The least-reported initiative of the Bush administration is the biggest foreign-aid endeavor in a generation. For a president who ran for office on a domestic-policy platform, Mr. Bush has created a surprising, outward-looking, cooperative set of international policies through his State Department that could have a significant effect on other nations’ environment, health care, agriculture and education.

President Bush properly received credit for greatly increasing the amount of money the United States spends fighting AIDS worldwide – he proposed an added $15 billion over five years, doubling the amount that had been going to Africa. But his Millennium Challenge Account, announced early this year, makes a bargain with developing nations that many Americans would support: Badly needed assistance will be increased by 50 percent over the next three years in exchange for demonstrable commitments to just rule (protecting human rights, fighting corruption), investments in people in areas such as health care and education and moving toward sound fiscal policies and open markets.

A prime reason for these policies is easy to find in the Sept. 11 attacks and the growing health threat of AIDS. But it is an important example of the administration reacting well to changed circumstances. Adding $2 billion this year to the foreign-aid budget of $8.6 billion is the largest jump since President Kennedy increased the budget by $4 billion – to $12.5 billion – in 1962. (It’s also a measure of how seriously over the last 40 years the United States has turned away from helping other nations develop.)

This is not just about money but attitude. Consider a speech last month by Assistant Secretary of State John Turner on climate change and a U.S. partnership with China on cleaner energy. “Climate change poses a global problem that requires a global response,” Mr. Turner said. “The United States and China share a common responsibility in this regard. Why? Coal, the workhorse of America and China’s power sectors, emits carbon dioxide when burned – a chief culprit in global warming. We know we cannot let the rising levels of carbon dioxide continue unchecked.”

The shorthand for anti-environmental measures is to say “balance” when what you really mean is, for instance, mountaintop mining. Several of the administration’s recent domestic environmental policies emphasize balance over strength. But the policies from the State Department have a more straightforward approach: There is no saying the science is still out on climate change, no doubting the human contribution, no waffling on the need for action. There remains, of course, a gap between identifying a culprit and getting to mandatory caps on carbon emissions, but the direction of the talk is very encouraging and suggests a commitment for action.

Political observers keep an eye on the competition between the Pentagon and State, trying to discern which is in particular favor with the White House. But it seems that, whether the favorite agency or not, the State Department at the president’s direction is quietly making crucial contributions to benefit many nations and U.S. interests abroad. These are considerable achievements.