U.S. foreign aid: our best diplomatic tool

I recently saw an interview with Rand Paul, the newest Senator from Kentucky, in which he advocated eliminating foreign aid from the federal budget. While foreign aid takes up less than one-half of a percent of the federal budget, Paul rightly argues that it will take cutting everything, no matter how "small," to restore fiscal stability.

However, I think he glosses over one of the biggest reasons for foreign aid. I really don't believe it's all about America's generosity. Paul is right, we don't have the money on hand to be generous. We need to cut back. But for all of the cutbacks we'll need to make, foreign aid won't be one of them.

Foreign aid is simply too important of a tool for negotiations. I read a story today that highlights the plight of a U.S. diplomat who's being imprisoned in Pakistan for presumably killing two Pakistanis in self-defense. The title of the story warns that "Pakistan could lose aid dollars over detained U.S. diplomat."

That's right, the negotiating tool for obtaining the release of an American diplomat is money. And we've seen cuts in aid used as a threat with many other countries, most recently with Egypt.

Money talks. It always will. Because of that, look to military and domestic budget cuts before foreign aid is ever even considered for the chopping block. Cutting foreign aid is simply too big a risk for international relations.