Pe cele oficiale (ODA), fiindca acestea fac obiectul declaratiilor politice despre asistenta din ultimii 60 de ani. Donatiile private in US sunt cel putin egale cu cele ale guvernului federal, toate criticile din articol se refera la administratie. Cetatenii americani trebuie laudati.
Asistenta aceasta este un instrument de politica externa, nu prea are treaba cu generozitatea, cu exceptia catastrofelor, urgentelor civile etc. Are mai mult scopuri politice si economice.
Una dintre sursele disputei este ca toata lumea a fost de acord cu un prag al ajutorului oficial, dar nu l-a respectat prea multa lume. Chiar America a promovat, mai demult, un nivel de 1%.
O a doua ar fi faptul ca periodic, de obicei la inceput de deceniu, vin politicienii la New York, promit in cadrul Adunarii Generale a ONU ca vor rezolva cu saracia si apoi cam uita. A existat, in anii `60 ceva numit Deceniul Dezvoltarii, care s-a transformat in prima decada. A urmat a doua, a treia ...
Ajutorul in sine nu este atat de important pe cat pare. Nici o tara nu se poate dezvolta numai cu bani din afara. Coruptia adesea distorsioneaza realizarea obiectivelor formale ale asistentei. De exemplul, planul Marshall a fost un catalizator a relansarii economice europene postbelice, nu singura cauza.
Nu in ultimul rand, investitiile straine au devenit, din anii `70, mai importante decat transferurile oficiale.
Cat despre scandalul de la ONU, no comment, era inutil.
Alan Rosca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
Alan Rosca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
statistica reflecta donatiile facute de americani, sau
doar cele facute de guvernul american? mare
diferenta...
a.r.
--- Mihai Zodian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> September 8, 2005
> U.N. Report Cites U.S. and Japan as the 'Least
> Generous Donors'
> By CELIA W. DUGGER
>
> UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 7 - A week before world
> leaders gather here to set a course for combating
> global poverty, a United Nations report released on
> Wednesday names the United States and Japan as among
> "the least generous donors" and says American and
> European trade policies are hypocritical and
> contribute to impoverishing African farmers.
>
> The report also highlights shortcomings in
> developing countries. It notes that India's and
> China's progress in reducing the easily preventable
> deaths of children has slowed even as their economic
> growth has surged. India has 2.5 million deaths of
> children a year, while China is second, with
> 730,000.
>
> The new document, the annual Human Development
> Report, calls on India and China to tackle health
> inequalities aggressively. It also maintains that
> rich countries must significantly increase aid if
> the goals they agreed to five years ago - to halve
> extreme poverty and reduce deaths of children by
> two-thirds by 2015, among others - are to be met.
>
> The report was unusual for the United Nations in so
> specifically describing the deficiencies of rich
> countries' policies. It was commissioned by the
> United Nations Development Program and written by a
> team of experts led by Kevin Watkins, former
> director of research for the charity Oxfam.
>
> While crediting the United States with being the
> world's largest donor, the report points out that
> among the world's richest countries, America is
> second to last in aid as a portion of its national
> income, with Italy bringing up the rear. Japan was
> third from the bottom. Aid per capita from donors
> ranges from more than $200 in Sweden to $51 in the
> United States and $37 in Italy.
>
> Richard Grenell, a spokesman for the United States
> at the United Nations, disputed the idea that the
> United States is stingy. "Let me remind the authors
> that President Bush has increased overall
> development assistance from the United States by 90
> percent since he took office," he said.
>
> The report notes that rich countries trumpet the
> virtues of open markets and free trade, even as they
> put up protectionist barriers against goods from
> poor countries and spend hundreds of billions on
> subsidies that benefit large-scale farmers,
> landowners and agribusiness.
>
> "Industrial countries are locked into a system that
> wastes money at home and destroys livelihoods
> abroad," the report says.
>
> It singles out the European Union for a policy "that
> lavishes $51 billion in support on producers." It
> also criticizes the United States for paying an
> estimated $4.7 billion to 20,000 cotton farmers in
> 2005, more than the total of American aid to Africa,
> a policy that the report contends gives American
> producers an unfair advantage over small farmers in
> Burkina Faso and Mali.
>
> The report also criticizes China and India for their
> policies. In China, the erosion of public health
> care has worsened the situation of the rural poor,
> it says. In India, it adds, inadequate public health
> services mean most children are not fully immunized
> against diseases in the hugely populous northern
> states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
>
> "Were India to show the same level of dynamism and
> innovation in tackling basic health inequalities as
> it has displayed in global technology markets, it
> could rapidly get on track for achieving" the
> targets set in 2005, the report says.
>
>
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/08/international/08nations.html
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le
> nouveau Yahoo! Messenger
> Téléchargez le ici !
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger
Téléchargez le ici !
*** sustineti [romania_eu_list] prin 1% din impozitul pe 2005 -
detalii la http://www.europe.org.ro/euroatlantic_club/unulasuta.php ***
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "romania_eu_list" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
