Donald Trump seems to think that every problem has a military solution.



But it was military and national security experts who gave the most full-throated defense of the foreign aid budget, which he's now seeking to slash by more than a quarter.



Because even with the "biggest military build-up in American history," we can't bomb Ebola out of existence.

We can't stop ISIS with brute force. Cut off its head, and another will grow right in its place, if we allow desperation and chaos to flourish.



Now is the worst moment for Trump to cut foreign aid. The world is facing the greatest humanitarian disaster since World War II, according to the United Nations - a famine we ignore at our peril.

Trump's defense budget follows a warped logic | Editorial



The U.N. rarely declares official famines; the last one worldwide was six years ago, in Somalia. Today, more than 20 million people are on the brink of starvation in just four countries, three of which are in Africa: South Sudan, Somalia and Nigeria.



The U.S. was a key player in the birth of South Sudan, the world's youngest country, where 100,000 people now face immediate starvation thanks to government corruption. It's a man-made famine fueled by ethnic cleansing, with 2,000 refugees a day fleeing into Northern Uganda.



Bug-eyed children with stick-limbs are dying hours after they reach safety, where survivors recount mass rapes and slaughters. This country is on the brink of genocide, and we have some responsibility.



Trump argues the U.S. provides more foreign aid than any European country, and it's time for other countries to step up. But this is a minuscule slice of our federal budget: less than 1 percent. Other European nations give a much higher percentage of their gross domestic product. We're near the bottom of the list.



True, we could better distribute this money. We give too much to Israel, a well-off country. Trump isn't touching that funding; his cuts hit Africa the hardest - where things are most desperate.



Foreign aid and diplomacy is a lot cheaper than military might, which is why congressional Republicans like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) are rejecting these cuts, too.

We have a long bipartisan tradition of humanitarian aid. It's a way to broadcast American values. The only experience many people have with the U.S. is that they received help when they needed it most.

It's how we contained Ebola, SARS and Zika before they got to our shores. And slashing the funds that help poor countries build up their resiliency to emergencies and the effects of climate change will only worsen crises in the future.



It's not just about human suffering; it's about preventing worldwide destabilization. Look at the collapse of Syria, which led to a massive refugee outflow into fragile countries.

They didn't have enough foreign aid to absorb such an influx, so refugees took the gamble of trying to get to Europe because they were desperate - risking their lives at sea, causing upheaval that upset the entire European Union.



That's how this fits into our own national interests. Those charged with protecting our country constantly defend the foreign aid budget - most recently in a letter by 120 retired three and four-star generals and admirals to Trump - because they know this is an investment that pays back. If only he would listen.

Bookmark NJ.com/Opinion. Follow on Twitter @NJ_Opinion and find NJ.com Opinion on Facebook.