Posted on 06/03/2005 1:11:22 PM PDT by nypokerface
CAPE TOWN (Reuters) - The United States is willing to look for ways to fund a "Marshall Plan" for Africa even if it opposes Britain's plan for a new lending facility, South African President Thabo Mbeki said on Friday.
Mbeki, fresh from meeting President Bush in Washington this week, told the World Economic Forum (WEF) Africa summit in Cape Town the U.S. leader was willing to help Africa, and Bush hoped commitments would be made at the G8 summit.
"The U.S. says, we don't agree on the IFF (British-proposed International Financial Facility), but what we agree to is to generate funds using whatever mechanisms at its disposal," Mbeki told African business and political leaders at the close of their three-day summit.
"What President Bush has said is, give me the target (funding), but leave to me the matter of what method I will use to produce this outcome ... He (Bush) wasn't talking about it being too much money," Mbeki said.
Mbeki said he did not expect resistance to the idea to fund the recovery of Africa, close to half of whose nearly 700 million sub-Saharan population live below a $1 a day, but the debate was likely to center around ways to pay for the effort.
The plan devised by the British government's Africa Commission seeks an extra $25 billion a year in aid until 2010 to help end widespread poverty and disease in Africa.
A central plank of the plan -- the IFF which would borrow against future aid pledges -- has drawn U.S. opposition.
SHOW OF SUPPORT
The Africa summit has said it hopes to use the British plan to lobby the G8 group of industrialized states to give more aid to Africa at the G8 meeting in Gleneagles Scotland next month. Mbeki said Africa would place funding for peace and security on the Gleneagles agenda.
Prime Minister Tony Blair has staked his reputation on helping the world's poorest continent during Britain's presidency of the G8 and the European Union this year, but his proposals have been dogged by discord among G8 nations on debt reduction and aid spending.
Mbeki said a plan to impose an international tax on jet fuel - an idea floated by French President Jacques Chirac - was yet another example that the G8 was keen to help Africa.
"Chirac is talking about taxes on jet fuel, the U.S. is talking of using its budget processes. I don't expect there will be conflict at Gleneagles over the need to help Africa," he said.
Mbeki backed the British blueprint, saying it responded to pledges already made by the G8 to Africa's New Partnership For Africa's Development (NEPAD), a home-grown rescue-plan, in 2002.
He said NEPAD's peer review mechanism -- where evaluators assess a country's governance record in the hope that positive ratings could lure foreign lending and investment -- would help guarantee that aid money is not misused.
The first reports under the voluntary scrutiny process, on Ghana and Rwanda, were expected to be ready this month, he said.
Niall FitzGerald, chairman of Reuters and co-chair of the WEF summit, told reporters peer review was central to Africa's future and that countries that ignored the review did so at their own cost.
"Those countries which have not yet signed up for that probably will be at the end of the line when it comes to getting the benefits of the projects to revitalise Africa," he said.
- Only Chirac can come up with such a stupid plan.
Here's an idea. Let the Europeans pay for it - up front, in cash - and we'll administer it and make sure it gets done. That's about as far as I'm willing to have us cooperate with yet another corrupt European plot.
Its about time we got together and offered money to help, er, umm, rebuild (?) Africa!!
Maybe Bush can figure out a way to import illegal aliens from Africa- I don't think there are enough coming from Latin America to satisfy him.
They didn't mention the fine print. Fuel for Airbus planes is tax-exempt.
Africa news ping
NEPAD[s] That's what we're gonna need if we get involved in this crap.
If Mr. Bush does decide to send money to Africa, let him dig into his own pocket.
I'm against even $1 of taxpayer money being sent to the continent of Africa. It is wrong, generally, to tax Americans for foreign aid. And Africa, in particular, is an unworthy recipient: the corrupt leaders invariably rake off most, with very little getting to their starving subjects. Hundreds of billions in welfare have already been spent on Africa over the years with little, if anything, to show for it. I see no prospect that any further amount of welfare largess will transform subSaharan Africa from the toilet bowl it now is. I certainly don't want any of my hard-earned money being confiscated by the government and transferred there. If the French want to throw their francs away, have at it.
African countries have many natural resources. If they seriously want to develop them, there are myriads of ways to lure private capital--immense amounts of private capital--in, to fund development. Artificial subsidies from Western Governments can only retard rational development, just as the Welfare State and the Great Society's War on Poverty, have retarded the progress of the poor in America.
Why would anyone imagine that what is stupid at home, somehow makes sense overseas?
Of course, American Aid to Africa can not be Constitutionally justified, unless there are strings attached, connecting it to our military needs or interests.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
If Bush really wants to help Africa, he should encourage them to promote capitalism, elect responsible leaders, and open up their countries to foreign investment.
Still looking through my pocket US Constitution here...trying to find the Constitutional authority for a "Marshall Plan" for Africa...can't seem to find it...must be here somewhere...
I'm still looking for the part about spreading democracy to the Middle East. Perhaps the African Marshall Aid section is in the same place.
Exactly right...my pocket version must be missing a huge part of the Constitution...the parts that provide authority for the 98% of the federal government that is not authorized by the parts I do have
Yes, I agree but with this caveat: Bush wants to wait
until the billions he's sending Africa for AIDS takes
effect. When they are like the Mexican illegals and are
healthy enough to run drugs, fill our prisons, and
bankrupt hospitals and school districts --- he will welcome
them with open arms. Meanwhile, he'll send additional
billions in tax dollars and pretend that it doesn't
matter about the national debt or domestic priorities.
By the way, I thought the Cold War excuse for foreign
aid excesses was over?
Jimmy Carter is not even a rival in the contest of
excessive spending by Bush. His Prescription Drug plan,
when it begins to kick in in '06, will cost trillions
and is the biggest entitlement since LBJ. Bush can't
be outdone by a piker like Carter -- he's a BIGTIME
spender who competes with the best. Oops - I mean the
worst. He's never seen a spending bill he didn't like
and hasn't read that part of the Constitution that
talks about something strange called a "veto". By the
way, you've in spired me to reread "The Red and the
Black". It's been years and I only vaguely remember
the young man torn between priesthood and soldier.
Would someone be kind enough to explain to me how even the name Marshall Plan, and the concept behind it even applies to Africa by even the most painful stretch of the imagination?
The Marshall Plan was not a form of International Welfare.
The Marshal Plan's goal was to restore the 20th Century Industry and infrastructure destroyed during years of war.
What is there to restore in Africa?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.