It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Bush opposes UK Africa debt plan

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 07:40 AM
President Bush seems to be taking a opposing stance to popular opinion the G8 and Europe on recent inititives to tackle world poverty especially in Africa
The UK's plan to write off debts owed by African nations is facing opposition in the US - and particularly from President George W Bush.

President Bush is set to come under pressure from debt campaigners
The UK's plan to write off debts owed by African nations is facing opposition in the US - and particularly from President George W Bush. Mr Bush said a key part of the plan did not fit with the US budget process.

Mr Bush's stance sets up a possible clash with UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, due in Washington next week.

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 Thursday.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Well it seems that President Bush may isolate popular opinion more against the USA if he blocks this. Recent campaigns like Make Poverty History and the to be applauded drive by Both Prime Minister Blair and Chancellor Gordon Brown (about the only thing I respect them for!) to once and for all to try and help the poorest people in the world, is at risk.
Will President Bush have a change of heart?

Related News Links:

[edit on 3-6-2005 by MischeviousElf]

[edit on 3-6-2005 by MischeviousElf]

posted on Jun, 3 2005 @ 08:08 AM
If the countries in question would actually use the money saved to help their citizens and not line their pockets, this would be a worthwhile project. Yet the historical trend of a lot of the rulers in that area of the world, the money will never benefit their people.

posted on Jun, 4 2005 @ 12:14 AM
This could possibly just Tony Blair be showing off.

posted on Jun, 4 2005 @ 12:30 AM
African debt relieve is essential if we want to see Africa crawl out from the mud and poverty and enter the modern world. Its pointless to hold African nations to their debts. Youre trying to squeeze blood from stones. They in their current state will never pay back their debts. Write them off, i say.

Of course, there is the concern over the corruption of many African governments that needs addressing, and thats valid. I think we should sponsor a debt for democracy campaign or something. If an African nation wants their debts relieved, they must instal stable, democratic, responsible ethical governments. If they need outside help doing this, the UN should get off their asses and doing something useful for a change. Once a responsible, stable, and free governemt is in place, that nation will have its debt relieved.

If Bush is really interested in spreading Democracy, this is the way to do it. Africa is a huge continent, rich with resources and very friendly, eager people who wish to succeed if given the chance. He could go a long way, it would be in return, beneficial for the US to lead such a campaign. Africa has about close to a billion people on it. 1 billion friends we could make in this world where we are increasingly without friends. Africa would be a great ally, if only we would use our influence and power to give it a helping hand.

posted on Jun, 4 2005 @ 09:54 PM
I thought the current plans for debt relief were tied to domestic political reforms in these African nations.

Of course Bush would oppose debt relief. He needs that money to buy more missiles and ammunition. Money that ends up in his dad's Carlye Group retirement account.

Bush is pissing in the wind here big time. Does he know what he's going up against. Can you imagine what would of happend if Reagan opposed LiveAid? My god, I cant stand Bush but he's got balls to do this.

posted on Jun, 4 2005 @ 10:42 PM
It seems to me that the Bush Administartion now has a history of taking a hard exremete stance and "Stick to thier guns" with any situation, and only at the last minute would they take less of an extreme stance. I think this is one of the cases where our standing in the world is in the crapper, and there is no point in trying to dig you way out now when all the otehr problems can be left to the next administation.

Sad really, when Bush has asked out countries like China to help pay for the Debt that has occured during his term, yet does not want to help others who are in debt

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 07:44 AM
No Change of heart then:

Downing Street says the trip to Washington is part of preparations for next month's Gleneagles G8 summit. Mr Blair hopes to use his chairmanship of the summit to gather support for Third World debt relief. Before he left the UK, his official spokesman played down expectations for the meeting with the US president. Mr Bush opposes Gordon Brown's plan to help Africa using an international finance facility to fund vaccinations.


The same reaction to the immediate worldwide efforts after the Tsunami, Bush was reticent again to follow world opinion. Or even have much compassion.

Nevertheless, Mr Blair recognises that he will not get support for crucial parts of his three-pronged attack on poverty in Africa - a package of debt relief, increased aid and fairer trade.In an interview for the Financial Times newspaper on Tuesday, Mr Blair acknowledged: "There are certain things we know they are not going to do, that we are not asking them to do." Mr Bush has already opposed UK treasury chief Gordon Brown's plan to use an international finance facility (IFF) to fund vaccinations, funded by borrowing on the bond market, saying he cannot commit the US to future debt repayments.The US has also refused to agree to give 0.7% of its national income in international aid, a long-term commitment Mr Blair wants from all G8 countries."We are not asking them to sign up to the IFF or 0.7% in aid. They are not going to do that and they've made that clear right from the very beginning," Mr Blair said."The US is not pulling its weight right now," said Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University's Earth Institute. He said there was "a great myth in the US" that aid was ineffective because of inefficiency and corruption."It's a nonsense. Aid works - the problem is it's on such a small scale that it's not commensurate with the challenge," "It's important for Prime Minister Blair to explain the truth to his American counterparts."


[edit on 7-6-2005 by MischeviousElf]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 08:16 AM
Tell you what, till the Europeans contribute 25 BILLION dollars, why should the US be asked to provide as much? BTW, Bush has tripled aid to Africa in the past four years!
The US is already providing how much when compared?
I thought so.
Africa was and is a European "quagmire", but in the name of "democracy", the US should become the primary contributor, as par, eh?

Get rid of the corrupt African leaders that are doing nothing with what monies and relief aid that they are recieving. Maybe raid a few of their Swiss bank accounts and redistribute or redirect that money back to where it was originally intended to go?!


[edit on 7-6-2005 by Seekerof]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 08:26 AM
I belive that Africa is located on Planet Earth and the entire World Population is responsible for the People and the Land - not Just Europe or USA or only Africans.

We all Live in the Same Apartment here People!

Maybe WE ALL should get togather and help these people that really NEED help, istead of wasting time and words who is responsible and who isnt.

While Politicians are involved in Deep Debates, children die on daily basis.

[edit on 7/6/05 by Souljah]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 08:36 AM
Oh my, now we are 'One' world with 'One' people crap.
Yeah, I used to feel the same way, till I woke up and realized that that dream is a simply that: a pipe dream.

Interesting that some are still thinking such.
Children have been dying daily in Africa for how many centuries, Souljah?
Africa was colonized by the Europeans.
Since then, Africa has become one huge gasping cesspool. Decades upon decades of "famine" and relief aid to Africa and all for what? Fatter Swiss accounts? Children continuing to die? Millions being displaced? Continued civil wars? Etc., etc.

Lets go to the source of the problem, and start with some major reforms in that part of the world, maybe?

More money is not the solution. It's like the more money sent the more that some hope that money acts to block the growing drain hole. Reminds me of the boy and the dam: 10 fingers and 20 holes....or socialist based healthcare systems where more and more money is continually pumped into a system that is simply going broke. Reform and getting the Africans to provide for themselves, at least the bear necessities, is the solution, or one of the major ones.


[edit on 7-6-2005 by Seekerof]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 09:35 AM

Your right giving money is not the answer, but its one of tools that can be used along with reducing or cancelling the poorer countries debt.

Many African countries are crippled with the debt repayments, its like the analagy of a failing business - when the recievers go in do they want to wind that business up, affecting many families that depend on the jobs or do they try and make the business viable?

Its true that children in Africa haver been dying for centuries through poverty, disease etc. but we as Europeans, Asians, North / South Americans are in a better position now to do something about it.

The US give billions in aid which is greatfully received by the recipient countries but so do other countries, they give a greater proportion of their wealth. Just look at the table on the below link -

Economic Aid - GDP per $


posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 09:38 AM
No mention that Africa has the most corrupt leadership(s) in the known world? How about raiding those Swiss bank accounts?

Think those raided and recovered hundreds of millions would help Africa?

Reform.....where is the reform at and when will it begin?


[edit on 7-6-2005 by Seekerof]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 12:05 PM
I am sure that World Military Budget could spare a few millions to help those who need help - not just Talk about it.

And Yes I agree that Europeans colonized Africa, just like they colonized America.

The problem is, that Africa has Always been the Slave Continent, and people that are born here are sentanced to Life in this Prison, while Capitalist societies just make more money out if it.

I mean HELLO? If you saw one really poor guy on the street, begging you for a dollar to go and buy something to eat, would you:

a. Give him the damn dollar
b. Borrow him the damn dollar
c. I dont care about the really poor guy on the street with nothing to eat
d. I would lend him 100 dollars and then after one year I would want it back - with interestes.

If you are a Capitalist you will answer with d.

And Who supports those Corrupt Leaders in Africa?

Probably not Africans that are dying everyday - but again, Wealth Western Capitalists.

Again the Circle is Complete - More Money is Made and thats all that matters....

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:07 PM

Originally posted by Seekerof
Tell you what, till the Europeans contribute 25 BILLION dollars, why should the US be asked to provide as much? BTW, Bush has tripled aid to Africa in the past four years!
The US is already providing how much when compared?
I thought so.

The EU is providing almost 5 times as much aid to Sub Saharan Africa as the US.
Not in terms of 'per capita' but in terms of real dollars.

They are also biggest donors to just about every other region in the world, including Lain America.


posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 05:17 AM
Seekerof, the United States caused the problem in Iraq yet its meant to be the Worlds responsibility to send their troops and aid to fix it. Why was Bush after EU support for it? Shouldnt we of just said, tough #, its your problem - you sort it out?

Youre also wrong, as shown above, and the United States is a miserly country when it comes to foreign aid. 6 cents out of every $100 of GDP compared to Britains 29c and Denmarks $1.09!

You are right about the corruption in African countries and I think if you actually read what Blair and Brown are planning you'd agree with it. They are tying debt relief to internal political reforms. If they fix their political systems then their debt will be written off. If they dont fix it, they dont get total debt relief.

This is all before any more money gets sent their way. When they have debt relief the doubled aid money can set about making their countries self reliant once and for all. Its kind of like giving some one a liver transplant instead of keeping them on dialysis for the rest of lives. Which is cheaper in the long run?

Knowing the above now, who do you think is in the wrong here? Be honest.

[edit on 8/6/05 by subz]

new topics

top topics


log in