SNIP
>
>I think we're going to have to differ on this one.
>In my experience, I've usually found that unconditional help brings far greater reward than help given with strings attached.

I have to bet that the magnitude of unconditional help offered by U.S. people, as charities or individuals is larger than the sum of ALL other help offered by persons/groups of all other countries combined, and I would hazard that this is so virtually everywhere.

I can't recollect, on the other hand, diplomatically offered "help" ever being UNconditional. It generally involves arms (to 'protect' democracy) or $ (to 'protect' democracy) AND the continuation of access to specific goods or places.
I believe that the infamous World Bank and International Monetary Fund pretend to be government influence free but I can't buy that myself.

I believe, too, that at the grassroots, the informal unconditional help offered by the U.S. or anyone else has far more effect than is visible. I blame this (invisibility) on the powerful in the locales benefitting from that help. They get no gain in publicizing it and can easily use it to claim things (spying, skimming$, insurrection, etc) that aren't so when they feel threatened (or when their own sources of 'revenue' dry up).

So I think that unconditional help does bring far greater reward than conditional help, but the world is built in such a way that *BOTH* are necessities today.

The program I mentioned earlier told of the following events:
1) Egypt wanted UK out of Egypt
2) UK agreed to leave on condition that:
--- a mothballed base by the Suez be left alone for possible later use;
--- that use would be in the eventuality that Egypt was attacked by some foreign power.
3) Egypt nationalized the Suez
4) UK & France made a secret deal with Israel to have them attack Egypt
5) UK and France demanded BOTH sides to stop hostilities
6) Israel agreed but Egypt did not, so UK (and France?) attacked Egypt (believe it or not!)
That was the Suez Canal Crisis of 1956.

With help like that Egypt didn't need enemies.

Jim