Who should have the most say in how aid is used: the countries giving the aid or the communities receiving it?

I believe that the decision on where aid should go should be one where both parties communicate with equal say as to where the aid is to go. A decision where communities express their problems and countries giving aid listen and help the best they can to minimise their problems. In Israel the U.S. has given more than $300b in aid. Less than 25% of the total aid Israel has received was economic aid, the other 75% of that aid went to the military.

How can military aid benefit the people who are living in extreme poverty?

From what I have seen there are no reports that the citizens of Israel have been able to express their need for economic aid, rather there are an abundance of reports that Israeli government officials are trying to secure a continuous supply of weapons. This shows the lack of communication between government, citizens and countries giving aid, although the government might have not supplied much input comments of citizens I believe the country giving aid should then make it their mission to get input from the communities.

From previous comments I have read, I believe people may argue that the communities should have the most say, however if an aid donor's beliefs do not align with where the aid is going, then they might be less willing to provide the aid. On the flip side, if the aid donors have complete control, or no input from citizens, then aid might be given to less important or severe issues.

In conclusion I believe aid would be more helpful and better used if when aid is given both aid donors and communities had equal say as to how the aid should be used.