[Peace-discuss] Fwd: US/Africa: More than a Trip?

[Ken Urban]

We also know that because of this trip, Mr. Bush will no longer be able
to donate blood.  

Ken

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ken Urban
Assoc. Prof. in Computer Science

B129A
(217)-353-2246
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> Alfred Kagan <akagan at uiuc.edu> 07/03/03 11:50 AM >>>
FYI

>Comments: Authenticated sender is <apicmail at mail.africapolicy.org>
>From: "Africa Action" <e-journal at africaaction.org>
>Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:27:01 -0500
>Subject: US/Africa: More than a Trip?
>Reply-to: e-journal at africaaction.org
>Priority: normal
>X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (marduk.africapolicy.org)
>To: e-journal-list at africaaction.org
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0
>	tests=MSG_ID_ADDED_BY_MTA_3
>	version=2.54
>X-Spam-Level:
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.54 (1.174.2.17-2003-05-11-exp)
>
>AFRICA ACTION
>Africa Policy E-Journal
>July 3, 2003 (030703)
>                    
>US/Africa: More than a Trip?
>(Africa Action document)
>
>With President Bush scheduled to depart on Monday for five days in
>five African countries, it is still unclear whether African
>realities will force the presidential party and press coverage to
>confront substantive issues, or whether the White House will
>succeed in focusing attention on spin and symbolism. "Is this for
>real or is this tourism?," former Reagan administration assistant
>secretary of state for Africa Chester Crocker asked last week at a
>Brookings Institution forum.
>
>The most immediate challenge is now coming from demands that the
>U.S. make a substantive leadership contribution to multilateral
>peacekeeping efforts in Liberia (see separate posting later today
>on this issue, including background on how previous U.S. policy
>failures contributed to the decades of conflict in Liberia).
>
>The rift between spin and substance is apparent on virtually every
>policy issue, however. Most tragically and deceptively, the Bush
>administration is taking credit for announcing promises of $15
>billion for HIV/AIDS, while continuing to block efforts to provide
>resources now by funding the multilateral Global Fund and expanding
>access to generic anti-retroviral drugs for AIDS treatment.
>
>This posting contains an op-ed by Africa Action executive director
>Salih Booker, originally entitled "Bush Africa Policy: It's a
>Trip," which appeared in the Chicago Tribune today, and talking
>points prepared in advance of yesterday's press briefing by Africa
>Action, TransAfrica Forum, 50 Years is Enough, and Foreign Policy
>in Focus, It also contains brief excerpts from yesterday's White
>House press briefing, in which White House Press Secretary Ari
>Fleischer attempted to answer skeptical questions about the
>President's AIDS initiative.
>
>For additional background on trade issues, see E-Journal
>postings on June 29 under
>http://www.africaaction.org/docs03/chr03.htm
>
>+++++++++++++++++end summary/introduction+++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Chicago Tribune, July 3, 2003
>http://www.chicagotribune.com
>
>Bush's lackluster Africa policy
>
>By Salih Booker
>
>President Bush is misleading a nation and a continent. He is
>misleading Americans by claiming his administration is taking
>real steps to address Africa's most urgent challenges. He is
>misleading Africans by declaring U.S. partnership with their
>efforts to fight AIDS and poverty and to promote peace.
>
>In fact, the Bush administration is on a collision course with
>Africa because its policies are simply antithetical to Africa's
>interests. The White House's few new Africa policy initiatives
>that seem compassionate are actually fictitious because they are
>left underfunded.
>
>The U.S. defines the most urgent international priorities as
>weapons of mass destruction, nuclear proliferation and terrorism.
>The G-7 club of wealthy countries concurs. Yet the rest of the
>world, the global majority, is concerned less with these
>potential threats than with the more immediate threats to human
>security and global stability--AIDS, poverty and civil conflicts.
>The divergent priorities of the Bush administration and the
>people of Africa should be apparent when President Bush travels
>to Africa for his first official visit next week.
>
>In West Africa, Bush will be confronted with the crisis in
>Liberia, amid growing calls from within that country for U.S.
>intervention to stop the latest violence. Bush has called for the
>removal of Liberian President Charles Taylor, but so far has been
>unwilling to take action to ensure a peaceful transition in that
>country and stability in the larger region.Despite America's
>unique historic ties with Liberia, the "hands-off" approach of
>the U.S. is undermining African peacemaking initiatives so
>important to Africa's people. This also is true in Sudan and in
>the Democratic Republic of Congo.
>
>Bush also will visit Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation and
>the fifth largest supplier of oil to the U.S. Washington's
>interests in West African oil have not translated into a
>commitment to Nigeria's democracy or to its economic development.
>Nigeria's efforts at poverty reduction are impossible under the
>burden of the $30 billion it owes in foreign debt. The refusal of
>the U.S. to support the cancellation of these debts reveals the
>absence of a real partnership between the U.S. and Africa's
>superpower.
>
>In South Africa, Bush will visit ground zero of the global AIDS
>crisis, home to almost 5 million people living with HIV/AIDS.
>
>While Bush has made much of his commitment to fighting AIDS in
>Africa, this is becoming a cruel hoax at the expense of those on
>the frontlines fighting AIDS in Africa. The president requested
>no new money to fight AIDS in Africa this year, and only $450
>million in new money for 2004. He has virtually sidestepped the
>Global Fund to fight AIDS, thus undermining the most important
>vehicle in the war on AIDS in Africa Despite his declarations --
>that he is committing $15 billion to fight AIDS in Africa and the
>Caribbean--Bush's failure to take action now is tantamount to
>breaking his promise.
>
>Far more significant to the Bush administration is the so-called
>war on terrorism. The military footprint of the U.S. has been
>growing, particularly in East Africa where military bases and
>access to ports and airfields are of increasing strategic
>importance. U.S. military concerns run counter to the efforts of
>Kenyans, Ugandans and others to combat poverty, HIV/AIDS and
>broader insecurity. The new $100 million anti-terrorism
>initiative announced by Bush last week will not even offset the
>money being lost by the tourist industry in Kenya as a result
>of frequent terror warnings from Washington.
>
>As Bush travels to Africa, we must recognize the dichotomy
>between U.S. global priorities and those of Africa's people, and
>we must work to bridge the deadly gap. A failure to demand more
>of U.S. policies toward Africa will ensure a continuation of
>America's historic disdain for Africa, with all of its terrible
>consequences.
>
>**************************************************************
>
>Africa Action
>July 2, 2003
>
>Talking Points on President Bush's trip to Africa and on the Bush
>Administration's Africa Policy
>
>President George W. Bush travels to Africa for his first official
>visit next week. Between July 7 and 12, he will visit the nations
>of Senegal, South Africa, Botswana, Uganda and Nigeria.
>
>The following are talking points covering the key issues in U.S.
>Africa policy.
>
>Trade
>
>Trade is high on the agenda of Bush's Africa trip. Though the
>Bush Administration promotes trade as the engine of growth, the
>reality is that the U.S. continues to pursue trade policies that
>are antithetical to Africa's interests.
>
>* The U.S. trade representatives continue to block implementation
>of the 2001 Doha Declaration on trade, which called for looser
>patent rules in order to give African countries greater access to
>essential anti-AIDS drugs.
>
>* U.S. agricultural subsidies undermine Africa's competitiveness,
>and cost the continent tens of billions of dollars each year in
>lost revenues.
>
>* Total trade between the U.S. and sub-Saharan Africa fell
>dramatically in 2002. Two-way trade was just under $24 billion,
>down 15% from the previous year. U.S. exports shrank to $6
>billion, and U.S. imports fell to $17.9 billion.
>
>* Africa's share of total world trade stands at 1%, less than
>half of what it was in 1980.
>
>* The African Growth & Opportunity Act (2000) was intended to
>offer incentives to African countries to open their markets, but
>it has brought very little benefit to a few countries, and has
>not promoted sustainable economic development.
>
>Oil
>
>The Bush Administration is increasingly interested in Africa's
>oil resources as an alternative to importing oil from the Middle
>East.
>
>* In 2002, crude oil accounted for $11 billion, or 61% of U.S.
>imports from Africa.
>
>* In 2001, sub-Saharan Africa supplied 18% of U.S. oil imports.
>This is almost as much as Saudi Arabia.
>
>* The National Intelligence Council projects U.S. oil supplies
>from West Africa will increase to 25% by 2015. This would surpass
>U.S. oil imports from the entire Persian Gulf.
>
>* Nigeria is the 5th largest supplier of oil to the U.S.,
>accounting for more than one- tenth of total U.S. oil imports.
>
>* Aside from Nigeria, the major oil producers in West Africa
>include Angola, Congo, Gabon, Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea.
>
>Aid
>
>The U.S. is the richest country in human history, but it fails to
>provide its fair share of foreign assistance to support African
>efforts to promote human development and overcome great social
>and economic challenges.
>
>* The U.S. currently ranks at the bottom of all donor countries,
>with only 0.1% of GNP (or about $10 billion) going to foreign aid
>worldwide. Only 1/100th of 1% of the U.S. budget ($1 billion) is
>spent on aid to sub-Saharan Africa.
>
>* In March 2002, President Bush announced a new initiative called
>the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA). This would increase U.S.
>development assistance by 50% over the next 3 years, so that by
>2006 an annual increase of $5 billion would be achieved. The
>President's budget request for the MCA for FY 2004 (beginning in
>October 2003) is $1.3 billion.
>
>* MCA funds will go to a list of countries (only a handful in
>Africa) that meet specific criteria govern justly, invest in the
>wellbeing of their people, and encourage economic freedom.
>
>* The MCA will be administered by a new body called the
>Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). This will be a government
>corporation headed by a Chief Executive Officer, and staffed from
>the public and private sector. A cabinet- level board will
>oversee the MCC, and will be chaired by the Secretary of State.
>
>* The MCA proposes a smaller increase in foreign aid than what
>the U.S. can and should provide. The eligibility criteria defined
>by the U.S. reinforces an imperialist-style relationship with
>poor countries, and creates competition between poor countries
>for a portion of the relatively meager MCA funds.
>
>* The U.S. has consistently failed to commit the level of aid
>that would be commensurate with its own interests and
>obligations, or with African countries' needs.
>
>Military Relations
>
>The U.S.' "military footprint" in Africa is growing. The U.S. is
>increasingly interested in establishing military bases and
>securing access to ports and airfields in Africa for strategic
>reasons.
>
>* The U.S. military base in Djibouti, East Africa, has been the
>main U.S. base for counter-terrorist activities off-shore and in
>that region since September 2001. Camp Lemonier is home to 1,800
>U.S. troops, strategically placed across the Red Sea from the
>Persian Gulf.
>
>* The U.S. is boosting its troop presence in West Africa, a
>region that is strategically important because of U.S. oil
>interests. The tiny island nation of Sao Tome offered to host a
>U.S. naval base, and Washington is considering that invitation.
>
>* President Bush announced a new $100 million initiative last
>week, to support the counter-terrorism efforts of East African
>countries.
>
>* Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY) has written a letter to
>the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, expressing concern
>over the expansion of the U.S. military presence in Africa, and
>asking for an explanation of U.S. plans.
>
>Conflict Resolution & Peacekeeping
>
>The refusal of the U.S. to participate in multilateral
>peacekeeping efforts undermines African initiatives in this area.
>It also reveals the lack of U.S. commitment to addressing
>Africa's most urgent challenges.
>
>* In Liberia, the political crisis is growing in the aftermath of
>the breakdown of last month's cease-fire agreement. The United
>Nations, European powers, and the people of Liberia are asking
>the U.S. to intervene to stop the latest violence. Although Bush
>has called for the removal of President Charles Taylor, the U.S.
>remains unwilling to take action to ensure a peaceful transition
>in Liberia, and promote stability in the West Africa region.
>
>* In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the peace
>process is moving forward, and stakeholders have approved a
>transitional government that should be inaugurated soon. However,
>violence and insecurity persist, particularly in eastern Congo,
>and a strong international commitment, and a larger peacekeeping
>force, will be required to ensure the peace process can be
>brought to a successful conclusion.
>
>* In both Liberia and DRC, the U.S. bears a large degree of
>historical responsibility for the conflicts that have
>destabilized these countries. During the Cold War, the U.S.
>provided billions of dollars worth of aid (and arms) to dictators
>of African countries that were considered geo-strategically
>important. Liberia, DRC, and Somalia are among the countries that
>had "special" Cold War relationships with the U.S. and that fell
>into violence and political turmoil in the 1990s.
>
>* Despite this historical responsibility, the U.S. adopts a
>"hands off " approach to African conflicts, and it refuses to
>participate in multilateral peacekeeping efforts, committing only
>bare logistical support in some cases.
>
>Africa's Debt Crisis
>
>Sub-Saharan Africa's massive burden of external debt is the
>largest obstacle to the continent's development, and to the fight
>against AIDS.
>
>* African countries owe almost $300 billion to rich creditor
>governments and to international financial institutions such as
>the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). O Each
>year, African governments are required to pay almost $15 billion
>in debt service to foreign creditors. These debts drain money
>from health care, education and other essential services, and
>from the response to the AIDS crisis.
>
>* Most of Africa's debts are illegitimate and they should be
>canceled. Many of these debts were incurred by dictators during
>the Cold War, who did not use the money to benefit Africa's
>people. Other loans were given for failed development projects,
>which also did not benefit Africa's people.
>
>* The current international debt relief framework, the Heavily
>Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, has failed to provide
>a solution to the debt crisis. It was launched by creditors in
>1996, and "enhanced" in 1999, but it has failed to reduce
>Africa's debt to a sustainable level. Even the World Bank and IMF
>have admitted that the HIPC initiative is not working. An
>independent audit of these two institutions has shown that they
>can afford to cancel Africa's debts completely.
>
>* The U.S. is the single largest shareholder at the World Bank
>and IMF, to whom most of Africa's debt is owed, and it can use
>its power to demand a new initiative to address Africa's debt
>crisis.
>
>* An inventory should be done of the debts currently being repaid
>by African countries, to establish what loans are being repaid,
>and whether the debts are legitimate. The U.S. should support
>this proposal. Until a solution has been found to the debt
>crisis, a moratorium should be declared on debt repayments. Kofi
>Annan, Secretary General of the UN, is among those who have
>endorsed this idea.
>
>The AIDS Crisis
>
>The AIDS pandemic is the greatest global threat to human security
>that exists today. It is taking its most devastating toll in
>Africa.
>
>* Africa is "ground zero" of the global AIDS crisis, home to 30
>million of the 42 million people living with HIV/AIDS globally.
>More than 18 million Africans have died of AIDS in the past 20
>years, out of 25 million people worldwide.
>
>* The UN and the National Intelligence Council emphasize that the
>global AIDS crisis is still in its infancy. They project that
>over 100 million people will be living with HIV/AIDS by 2010.
>
>* In his State of the Union address in January, President Bush
>announced a new plan to increase funding to fight AIDS in Africa,
>but this is turning out to be a cruel hoax.
>
>* Bush promised an "emergency plan" to give $15 billion over 5
>years to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean. But NO new money
>has been made available in 2003, and only $450 million is being
>requested for 2004. The White House has backtracked and said that
>the money will not just be for Africa and the Caribbean, as the
>President said, but for the entire world.
>
>* President Bush has requested only $200 million per year for the
>Global Fund to fight AIDS, which is the most effective vehicle
>for addressing Africa's AIDS crisis. The Global Fund is
>transparent and accountable, it has fewer administrative costs
>than bilateral (USAID) programs, and it involves key stakeholders
>in decision-making. But because the U.S. refuses to pay its fair
>share ($3.5 billion per year), the Global Fund will not have
>sufficient money to fund a third round of grant proposals in
>October 2003.
>
>* President Bush has acknowledged that affordable antiretroviral
>drugs are necessary to fight HIV/AIDS. In order for African
>countries to have access to these drugs, they must have the
>capacity to produce them for low cost themselves, or else to
>import cheaper generic versions from Brazil, India and elsewhere.
>But the U.S. trade representative is still blocking African
>access to these drugs, and insisting that pharmaceutical company
>patents take priority over people's lives.
>
>* The absence of U.S. leadership remains the greatest obstacle to
>a successful effort to defeat AIDS in Africa and globally.
>
>************************************************************
>
>Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
>
>2 July 2003
>
>Q Ari, AIDS advocates had a couple of reactions to the Tobias
>appointment and administration AIDS policy in general. First of
>all, they're saying that Tobias' history as a drug company
>executive show that that's where the administration's real
>allegiance lies, is in policies that foster the profits of the drug
>companies, rather than AIDS victims in Africa who would benefit
>from low-cost generic drugs -- that sort of thing. And they are
>also criticizing the administration for not seeking full funding in
>the first year of the AIDS initiative ... Can you address those
>two?
>
>MR. FLEISCHER: Well, first of all, I'm not sure who you're quoting,
>but I can tell you for certain they don't speak for the majority of
>AIDS activists in the country. Let me cite you somebody who has
>spoken out about this appointment, and this is Sandra Thurman, who
>was the Director of the White House AIDS Office in the Clinton
>administration. She is now the President of International AIDS
>Trust. She called Mr. Tobias' selection "good news." And she added,
>"This is clearly a person with tremendous stature and management
>acumen."
>
>And, indeed, that's right. The President wanted to appoint somebody
>to undertake a massive $15-billion 5-year program who had sound
>business and management judgment. ...
>
>Mr. Tobias is a known and innovative leader. He's a successful
>businessman. He has worked with billion-dollar organizations before
>to make certain that they were run effectively. ...
>
>Q Does he support revising his trade policy to make it easier for
>African countries to get low-cost generic drugs?
>
>MR. FLEISCHER: Well, of course, the President's proposal for AIDS
>focuses on getting low-cost anti-retroviral drugs to people who
>suffer from AIDS. That's part and parcel of the program. That's
>exactly what he's going to administer.
>
>Q And then the funding question?
>
>MR. FLEISCHER: On the funding question, I don't recall off the top
>of my head whether the funding proposal in its first year was $2
>billion or $3 billion. But it's a $15 billion, five-year
>initiative. Listen, I think -- the President has tremendous
>sympathy with all the advocates who are fighting for more. This is
>the President who has delivered the most. And he understands that
>for people who suffer, the most will never be enough. But this is
>the President who has tripled funding for AIDS around the world,
>who has made a front-and-center State of the Union national
>priority fighting AIDS in Africa. He understands that there are
>people who have friends and relatives who suffer. But he is leading
>the way around the world and bringing help to those who need it.
>
>Q And then on the trip. On Randy's question, on HIV/AIDS, some are
>saying that this is going to be a victory lap, a photo op in
>Africa. And they're saying that it's all about the President's
>promises for HIV/AIDS, this $15 billion. And it still has yet to be
>allocated. And many Republican congresspersons are trying to
>underfund this. There's a concern, many people want to hear from
>the administration, one, if the HIV/AIDS will be fully funded, as
>well as the millennium program, and if this funding will be of new
>money, not taken from any other developmental projects.
>
>MR. FLEISCHER: Well, one, the House and the Senate just passed this
>with overwhelming, big votes, a full $15 billion. So the President
>announced it in his State of the Union in January. In June, a mere
>five months later, Congress passed it. And now we're in the middle
>of the appropriations cycle, as you know. You've been around,
>you're an expert. You know the timing that Congress acts under. So
>now comes the important appropriation process to back up the
>authorization level, and members of Congress in both parties know
>that this is a top presidential priority and the President is going
>to fight for every penny of this funding.
>
>Q But at this point, it's a promise. Is the President going to put
>this on the fast track? Is he going to say -- MR. FLEISCHER: I
>think he already has. It's clear to all.
>
>Q But it's a promise at this point. Many are talking about
>underfunding this. How is this going to be fully funded to $15
>billion --
>
>MR. FLEISCHER: I just -- I don't understand how right after
>Congress overwhelmingly just voted the full $15 billion you can say
>that it's being underfunded. It was just voted on.
>
>************************************************************
>The Africa Action E-Journal is a free information service
>provided by Africa Action, including both original
>commentary and reposted documents. Africa Action provides this
>information and analysis in order to promote U.S. and
>international policies toward Africa that advance economic,
>political and social justice and the full spectrum of
>human rights.
>
>Documents previously distributed in the e-journal are
>available on the Africa Action website:
>http://www.africaaction.org
>For additional background on this e-journal go to:
>http://www.africaaction.org/e-journal.htm
>To support Africa Action with your contribution go to:
>http://www.africaaction.org/join.htm
>
>To be added to or dropped from the e-journal subscription list,
>write to e-journal at africaaction.org. For more information about
>reposted material, please contact directly the source mentioned
>in the posting.
>
>Africa Action
>1634 Eye St. NW, #810, Washington, DC 20006.
>Phone: 202-546-7961. Fax: 202-546-1545.
>E-mail: africaaction at igc.org.
>************************************************************


-- 


Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA

tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss