. Even the seemingly natural realignment of NATO into a leaner organization structured around rapid-response and anti-terrorism (with a goal of fading into a strong European defensive network) has become bogged down by larger US interests in the Middle East. The NATO charter is still built around identifying one hostile aggressor as a threat to Europe. Any guesses why the Russians might object to NATO expansion?

All things considered, the same holds true when concerning matters of US foreign aid. In a recent article, published last week in the Weekly Standard, Ken Hagerty (President and Found of Global Venture Investors Foundation) writes about how the end of the Cold War “deprived our foreign aid system of its strategic underpinnings” and has rendered it as an “amorphous exercise, motivated by a marbled mixture of altruism, vanity, pragmatism, guilt, and nobles oblige.”

Hagerty, whom I’ve known for the past few years, is correct that the US foreign aid system is not built on encouraging growth in free markets on a consistent basis. But taking the issue further, Hagerty notes that US development assistance has “become a global welfare system, with many of the same syndromes that afflicted America’s war on poverty.” Instead of creating a post-Cold War foreign aid program that encourages free market capitalism, recipients opt instead into a cycle of dependency rather than achieving self-sufficiency. This is where Hagerty’s “Free Cities” program comes into play.

The “Free Cities” program is a way to “harness market forces to jump-start non-corrupt, globalized private sectors inside impoverished countries.” It is essentially a new development paradigm designed to generate a economic version of Hong Kong without “the baggage of colonialism.”

To learn more about this program, I highly recommend you read Ken’s article in the Weekly Standard. You can read it by clicking here.

To reach Ken Hagerty, you can contact him through his website by clicking here or via email at: kenhagerty@gvif.org