The US and the world: the Bush-Bolton version

Well, regarding my idea that a US reconsideration of the Iraq war venture should spur our citizenry to a much deeper reconsideration of the whole relationship we seek to have with the rest of the world… Here, friends, from the WaPo’s Colum Lynch is the view of this relationship now being aggressively pushed for by Our Dear Leaders:

    Less than a month before world leaders arrive in New York for a world summit on poverty and U.N. reform, the Bush administration has thrown the proceedings in turmoil with a call for drastic renegotiation of a draft agreement to be signed by presidents and prime ministers attending the event.
    The United States has only recently introduced more than 750 amendments that would eliminate new pledges of foreign aid to impoverished nations, scrap provisions that call for action to halt climate change and urge nuclear powers to make greater progress in dismantling their nuclear arms. At the same time, the administration is urging members of the United Nations to strengthen language in the 29-page document that would underscore the importance of taking tougher action against terrorism, promoting human rights and democracy, and halting the spread of the world’s deadliest weapons.
    Next month’s summit, an unusual meeting at the United Nations of heads of state, was called by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan to reinvigorate efforts to fight poverty and to take stronger steps in the battles against terrorism and genocide. The leaders of 175 nations are expected to attend and sign the agreement, which has been under negotiation for six months.

    The United Nations originally scheduled the Sept. 14 summit as a follow-up to the 2000 Millennium Summit, which produced commitments by U.N. members to meet deadlines over the next 15 years aimed at reducing poverty, preventable diseases and other scourges of the world’s poor. ..
    The U.S. amendments call for striking any mention of the Millennium Development Goals, and the administration has publicly complained that the document’s section on poverty is too long. Instead, the United States has sought to underscore the importance of the Monterrey Consensus, a 2002 summit in Mexico that focused on free-market reforms [!], and required governments to improve accountability in exchange for aid and debt relief.
    The proposed U.S. amendments, contained in a confidential 36-page document obtained by The Washington Post, have been presented this week to select envoys. The U.N. General Assembly’s president, Jean Ping of Gambia, is organizing a core group of 20 to 30 countries, including the United States and other major powers, to engage in an intensive final round of negotiations in an attempt to strike a deal…

Readers may want to read Lynch’s report there alongside the argument I was making here, a little while ago.

3 thoughts on “The US and the world: the Bush-Bolton version”

  1. Can you point to one example of where foreign aid has done significant good? Aside from the Marshall Plan. I didn’t think so. The best if not the only thing the US could do for the impoverished countries of Africa and Latin America would be to open our borders to textiles and other goods that they export.

  2. Sounds like Bolton is doing the job at the UN he was sent to do: trash international institutions. Our rulers want to bring any international counterweight to the corporations down, now.

  3. “Can you point to one example of where foreign aid has done significant good? Aside from the Marshall Plan.”
    DBL is right. The Marshall Plan was a success, and that’s what’s the Millenium Development Goals aim to duplicate. Needless to say, this doesn’t fly down in Crawford. I suspect the Marshall Plan wouldn’t have gotten anywhere either with this crowd.
    In fact, Bolton’s flurry of activity could be setting the stage for a US withdrawal from the UN.
    Sound farfetched? If you’re desperate to divert public attention from an incompetent war policy just about anything goes.

Comments are closed.