|
US uncompromising on UK debt relief plan for africa
|
View this Thread in Original format
| swilly |
UK pushing for Africa debt plan
UK Chancellor Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown is worried that time is running out for Africa
The UK Chancellor Gordon Brown has put forward a bold plan to tackle poverty in Africa ahead of the G8 Summit of rich countries in Scotland next month.
He called for a doubling of European aid by 2010 and 100% debt relief, as well as an end to many trade subsidies.
But the plan is facing opposition in the US - and particularly from President George W Bush.
Mr Bush's stance sets up a possible clash with UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, due in Washington next week.
Mr Bush said on Wednesday that a key part of the plan did not fit with the US budget process.
The UK is pushing hard for major debt relief and a doubling of aid to Africa, and Chancellor Gordon Brown laid out a set of ambitious plans on Friday.
This is not a time for timidity nor a time to fear reaching too high
Gordon Brown, UK Finance Minister
Brown waives Live 8 VAT
The UK has said that 2005 is a vital year for Africa, and argues that without significantly more money the United Nations' Millennium Goal of halving world poverty by 2015 will be impossible to meet.
The UK is one of six European nations who have pledged to increase their aid target to 0.7% of GDP by that year, a figure which only five countries have managed to reach so far.
However the US has said that the target is not a realistic one for it to work towards.
US Treasury spokesman Tony Fratto told BBC's Newsnight programme: "The problem at looking at targets of 0.7% of GDP is that when people focus on numbers like that they don't know what they are talking about in nominal terms.
"They don't know how much money is available and how much money is in the pipeline."
'Doesn't fit'
Speaking in Edinburgh, Mr Brown said he would present the new British proposals to the leaders of the G8 summit next month, to the European Union, and the UN.
As well as 100% debt relief, Mr Brown wants to set up an International Finance Facility (IFF) to double development aid to Africa in order to pay for education and medical programmes like mass immunisation.
BROWN'S FOUR-POINT PLAN FOR AFRICA
100% debt relief to pay for education and health
Launch International Finance Facility for Immunisation
Large increase in direct development aid, doubling of aid from European countries
Removal of export subsidies and all trade-distorting support to agriculture, which work against producers in the developing world
Source: Chancellor Gordon Brown, 3 June speech
Watch the speech
He also said that the EU would double its own aid to $80bn a year by 2010.
But the US remains concerned that the UK is proposing that the debt plans should be financed in part by selling gold reserves held by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
A surge in the price of gold has boosted the value of the reserve, and the UK wants to use that extra cash.
The US - along with some other countries including Japan, Germany and Italy - has never been keen on the idea of selling IMF gold.
Washington has also raised questions over the IFF, which would allow developing countries to borrow against future aid pledges.
Mr Bush said on Wednesday that the IFF for Africa "doesn't fit our budgetary process".
The US has already pledged to increase development aid through its own Millennium Challenge Account, but little of the money has been spent so far.
Getting closer
Analysts say the war in Iraq and its related costs have pushed Africa off the US agenda, and think a change in priorities is unlikely.
"What the UK is proposing is not a cost-free policy," said Marina Ottoway, a senior associate at Carnegie Endowment in Washington. "Africa has not really had much of a constituency in the US."
US President George W Bush
President Bush is more focused on Iraq than Africa, analysts said
According to Reuters, UK government sources have been talking about pressing ahead even without US involvement.
Even that may prove difficult, Ms Ottoway explained, since agreements with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund are multilateral and any changes would therefore require US backing.
Similar strictures apply to the trade agreements, and the European Union is unlikely to drop subsidies unless the US does the same, she said.
Mr Brown played down reports of a rift or stand-off between the UK and the US.
"In my talks over the last few months, but particularly over the last day or two, with the US Treasury Secretary, we believe that there is common ground on securing that debt relief," he explained.
"We believe it is going to be possible to reach an agreement on debt relief."
"This is not a time for timidity nor a time to fear reaching too high." |
|
|
| swilly |
I saw this documentary and interview with this women whose research focused on third world debt. She had some very interesting points to make about the debt and foreign aid.
- In many nations some 80 percent or more of the the aid we send is used to make interest payments on that respective nations debt. In some nations its closer to 100 percent.
- In many ways foriegn aid is a farce as the money we send them is used to help maintain the third world debt and not actually do development.
- If the debt were cancelled many nations would no longer need foreign aid.
At least the UK is taking some intiatives in this area. I wonder how much of the americans stance is due the profits they reap from having the other western countries finance the third world debt? |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
As well as 100% debt relief, Mr Brown wants to set up an International Finance Facility (IFF) |
| quote: | | Washington has also raised questions over the IFF, which would allow developing countries to borrow against future aid pledges. |
Don't be fooled. They're just replacing one type of debt for another.
True devlopment comes from within... everything else just creates dependency. |
|
|
| EvilTree |
Screw giving aid to Africa and other 3rd world countries where a lot of aid goes to lining the tinpot dictator and their cronies's pockets.
Until I am satisfied that the govts actually use the aid to develop their country, or some third agency has direct control over the aid money, I say screw giving aid. |
|
|
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Screw giving aid to Africa and other 3rd world countries where a lot of aid goes to lining the tinpot dictator and their cronies's pockets.
Until I am satisfied that the govts actually use the aid to develop their country, or some third agency has direct control over the aid money, I say screw giving aid. |
I agree that there are some nations who have problems with governance. But that being said there are also many nations who would benefit and be able to develop thier respective states if the debt was forgiven. Imagine if canada was in the same position and some 60 percent(in some states closer to 80 percent) of the government's revenue was used just to make interest payments. Many states in the caribean suffer due to these payments and the world knows that they will be unable to pay them back. Its just a modern form of slavery IMO. Rather then outright own them we extract 80 percent of thier revenues and even give them money in the form of foreign aid to make payments on thier loans.
Considering many nations in the lesser developed world are in thier current situations due to the processes of colonialism we owe it to them to make right the situation ( not to mention that much of our affluence is due to the unequal power relatoinships we had with the lesser developed world during colonialism as well) |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
I agree that there are some nations who have problems with governance. |
Canada.
| quote: | | Considering many nations in the lesser developed world are in thier current situations due to the processes of colonialism we owe it to them to make right the situation ( not to mention that much of our affluence is due to the unequal power relatoinships we had with the lesser developed world during colonialism as well) |
45 years after independence, it's plain to see that colonialism has almost nothing to do with the current situation.
Ireland was a colony for longer than most of those African countries, and it's doing well today. |
|
|
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
45 years after independence, it's plain to see that colonialism has almost nothing to do with the current situation.
Ireland was a colony for longer than most of those African countries, and it's doing well today. |
well it must be because those nations are not white states then.
Because colonialism naturally has had no impact:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Kytracid |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
45 years after independence, it's plain to see that colonialism has almost nothing to do with the current situation.
Ireland was a colony for longer than most of those African countries, and it's doing well today. |
99% of the people in Ireland are white. Think about that one for a minute.
Colonialism in fact has quite a lot to do with it. Those countries were kept in a state of dependancy because it was benefical to the European powers. Even after they achieved independence artifical lines were drawn to ensure that there would still be turmoil in the states. Lines that were drawn again by the colonists.
African and Asian states were used as a resource to fuel the economies of the west. The same is not true of Ireland (which basically has nothing except Potatoes to take anyway).
Sure, there's been chronic mismanagement and rife corruption which is to blame as well, but considering these states have only been independent in a true sense for 50 years or less and most of them are still crippled by IAF structural policies (another form of imperialist control) it's not surprising that they have not yet reached levels where they can support themselves without aid.
Debt cancellation for some poor nations is an absolute must. They are owed that much for the hundreads of years that their land and people were exploited by colonial forces. |
|
|
| EvilTree |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kytracid
99% of the people in Ireland are white. Think about that one for a minute.
Colonialism in fact has quite a lot to do with it. Those countries were kept in a state of dependancy because it was benefical to the European powers. Even after they achieved independence artifical lines were drawn to ensure that there would still be turmoil in the states. Lines that were drawn again by the colonists.
African and Asian states were used as a resource to fuel the economies of the west. The same is not true of Ireland (which basically has nothing except Potatoes to take anyway).
Sure, there's been chronic mismanagement and rife corruption which is to blame as well, but considering these states have only been independent in a true sense for 50 years or less and most of them are still crippled by IAF structural policies (another form of imperialist control) it's not surprising that they have not yet reached levels where they can support themselves without aid.
Debt cancellation for some poor nations is an absolute must. They are owed that much for the hundreads of years that their land and people were exploited by colonial forces. |
Actually, most damage was done by tin pot dictators who kept the country poor while borrowing money after African and other nations around the world became independent in 50s and 60s.
Colonialism is not enough excuse, while perhaps even more devastated nations such as Japan, South Korea and Germany and to a degree Britain which was pretty much bankrupt after WW2 enjoy economic prosperity today. |
|
|
| Kytracid |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Screw giving aid to Africa and other 3rd world countries where a lot of aid goes to lining the tinpot dictator and their cronies's pockets.
Until I am satisfied that the govts actually use the aid to develop their country, or some third agency has direct control over the aid money, I say screw giving aid. |
Naive outlook to a far more complex situation. Every country in Africa doesn't have a dictator, neither is there any surefire way of ensuring how debt money is spent.
A third agency has direct control...which agency, you mean the IMF and World Bank, aka the imperialist powers of the United States of America ? They already do...
You think countries are given money and that's the end of the story...HA!
Ain't no such thing as a free lunch...of course, you'd have to live or do some extensive, unbiased reaserach into th real conditions in one of those countries to realize this. |
|
|
| Kytracid |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Actually, most damage was done by tin pot dictators who kept the country poor while borrowing money after African and other nations around the world became independent in 50s and 60s.
Colonialism is not enough excuse, while perhaps even more devastated nations such as Japan, South Korea and Germany and to a degree Britain which was pretty much bankrupt after WW2 enjoy economic prosperity today. |
Umm...cause Japan and Germany weren't given a dime right ? :D
Those countries were literally rebuild from the ground up by the US after the war. Yes, the NIC's (Asian Tigers) have been a success, but they were never true colonies. Not like African states. Also, they are a host of other conditions which existed in those countries which resulted in their meteroic rise after the war.
There's no doubt that colonism isn't the only reason for the failure of African countries, but comparing them to South Korea, Japan and Germany is also incorrect. |
|
|
| Kytracid |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Actually, most damage was done by tin pot dictators who kept the country poor while borrowing money after African and other nations around the world became independent in 50s and 60s.
|
What conditions allowed for these tin pot dictators to come to power ? Ask yourself that question. Divide and Conquer has been the Wests credo when it comes to taking over another nation. When they left, they ensured that their colonies would remain unstable. For this reason in particular lines across colonies were redrawn which resulted in civil strife. Leaders who were greedy were installed in a seat of power. Leaders who were lackeys of their former imperial masters. The legacy of corruption can be traced to colonial rule, and the exclusion of local people in the process of goverance.
After hundreads of years of colonial rules you pack up and leave a country in the hands of a few despots who have never really tasted power and expect things to run smoothly...yeah right ! |
|
|
|
|
