Policy Issues

Haughty and Abrasive *

Regardless, the indulgence that was granted other presidents is not offered Bush. It is his manner, his rhetoric, his bristling unilateralism that make the United States not so much an exceptional nation but a nation that demands exceptions. For instance, the United States holds prisoners at Guantanamo without formal charges. Guantanamo came up repeatedly in my conversations here, notably with Interior Minister Otto Schily, the German equivalent of the attorney general. Would that John Ashcroft shared such concern.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, German-American relations were bound to change. The common enemy was gone. But whatever differences were going to emerge have been exacerbated by the Bush administration's haughty and abrasive style. Might may make right but, as America will discover when it needs them, it does not make friends. Richard Cohen, Washington Post 10/23/03

Who Knew? *

Beginning in April 2002, the State Department project assembled more than 200 Iraqi lawyers, engineers, business people and other experts into 17 working groups to study topics ranging from creating a new justice system to reorganizing the military to revamping the economy.

Their findings included a much more dire assessment of Iraq's dilapidated electrical and water systems than many Pentagon officials assumed. They warned of a society so brutalized by Saddam Hussein's rule that many Iraqis might react coolly to Americans' notion of quickly rebuilding civil society.

Several officials said that many of the findings in the $5 million study were ignored by Pentagon officials until recently, although the Pentagon said they took the findings into account. The work is now being relied on heavily as occupation forces struggle to impose stability in Iraq.  ERIC SCHMITT and JOEL BRINKLEY, NY Times, 10/19/03

Friends: Turks & Kurds?

Turkey's decision to send peacekeeping troops to Iraq is a victory for the Bush administration, which has been working for months to entice allies to send more forces - especially Muslim troops - to ease pressure on stressed-out American forces. MATT KELLEY, Associated Press in the Mercury News.

At least one Kurdish rebel fighter has been killed and three Turkish soldiers wounded in clashes in southeastern Turkey, security officials said on Tuesday. . .

NATO member Turkey is hoping that sending troops to help in Iraq will encourage the United States to crack down on the separatist Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), also known as KADEK, which is based mainly in camps in northern Iraq.  Reuters, 10/7/03

Blair Knew; Did Bush?

The most damning claim in the diaries of the former [British] foreign secretary, Robin Cook, serialisation of which began yesterday, is that Tony Blair knew two weeks before the war began that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.

. . . In the end though, Mr Blair, faced with a choice between fulfilling an implicit promise to Mr Bush or siding with the British public, opted for the former. In the end though, Mr Blair, faced with a choice between fulfilling an implicit promise to Mr Bush or siding with the British public, opted for the former.  Ewen MacAskill and Richard Norton-Taylor, Monday October 6, 2003, The Guardian

Bush's Fear of the UN *

Mr. Bush said in yesterday's speech that the United States invaded Iraq in part to defend the credibility of the United Nations. If we are to take him at his word, then he should continue that effort by allowing the world body to assume responsibility for the civilian nation-building process.

Unfortunately, Mr. Bush's speech did not grapple with these issues. His address seemed aimed more at a domestic audience than the world community, given how sunny a picture he painted of a situation in which the administration is finding almost nothing as easy as it had hoped.

The United States clearly fears that if the United Nations takes over the job, it will make a mess of things. We are in a mess already. What's needed now is an international plan for dealing with it.  NY Times Editorial, 9/24/03

Amateurs and Zealots

Bush is a different kind of president because he is a different kind of man. No one, for instance, questioned Clinton's intelligence or his knowledge. Bush, though, was widely viewed as slight, particularly unschooled in foreign affairs, where, above all, he was incurious, unquestioning and -- as we have learned -- unprepared. Always, though, he was certain.

That certainty was certainly misplaced. Bush's foreign policy is a shambles -- a war against the wrong enemy (Iraq and not worldwide terrorism), for the wrong reasons (where are those weapons of mass destruction?), a debacle in postwar Iraq (who are those terrorists?), a Middle Eastern road map to nowhere (wasn't Iraq going to make it all so easy?) and a string of statements about nearly everything (the cost of rebuilding Iraq, for instance) that have proved either untrue or just plain dumb. To make matters worse, truth-tellers have been punished while liars and fog merchants have remained in office. Richard Cohen, Washington Post 9/11/03

Empire of Novices

• The neocons wanted to marginalize the wimpy U.N. by barreling past them into Iraq. Now the Bush administration is crawling back to the U.N., but other nations are suspicious of U.S. security and politics in Iraq.

• Dick Cheney and Rummy wanted to blow off multilateralism and snub what Bushies call "the chocolate-making countries" of France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg. But faced with untold billions in costs and mounting casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan, Americans are beginning to see the advantages of sidekicks who know the perils of empire.

• The Pentagon wanted to sideline the C.I.A. and State and run the war and reconstruction itself. Now, overwhelmed,  Maureen Dowd, NY Times 9/3/03

Bush  + Blair =Twin Deceptions *

Yet in arguing that his office had intervened only in the packaging of the dossier and had left a senior intelligence adviser, John Scarlett, in charge of all substantive intelligence findings, Mr. Blair claimed an implausibly superfluous role for a leader preparing to take his nation to war. An e-mail note from Mr. Blair's chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, reported that the dossier had gone through a "substantial rewrite" to address points Mr. Blair had personally raised. Mr. Powell earlier told the inquiry that in mid-September last year he had warned Mr. Blair that it would be inaccurate to claim that Iraq posed an imminent threat. Yet one week later, in presenting the dossier to Parliament, Mr. Blair implied just that by saying Mr. Hussein's unconventional weapons programs were "up and running."  NY Times Editorial 8/29/03

Bush's Unholy Alliance *

By doing their high-risk, audacious sociological and political makeover in Iraq, Bush officials and neocons hoped to drain the terrorist swamp in the long run. But in the short run, they have created new terrorist-breeding swamps full of angry young Arabs who see America the same way Muslims saw Westerners in the Crusades: as Christian expansionist imperialists motivated by piety and greed.

Just because the unholy alliance of Saddam loyalists, foreign fighters and Islamic terrorists has turned Iraq into a scary shooting gallery for our troops doesn't mean Americans at home are any safer. Since when did terrorists see terror as an either-or proposition?

"Bring 'em on" sounded like a tinny, reckless boast the first time the president said it. It doesn't sound any better when Mr. Bush says it louder with a chorus.  Maureen Dowd, NY Times 8/27/03

What's the Course?

The call for "staying the course" is even more indefensible when one tries to find it. What course are we staying on in Iraq or Afghanistan? The president has boldly outlined the objective or endpoint of our policy: democratic regime change in the greater Middle East. But the president has never articulated or written down the strategy for getting there. Without a plan in hand, the Bush administration instead is compelled to move reactively from crisis to crisis, making up "the course" as it goes along.

The list of immediate amendments to the course in Iraq (and Afghanistan) is obvious -- more American troops, faster deployments of newly trained Iraqi forces, more money for the reconstruction effort and a new United Nations resolution to help bring in soldiers from other countries. Michael McFaul, Washington Post, 8/24/03

What "Imminent threat?"

The trail of evidence has reached Mr. Blair himself. His chief of staff and close aide, Jonathan Powell, disclosed that he had warned on Sept. 17 that it would be wrong for Mr. Blair to claim that Iraq posed an "imminent threat" to the world. When Mr. Blair presented the case to Parliament a week later, however, he said that Iraq's program of weapons of mass destruction was "up and running," and the dossier spoke of a "current and serious threat." . . . Aides freely complained that much of the evidence of the arms threat assembled by the intelligence agencies was circumstantial, that the argument was not compelling and that the document failed to establish intent as well as capability.  WARREN HOGE, NY Times, 8/23/03

Only Bush Didn't See this Coming

Osama bin Laden was inspired to attack us partly by his hatred of the American military presence in Saudi Arabia. Now foreign zealots from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria, enraged about the American military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, are slipping over the Iraqi border to help Saddam loyalists.

Bush officials, who before the war also overdramatized the connection between Saddam and the Ansar al-Islam militants in northern Iraq, have now become spooked about hundreds of fighters coming back from Iran to attack Americans.

The Qaeda and Ansar zealots, along with old Baath soldiers and new foreign recruits, are intent on keeping Iraq in anarchy, even as Afghanistan also slips back into chaos, with a reconstituted Taliban fighting machine killing 90 in the last month.  MAUREEN DOWD, NY Times 8/20/03

Not Germany 1945

The Pentagon, with its insistence on doing nation-building in Iraq on the cheap, has been too slow in forming a provisional Iraqi government, too slow in getting the electricity on, too slow in turning security over to Iraqis. As a result, while most Iraqis are happy to be rid of Saddam, too many feel that their lives are tangibly worse in every other respect — jobs, electricity, roadblocks — because of the U.S. presence. "Saddam was paranoid, but he kept the streets open — you're closing all the arteries," Muhammad Kadhim, a Baghdad professor, said to me.

. . . There are only two things we need: more Americans out back and more Iraqis out front. President Bush needs to give the U.S. administrator, Paul Bremer III, more resources to get basic services here running and Iraqis in charge as fast as we can. This is not Germany 1945. America is much more radioactive in this region. We don't have infinite time.  Friedman, NY Times 8/20/03

NeoCons and Iran-Contra Reconnect

The senior [administration] official and another administration source . . . said that the ultimate policy objective of [Undersecretary of Defense] Feith and a group of neo-conservatives civilians inside the Pentagon is regime change in Iran.
This second official said, "United States policy officially is not regime change, overtly or covertly," . . .

He said that the immediate objective of the Pentagon hardliners appears to be to "antagonize Iran so that they get frustrated and then by their reactions harden U.S. policy against them."

He confirmed that Secretary of State Colin Powell complained directly to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld several days ago about Feith's policy shop conducting missions that countered U.S. policy.  Knut Royce and Timothy M. Phelps, Newday 8/8/03

Bush Goal in Iraq

Last week Iraq’s Governing Council, the 25-person body of Iraqis that helps the United States run the country, chose nine members who will each serve as president of the council on a rotating basis. . . .at the urging of the Defense Department. . . .we have pushed our favorite Iraqis onto the center stage of Iraqi politics. . . . Some have wondered why a small group of people in the Pentagon—Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith—have been obsessively maintaining control of Iraq policy. . . . But it all makes sense if the Pentagon’s goal is to create circumstances that help the exiles gain control of Iraq. . . . Douglas Feith admits, “Our goal is not to turn Iraq over to any international organizations. Our goal is to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis.” Transpose two words and you have the actual policy: the goal in Iraq is to turn Iraq over to our Iraqis.   Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek, 8/11/03

Shooting Rights

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said the administration is "trying to create the impression that they are inter-nationalizing this," boasting of the participation in Iraq by 30 countries that will have contributed 30,000 peacekeepers by this fall. . . the administration's refusal to seek a second resolution has cost it as many as 45,000 additional troops from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Germany and France.  Biden said he found the administration's reluctance to cede some control in Iraq baffling. "What are we giving up?" he said. "Are we giving up the right to get shot alone?"  Vernon Loeb and Colum Lynch, Washington Post, 8/2/03

A Real Threat:  "We have an attitude, not a policy," said Donald Gregg, a former ambassador to South Korea who is president of the Korea Society in New York.

We're so used to the administration's hyping the Iraq threat that it's stunning to see officials playing down the North Korean crisis.

"If you wanted a case of imminent threat and danger, according to the principles enunciated in the National Security Strategy document, then North Korea is much more of a threat than Iraq ever was in the last few years," noted Jonathan Pollack, chairman of the strategic research department of the Naval War College. Kristof, NY Times 8/1/03

Where's the Threat:  Mr. Bush still hung onto his most well-worn buzzwords, however. Iraq was a "threat" — just as the tax cuts were "a job-creation program." The president and his advisers obviously still believe that the constant repetition of several simplistic points will hypnotize the American people into forgetting the original question . . . it was interesting to hear how focused he was when someone asked how, with no opponent, he planned to spend $170 million or more on the primary. "Just watch me," Mr. Bush said concisely.  NY Times Editorial 7/31/03

$ for  War in Iraq OR War on Terrorism:  Despite renewed warnings about possible airline hijackings, the Transportation Security Administration has alerted federal air marshals that as of Friday they will no longer be covering cross-country or international flights, MSNBC.com has learned. The decision to drop coverage on flights that many experts consider to be at the highest risk of attack apparently stems from a policy decision to rework schedules so that air marshals don’t have to incur the expense of staying overnight in hotels.  Meeks, MSNBC 7/29/03

Other  Issues

Bush Hurts U.S. Credibility*

The Bush administration's inability to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq -- after public statements declaring an imminent threat posed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein -- has begun to harm the credibility abroad of the United States and of American intelligence, according to foreign-policy experts in both parties. . . .Bush said that Hussein had enough anthrax to "kill several million people," enough botulinum toxin to "subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure" and enough chemical agents to "kill untold thousands." . . .Thirteen years ago, when the United States was a backer of Hussein, Iraq used chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war. . . .A recent CBS poll found that only 16 percent of those surveyed believed the administration lied about Iraq's weapons.  Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, 1/19/04

Bush Acquiesces to Korea*

The place we should really lose sleep over is North Korea, not Iraq. That's because President Bush is in effect acquiescing as North Korea builds up its nuclear arsenal.  An administration that was panicked about Iraq's virtually nonexistent nuclear programs is blasé as North Korea reprocesses plutonium, enriches uranium and gets set to produce up to 200 atomic weapons by 2010. North Korea balances its budget by counterfeiting American $100 bills, so counting on its scruples not to sell a nuclear warhead to terrorists seems a dangerous bet. . . President Bush has refused to negotiate directly with the North Koreans, and the result is that Kim Jong Il is now pursuing both the plutonium and uranium approaches and could eventually produce several dozen warheads a year.  Kristof, NY Times, 1/10/04

Bush Vengeance

The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, saying it was acting to protect "the essential security interests of the United States."

The directive, issued Friday by Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, represents the most substantive retaliation to date by the Bush administration against American allies who opposed its decision to go to war in Iraq. . . ."It strikes me that we should do whatever we can to draw in the French, the Germans, the Russians and others into the process," said the congressman, Representative Christopher Shays [Rep.] of Connecticut.  DOUGLAS JEHL, NY Times 12/10/03

Thanksgiving "Letter from Tikrit"*

Memo to: President Bush

From: Saddam Hussein

Dear Bush: Well, it's been a while since we last communicated. It's not easy getting tapes out from this basement in Tikrit, but I thought it was time we had a little chat. Heard your speech on Arab democracy on the BBC Arabic Service. I'll give you this, Bush, you and Blair do understand the stakes. It's your willpower I doubt. . . .  MORE

THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, NY Times, 11/27/03

Bush Helps Drug Companies Take Lives*

"An F.T.A.A. agreement with strong I.P. [intellectual property] provisions threatens to have a catastrophic impact on the lives of millions of people living with H.I.V./ AIDS and other diseases," warns Doctors Without Borders. . .
Even now, ahead of the F.T.A.A., Guatemala and Honduras avoid using generic antiretrovirals for fear of offending the U.S. Guatemala, for example, has 67,000 people, including 5,000 children, with H.I.V. or AIDS. Most will die. Astonishingly, the country spends most of its scarce AIDS money on brand-name drugs rather than cheaper generics, . . .

I find it appalling that we Americans are putting a priority on patents rather than patients, and that we are prepared to sacrifice sick people like Mr. Sánchez, Ms. Gerónimo and Rony — just so companies like Bristol-Myers Squibb can increase their dividends.  KRISTOF, NY Times, 11/22/03

Bush's Afghanistan Mess*

The United Nations refugee agency announced today that it was temporarily pulling 30 foreign staff members out of large areas of southern and eastern Afghanistan and closing refugee reception centers in four provinces, officials said.

. . .The suspension of operations comes after three attacks on United Nations offices and staff members in the last week by suspected Taliban fighters.

The shootings and bombings, which appear to be growing both in sophistication and lethality. . . The group appears to be trying to gain support from ethnic Pashtuns already frustrated by a lack of aid from the international community and a lack of power in the national government.  DAVID ROHDE, NY Times 11/18/03

Bushification of Afghanistan*

"There is a palpable risk that Afghanistan will again turn into a failed state, this time in the hands of drug cartels and narco-terrorists," Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, writes in a grim new report on Afghanistan. . ..In at least three districts in the southeast, there is no central government representation, and the Taliban has de facto control. . . .
An analyst in the U.S. intelligence community, who seeks to direct more attention to the way narco-trafficking is destabilizing the region, says that Afghanistan now accounts for 75 percent of the poppies grown for narcotics worldwide. . . If Afghanistan is a White House model for Iraq, heaven help us.   Kristof, NY Times 11/15/03

Bush Supports our Troops*

The Bush administration is seeking to block a group of American troops who were tortured in Iraqi prisons during the Persian Gulf war in 1991 from collecting any of the hundreds of millions of dollars in frozen Iraqi assets they won last summer in a federal court ruling against the government of Saddam Hussein.

In a court challenge that the administration is winning so far but is not eager to publicize, administration lawyers have argued that Iraqi assets frozen in bank accounts in the United States are needed for Iraqi reconstruction and that the judgment won by the 17 former American prisoners should be overturned. . . .

In a sworn court filing in the case for the former prisoners, L. Paul Bremer III, the American administrator in Iraq, said the money won by the former prisoners had already been "completely obligated or expended" in reconstruction efforts.  PHILIP SHENON
NY Times, 11/10/03

Bush vs. CIA *

Vince Cannistraro, former CIA operations chief, charged yesterday: "She [Valerie Plame] was outed as a vindictive act because the agency was not providing support for policy statements that Saddam Hussein was reviving his nuclear programme.". . .

In written testimony, he said that Vice-President Dick Cheney and his top aide Lewis Libby went to CIA headquarters to press mid-level analysts to provide support for the claim [that Iraq had links to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.]  Mr Cheney, he said, "insisted that desk analysts were not looking hard enough for the evidence". . .

Other agency officials, . . . said "The US government has never before released the name of a clandestine officer," said Jim Marcinkowski, a former CIA case officer. . .

The Republican-controlled Senate intelligence committee . . .will conclude that the CIA overstated any evidence about Iraq's weapons programmes and ties to terrorism.  Edward Alden , Financial Times, 10/25/03

The Bush Crusade *

For [U.S. deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence] Gen. Boykin, terrorism is a conflict in which "the enemy is a guy named Satan," . . .troubling is Gen. Boykin's offensive assessment of Islam. [In defending his statements, he]  argues that his reference to idol worship refers to Somali warlord Osman Ato's "worship of money and power." A reading of [Boykin's] speech [to the National Prayer Breakfast] undercuts that . . . "[Alto]went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he said, 'They'll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will protect me.' Well, you know what, I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol." Gen. Boykin says that when Mr. Ato was captured three days later, the general went into Ato's cell and delivered a message: "Mr. Ato, you underestimated our God."

. . . Statements such as this feed the conviction of many in the Islamic world that the fight against terrorism is also a battle against Islam.  Washington Post Editorial 10/19/03

Murdoch's Fox in the Bush*

researchers discovered that large minorities of Americans entertained some highly fanciful beliefs about the facts of the Iraqi war. Fully 48 percent of Americans believed that the United States had uncovered evidence demonstrating a close working relationship between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Another 22 percent thought that we had found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And 25 percent said that most people in other countries had backed the U.S. war against Saddam Hussein. . . .

The fair and balanced folks at Fox, the survey concludes, were "the news source whose viewers had the most misperceptions." Eighty percent of Fox viewers believed at least one of these un-facts; 45 percent believed all three. . .

Take a wild flight of fancy with me and assume for just a moment that one major goal over at Fox is to ensure Bush's reelection.  Meyerson, Washington Post 10/15/03

Connect the Dots

The Economist quoted a World Bank study that said a Cancún agreement, reducing tariffs and agrisubsidies, could have raised global income by $500 billion a year by 2015 — over 60 percent of which would go to poor countries and pull 144 million people out of poverty.

Sure, poverty doesn't cause terrorism — no one is killing for a raise. But poverty is great for the terrorism business because poverty creates humiliation and stifled aspirations and forces many people to leave their traditional farms to join the alienated urban poor in the cities — all conditions that spawn terrorists.  Friedman, NY Times, 9/25/03

AIDS, ED and Bush

AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis are all worsening in the third world and now kill a combined six million people per year. This slaughter is one of the central moral challenges we face today, yet Western governments have abdicated responsibility, and Western medical science is uninterested in diseases that kill only poor people. Many times more money addresses erectile dysfunction than malaria.

For all my admiration of Mr. Gates's work in Africa, I believe there are two important areas where his effort falls short.

First, he waffles on public policy issues. If he used his megaphone to nudge President Bush to fund fully his pledges on AIDS spending, or if he pressed South Africa's president to tackle AIDS aggressively, he might be able to save many thousands more lives. With a person infected with H.I.V. every 6 seconds, this is no time for him to be so deferential.  NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF, NY Times, 9/24/03

The Rich and the Poor *

Cancún means "snakepit" in the local Mayan language, and it lived up to its name as the host of an important World Trade Organization meeting that began last week. Rather than tackling the problem of their high agricultural tariffs and lavish farm subsidies, which victimize farmers in poorer nations, a number of rich nations derailed the talks.

The failure by 146 trade delegates to reach an agreement in Mexico is a serious blow to the global economy. And contrary to the mindless cheering with which the breakdown was greeted by antiglobalization protesters at Cancún, the world's poorest and most vulnerable nations will suffer most.  NY Times Editorial 9/16/03

Foreign Views of U.S. Darken Since Sept. 11

In the two years since Sept. 11, 2001, the view of the United States as a victim of terrorism that deserved the world's sympathy and support has given way to a widespread vision of America as an imperial power . . .

The war in Iraq has had a major impact on public opinion, which has moved generally from post-9/11 sympathy to post-Iraq antipathy, or at least to disappointment over what is seen as the sole superpower's inclination to act pre-emptively, without either persuasive reasons or United Nations approval.

To some degree, the resentment is centered on the person of President Bush, who is seen by many of those interviewed, at best, as an ineffective spokesman for American interests and, at worst, as a gunslinging cowboy knocking over international treaties and bent on controlling the world's oil, if not the entire world.  RICHARD BERNSTEIN, NY Times 9/11/03

The Light Goes On *

SIXTY-FOUR PERCENT of respondents said that the U.S. military presence in the Middle East increased the likelihood of terrorism, 77 percent thought there were widespread negative feelings towards the U.S. in the Islamic world that enhanced terrorist recruiting, and 54 per cent thought the US had been too assertive in its foreign policies . . . The findings were part of a comprehensive survey of U.S. foreign policy attitudes released this week by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (Pipa) at the University of Maryland . . .Large majorities also thought the U.S. should make greater efforts to improve relations with the Muslim world. Edward Alden
FINANCIAL TIMES at MSNBC 9/10/03

Bush Bait-and-Switch *

It's now clear that the Iraq war was the mother of all bait-and-switch operations. Mr. Bush and his officials portrayed the invasion of Iraq as an urgent response to an imminent threat, and used war fever to win the midterm election. Then they insisted that the costs of occupation and reconstruction would be minimal, and used the initial glow of battlefield victory to push through yet another round of irresponsible tax cuts. . .Yet in the speech on Sunday he was still up to his usual tricks. Once again, he made a rhetorical link between the Iraq war and 9/11. This argument by innuendo reminds us why 69 percent of the public believes that Saddam was involved in 9/11, despite a complete absence of evidence. . .  he declared that Saddam "possessed and used weapons of mass destruction" — 1991, 2003, what's the difference? Paul Krugman, NY Times 9/9/03

Bush Betrays Africa

In his last State of the Union address, the president announced a new program to fight AIDS in Africa and pledged $15 billion over the next five years. . .

The Senate is scheduled to vote soon on an appropriations bill that contains $2 billion for the AIDS initiative — only $500 million more than this year's spending. The House has approved even less. This is the White House's doing. It is twisting arms to get Congress to cut its own program. The House and Senate had authorized $3 billion for next year.

This undercutting of trumpeted compassion initiatives is a habit with the president because of his devotion to tax cuts for the wealthy. But officials are arguing that AIDS money cannot be spent wisely because the office of the AIDS coordinator — and Africa — is not ready.  Both assertions are nonsense.  NY Times Editorial, 9/4/03

Is our Future in Iraq or in Educating our Kids? *

When the Bush administration first indicated that it wanted to require states to eliminate the achievement gap between rich and poor students by 2014, states with large poor populations were hesitant, believing that the federal government would never ante up the necessary dollars. This turned out to be the case, when the House shortchanged No Child Left Behind by about 30 percent, providing $6 billion less than Congress originally called for when it authorized the bill.. . .If the administration continues along its current path, the opportunity for school reform will surely slip away.  NY Times Editorial 8/31/03

Other Ways to Use $70 Billion:  Fighting famine inside Ethiopia means providing not only emergency food but also programs to help people emerge from the trap of destitution. Rural Ethiopians need more markets for their crops and better roads to be able to move their products to other parts of the country. They could use projects to make water accessible to poor peasants, seed banks and programs to increase livestock supplies. And they need better health care — the government spends only $1.50 per person for health care each year, although Ethiopia now has more than two million people with the AIDS virus, and the infection is exploding.  NY Times Editorial 7/28/03

Bush's Hollow Words:  Two weeks after President George W. Bush toured Africa with promises of vast increases in spending on global AIDS, the House of Representatives approved Thursday a spending measure that would bring total spending on the epidemic next year to roughly $2 billion - $1 billion short of the amount set out in a bill Bush had signed in May.  . . . "The rhetoric surrounding the signing of the HIV/$ AIDS bill and his trip to Africa was hollow.  Sheryl Gay Stolberg, NYTimes, Int'l Heral Tribune, 7/24/03

World Trade Rules: The Poor Get Poorer:  No matter how small a wage Filipino workers are willing to accept, they cannot compete with agribusinesses afloat on billions of dollars in government welfare. "Farmers in the United States get help every step of the way," says Rudivico Mamac, a very typical, and very poor, Filipino sharecropper, whose 12-year-old son is embarrassed that his family cannot afford to buy him a ballpoint pen or notebooks for school.  NY Times Editorial 7/20/03

IRS:  The Rich Get Richer:  According to a recent report from the Internal Revenue Service, some 400 super-rich Americans had an average income of nearly $174 million each, or a combined income of $69 billion, in 2000. Incredibly, that's more than the combined incomes of the 166 million people living in four of the countries that the president is visiting this week: Nigeria, Senegal, Uganda and Botswana. America's richest individuals could actually change the course of Africa's history, and the president — who has stressed the importance of personal responsibility — should urge them to do so.   JEFFREY D. SACHS, NY Times, 7/9/03

A year ago, Bush signed the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. The law—crafted to help Democratic and Republican farm-state senators up for reelection —boosted agricultural subsidies by an astonishing 80 percent. And, because the president signed it, many Africans will die." Peter Beinart, The New Republic 6/3/03

In "Crude Vision: How Oil Interests Obscured US Government Focus On Chemical Weapons Use by Saddam Hussein" the Institute for Policy Studies reveals that the diplomatic pressure from Rumsfeld and the Reagan administration happened during and despite Hussein's use of chemical weapons. Behind the scenes, these officials worked for two years attempting to secure the billion dollar pipeline scheme for the Bechtel corporation. The Bush/Cheney administration now eyes Bechtel as a primary contractor for the rebuilding of Iraq's infrastructure.  Institute of Policy Studies, March 2003