The advocates of international aid believe that countries have a moral obligation to help each other, while the opponents consider it unnecessary, because money is misspent by the governments that receive it. Discuss these two points of view and give your opinion.

Over the past decades, international

aid

has become an issue of broad interest to the general public. Many suggest that members of

global community

Suggestion

the global community

a global community

have the responsibility for providing assistance to each other;

however

, the opponents argue that the provision of international

aid

could be misspent by recipient countries. As every coin has two sides, justification of both philosophies will be discussed in the following essay. On the one hand, there is no point in denying that the more international

aid

victims of catastrophic problems receive, the more rapidly they recover. Nowadays, economic disparity is the main reason that accounts for why some countries return to normal state swiftly after natural disasters. Meanwhile, other countries decline

further

in

Suggestion

into

recession because of the lack of financial sources. Japan could be cited as a good example.

Although

this

country periodically suffers major earthquakes and tsunamis,

sustainability

Suggestion

the sustainability

of

this

country has been maintained well thanks to economic prosperity. In stark contrast, consistent drought in Indonesia

have promoted

Suggestion

has promoted

social unrest, uncontrollable immigration to neighbouring countries.

This

example demonstrates that governments should provide humanitarian

relief

in order to help victims escape catastrophes

.

Accept space

.

On the other hand

, an argument raised by objectors to international

aid

is that humanitarian

relief

could be

spend

Suggestion

spent

on inappropriate destinations by recipient governments. Sociologists could contend that embezzlement

is

Suggestion

has been

ever-present.

Therefore

,

corruptive

governments can take full

advantages

Suggestion

advantage

of legal loopholes to use humanitarian

relief

for unintended

proposes

propose or intend

purposes

.

For instance

, venal government in Venezuela has been criticized for making optimal use of political exclusiveness to misspend financial and without international supervision.

This

example shows that humanitarian

relief

could be mishandled by recipients. Taking all of the above mentioned facts into account, it is my opinion that donor countries should provide humanitarian

aid

to populations in need.

Nevertheless

, they should be accompanied with compulsory requirement to minimize risk of being misused by

corruptive

governments.