Blog

House of Representatives appropriations activity — State/Foreign Operations

While much of the country and the world had been focused on whether or not the U.S. debt ceiling would be raised by August 2, the U.S. House of Representatives was continuing its work on discretionary funding for Fiscal Year 2012. The House Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee on State/ Foreign Operations approved its version of the legislation, which would make deep cuts in State Department operations and foreign aid. While it is not surprising that the Republican-crafted bill includes deep cuts, Democrats such as Nina Lowey (D-NY) noted the impact that the legislation would have on mitigating the current famine in Africa. “This legislation would be a step back from U.S. leadership and substantially weaken the United States’ efforts overseas by decreasing economic opportunity, stability and access to critical services for millions of the world’s poorest people,” Lowey said.

The House subcommittee bill includes a total of $39.6 billion in regular discretionary funding, $8.6 billion or 18 per cent below last year’s level. In addition, the bill includes $7.6 billion for “Global War on Terror” funding, for a total of $47.2 billion.

New Leadership in Global Health–BRICS Health Ministers pledge support

On July 11, 2011, Health Ministers from the BRICS countries—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—came together in Beijing for the BRICS Health Ministers’ Meeting. The primary focus of the meeting was to discuss these countries’ role in providing wider access to quality and affordable health care around the world. The meeting concluded with the Health Ministers signing of the ‘Beijing Declaration,’ which called for collaboration with international health organizations, as well as with each other. These collaborations would hopefully yield the promotion of technology transfer and accessibility to “affordable, quality, efficacious, safe medical products and other health technologies” in developing countries. The Declaration also stressed the importance of reforming international organizations like WHO in order to improve transparency, efficiency, and accountability.

The Health Ministers collectively acknowledged the lack of access to health care and affordable medicine in their own countries, and recognized the benefit of this collaboration and technology transfer to significant portions of their populations. UNAIDS Executive Director Michel Sidibé, who also attended the Ministers’ Meeting, spoke to the unique position of BRICS nations of being “a voice with incredible economic, technological and innovative strength…[that is] intimately connected to the needs and interests of the developing world” (unaids.org).

The increasing economic power of the BRICS countries in the global economy does place them in an interesting, new arena of foreign aid. These five nations account for 40 percent of the world’s population, 18 percent of global trade, and 45 percent of current growth. However, in four out of five of the BRICS countries, two thirds of the people who need HIV treatment are not receiving it. Are these countries really in a position to bring about real, substantial change to the way health care is accessed in the world?

Sidibé says yes.  “It will help us to change the course of debate on public health by bringing to the center the voice of the poorest segment of society by making sure that social justice and the redistribution of opportunities will become a major aspect of the way we deliver public goods to the people,” he says. South African Health Minister Dr. Aaron Motsoaledi stated that the BRICS countries could form a strong partnership with international health organizations because they are the ones that have the “most of the affordable drugs… to supply the developing world.” An example of this is the new meningitis conjugate vaccine developed by the Serum Institute of India, with an estimated cost of only 50 cents a dose. Because these countries share similar health care challenges in their own countries, they have the unique understanding of the problem of accessibility. This could yield a more informed and effective approach to efforts of improving health care systems worldwide.

In light of the recently approved legislation from the U.S. House of Representatives that proposes deep cuts to the foreign aid budget, the entrance of the BRICS nations into the foreign assistance arena could not come at a better time. As these countries seek greater influence in the global development community, the world could see a significant shift in how international aid is administered, and ultimately, what this means for the overall global economy. It is up to us to decide what the role of the U.S. will be in that change.

For more information on the first BRICS Health Ministers Meeting, go to <http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/BRICS-countries-vow-to-help-poor-nations-in-health-1460626.php>.

Moldova and Europe: Change, Diversity, and the Future

“What is the strongest integrating force for this young country?”

This question, posed by an audience member, was one in a flurry of audience participation at an event to discuss post-Soviet countries with Global Washington member and volunteer, Liuba Ceban.  Ceban, a native Moldovan and Hubert H. Humphrey Fellow, answered that there isn’t necessarily a single uniting force for the young country. She explained that within the country, some people desire to reintegrate with Romania while others wish Moldova to be a prosperous nation of its own. The country is equally divided on matters of allegiance; arguments often erupt as to whether Moldova was better off under Soviet occupation and whether the country’s current trajectory towards EU membership is wise. Ceban closed the question with a resolute “it’s too soon to tell where the country will end up.”

It’s safe to say that little Moldova has been going through a lot of changes. The country, which historically has been primarily agrarian, has a mushrooming IT industry whose brisk pace left even Ceban surprised. She also mentioned the challenge that growing diversity will pose to Moldova. Today, the predominant faith is Christian Orthodox. But because of the country’s communist legacy, many other citizens still harbor resentment towards religion; the “biggest evil”, as it was sometimes called. Together with the very recent registration of Moldova’s Muslim community, these combating viewpoints have made the issue of religious freedom a very relevant one.

Ceban often returned to the theme “Eastern Europe cannot be thought of as a package.” The issue of religion is just one of many divergent points between the Eastern Europe states. Belarus, a country to the north of Moldova, has political freedom of religion but some intolerance among the community. Ukraine is even freer religiously, and Ceban attributed that to the previous leadership of the country’s more pro-EU policies and agenda. Moldova is also the only former soviet country with a strong, intact Communist party.

Ultimately, the message that Ceban brought to the discussion was that with the diversity of opinions and backgrounds and the rapid pace of change in Moldova, there’s no telling where the post-Romanian post-Soviet country will end up. But the country’s journey cannot be grouped with Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Belarus, and Ukraine, as if they all come from identical history and culture.

Liuba Ceban started a nonprofit called WIN (Worldwide Initiatives Network) Moldova alongside former Peace Corps volunteers, whose goal is to promote partnerships for sustainable change and development in Moldova and to work with at risk children. The institution will be running a promotional event on July 6th from 6:00pm to 8:00pm at the Watertown Hotel, 4242 Roosevelt Way NE Seattle, WA 98105.