The New York Times ran an op-ed in 1996 suggesting America aided developing nations far too little. I wrote the Times arguing that American defense spending is (and continues to be) aid to nations such as Germany, Japan, South Korea, and others under our nuclear umbrella. I believed in 1997 that America must maintain a strong military, backed by a government that wasn’t running absurd deficits. At this writing (in 2023), I continue to believe that we must cut deficit spending and continue support for our military, lest we jeopardize our security as we did in the years leading up to September 11, 2001. —MM
To the Editor:
Stephan-Götz Richter (Op-Ed, Aug. 27) would have us believe that we live in a country of cheapskates and shortsighted politicians. I am not bothered that Japan and Germany give more aid to developing countries than the United States does. Neither Japan nor Germany has to substantially support its military; for 45 years the United States has done so. And does Mr. Richter not consider our support of democracy in Haiti to be “aid”?
Mr. Richter sees our proiected budget deficit of 1.9 percent of gross national product as impressive. Just because Germany, Japan and France have messier finances doesn’t mean a $3 trillion debt is impressive, nor does it mean that the United States is a freeloader if our politi- cians are trying to curb spending. Reducing our national debt, encouraging capitalism abroad, defending developing democracies with military might and being selective among those to whom we give foreign aid are not shortsighted goals.
No country has taxed its way into prosperity. But if Mr. Richter has figured out how to do that, I’d love to read about it in The New York Times first.
MORGAN MURPHY
New York, Aug. 28, 1996