It is possible to help all people in the world, so governments should only focus on people in their own countries. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In today's world, many governments across the world are helping people outside of their respective countries.

Although

this

is a good development, I believe governments should focus on the overall upliftment of their own citizens

first

before lending a helping hand to people from other nations. In

this

essay, I will examine facts justifying why authorities should give priority to their own general public over others.

To begin

with, many leaders from different countries get involved in developmental activities of their neighbouring countries or any other friendly nations.

However

, they forget the fact that their citizens need their attention as no country is free from domestic problems. Governments tend to lend financial support to foreign states, but the same amount could be used for providing much cheaper education to students or give more subsidized ration to the public.

In addition

, governments keep changing with time to time, which

also

changes their allies. A friendly nation to the current government may not be the same when a different political party is elected in the future. All funds or benefits given to them may not be useful in

such

scenario which is a wastage of effort as well as of monetary funds.

Instead

,

this

could have been used for bringing a change in the lives of their own people.

For example

, India provided extensive support to the people of Nepal in the past. But the current leadership in Nepal is having an anti-India stand, all the rapport that was built previously is of no use under the current leadership

that is

in power in Nepal.

Hence

, I believe before helping people from other countries it is necessary to focus on domestic issues. To conclude, in my opinion, central authorities should prioritize their own citizens

first

over any other. If

this

is not followed, a nation might end up in an internal crisis which is a dangerous sign for any democratically elected head of the state.