-Caveat Lector-

With typical liberal rhetoric, Clinton bemoans the world condition just as
if he did not spend the last 8 years in the White House!  Why didn't HIS
administration address some of his late-in-the- game concerns?  Because it
is total hypocrisy, that's why.  But it does make him sound better than he
actually is and it is certainly more noble than his "I told the American
people the truth more than I lied to them." remarks.
Amelia

Clinton offers US global agenda

By John Donnelly, Globe Staff, 12/18/2000


WASHINGTON - He was at his most eloquent, talking about moral responsibility
for the world's poor, arguing that an isolated America only hurts itself,
rolling out numbers to show that if the nation paid its fair share to stop
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, it would only equal the US government's
annual bill for office supplies.


And yet President Clinton delivered two major foreign policy addresses - one
in Nebraska on Dec. 8, the other in England last week - just a little more
than a month before he leaves office, with no expectation that the incoming
Bush administration would follow his lead.


His words left many who work on behalf of the world's poor extraordinarily
sad, some of them bitter.


''Too little, too late,'' said Amir Attaran, director for international
health research at the Center for International Development at Harvard
University. ''My feeling is that the 11th hour was a mighty long time to
discover all this. I mean, these problems aren't things that were fresh to
be discovered.''


Samuel R. Berger, Clinton's national security adviser, said in an interview
last week, however, that the president had begun to build a record of
helping the developing world and wanted to state his case of what was needed
ahead. Berger said the Bush administration and Congress would be hard
pressed to ignore the devastating impact globalization has had so far on the
poorest nations.


''Part of these speeches is establishing what we think the base line is in
going forward,'' Berger said. ''Clearly, this has developed through a
process of evolution, of learning from experience, or seeing the world more
clearly. I'm sure that the new administration will have its own ideas and
new priorities, but I think that the US cannot go backwards on these global
issues of climate change, AIDS, digital divide, and debt relief, because the
world has changed.''


Fred I. Greenstein, a Princeton presidential scholar and author of ''The
Presidential Difference,'' had another view of Clinton, whom he described as
full of restless energy.


''Among lame ducks, none of them were busier than him, few kept going like
he is,'' Greenstein said. ''With Clinton, it's almost as if he is looking
for things that will somehow reconstruct the whole picture of his
presidency: one more speech and Monica goes down to the third paragraph of
the obituary.''


In numerous speeches over the past three years, Clinton has outlined his
concerns about the dangers of globalization and the need to increase
international funding to cut poor countries' huge debt loads, put more
children in school, and provide better health services. But the two recent
speeches argued the case with more fervor and detail, and the England speech
included a stronger call for the world's 22 donor nations to contribute
their fair share to the poor.


Traveling to America's heartland on Dec. 8, Clinton made the case of US
involvement in a state that is geographically distant from other nations but
tightly linked to the global economy.


He concluded: ''We don't have to be cheap. Our economy is the envy of the
world. We don't have to swim against the currents of the world. The momentum
of history is on our side. ... And we don't have the excuse of ignorance,
because we've got a 24-hour global news cycle. We know what's going on out
there.''


What's going on, he said in England on Thursday, was shameful to watch in
the developing world.


''We know perfectly well today how children live and die in the poorest
countries, and how little it would take to make a difference in their
lives,'' he said. ''In a global information age we can no longer have the
excuse of ignorance. We can choose not to act, of course, but we can no
longer choose not to know.''


He added, ''With the Cold War over, no overriding struggle for survival
diverts us from aiding the survival of the hundreds of millions of people in
the developing world struggling just to get by day to day.''


The difference between what the world provides and what the world needs to
fight AIDS, malaria, and TB was $6 billion a year, he said. The US fair
share of that amount would be $1.5 billion, he said - or ''about the same as
our government spends every year on office supplies, or about what the
people of Britain spend every year on blue jeans.''


In fiscal year 2001, the US government will spend $466 million for
international AIDS efforts, up from $244 million last year and $135 million
in 1999.


In 1998, according to figures compiled by Harvard's Attaran and Jeffrey
Sachs, donor countries spent $69 million, or $3 per HIV-infected person.
That was down from more than $15 per HIV-infected person in 1988.


Attaran said that even if the amount of money needed to fight AIDS, TB, and
malaria were $10 billion, ''this is so totally affordable to the United
States; you only need to do the math.''


The math: The 22 donor nations produce an annual income of $21 trillion, so
$10 billion is about 0.05 percent of all their income combined.


''Would Americans want to put 0.02 percent of their wealth toward the
greatest plague since the the 14th century? My sense is they probably would,
and that isn't a partisan issue,'' Attaran said.


Clinton also said on Thursday that globalization was tearing down all
barriers, that ''what happens anywhere is felt in a flash everywhere, from
Coventry to Kansas to Cambodia. ... In a single hour today, more people and
more goods move from continent to continent than moved in the entire 19th
century.''


In Kansas City, Mo., Frank J. Smist Jr., the director of the global studies
center at Rockhurst College, said the speech was a powerful expression of
change and the administration's policy, but, ''I just feel such great
disappointment.


''It was one of the most powerful speeches of his presidency, but why did he
wait eight years? I look at the eight years as an awful lot of missed
opportunities.''


In Brussels, Seth Amgot, a spokesman for Oxfam America, was so moved by the
speech that he sent copies to dozens of colleagues. But even in his praise
for the administration's push for $435 million in debt relief to poor
nations, he acknowledged, ''It was hard work getting them where they are.''


Clinton concluded his speech Thursday by saying that ''no generation has
ever had the opportunity that all of us now have to build a global economy
that leaves no one behind. ... For eight years, I have done what I could to
lead my country down that path. I think for the rest of our lives, we had
all better stay on it.''


But will Bush?


Asked about the next president's intent, Berger laughed. ''I can't do much
about that one,'' he said.


''Unless we continue to move ahead - and I believe we've created a frame of
reference with which to view this - we are going to pay a price as a
country.''


This story ran on page A01 of the Boston Globe on 12/18/2000.
� Copyright 2000 Globe Newspaper Company.


[ Send this story to a friend | Easy-print version ]

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to