twitter facebook donate

News Release Archive - Resources: Trade, World Bank, IMF

U.S.-China Relations: Neither Collision nor Collusion

November 20, 2012

HENRY ROSEMONT, [email]
Rosemont is distinguished professor emeritus at St. Mary’s College of Maryland and visiting professor of religious studies at Brown University. His books include “A Chinese Mirror: Moral Reflections on Political Economy” and translations of Chinese classics. Rosemont said today: “If President Obama bases U.S. relations with China on principles of competition and criticism, the new regime of Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang will almost surely respond in kind, and the governments of both countries will become less capable of dealing with their own internal large-scale problems.

“Moving to a policy based on cooperation on the other hand – diplomatically, militarily and economically — both countries can contribute to solving their own and each other’s problems at the same time, as well as problems more worldwide in scope. As the major power in the relationship, the initiative for a new policy must lie with the U.S., especially with all the anti-China rhetoric that infected the recent election campaign.” Rosemont wrote the piece “Is China a Threat?” http://www.fpif.org/reports/is_china_a_threat

LORI WALLACH, http://www.citizen.org/trade
Director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, Wallach said today: “After both presidential candidates and congressional candidates nationwide campaigned intensively against U.S. job offshoring, the American public would be alarmed to know that President Obama’s Asia trip has focused on expanding to many new nations a NAFTA-style ‘free trade’ agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that would greatly expand U.S. jobs offshoring, give Chinese firms a waiver to ‘Buy American’ procurement policies and further erode the U.S. manufacturing base. On the trip, some administration officials touted TPP as a tool to contain China’s influence and facilitate the U.S. Asia pivot, while Secretary of State Clinton announced that she would welcome China joining TPP.”

Filed Under:

Secret Pentagon Docs Reveal Pre-War Plans to Get Big Oil into Iraq

July 17, 2012

Bloomberg reports: “Iraq’s crude production overtook Iran’s last month for the first time in more than two decades… The rising rate of Iraqi production comes as foreign investors such as ExxonMobil Corp. and BP are developing new fields and reworking older deposits.”

GREG MUTTITT, dlee at thenewpress.com
Currently touring the U.S., Muttitt (based in London) is author of the just-released Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq. He said today: “Government officials meeting in the Pentagon before the Iraq war planned to use the U.S. occupation to open the country to Big Oil. The documents, marked SECRET/NOFORN, were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and reveal for the first time the role of the Energy Infrastructure Planning Group, which was established in 2002 by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith to plan how to run the Iraqi oil industry under the Coalition Provisional Authority.

“In a November 2002 presentation to the Deputies Committee of the National Security Council, EIPG proposed not to repair war damage to oil infrastructure, as doing so ‘could discourage private sector involvement” in rebuilding the industry. That proposal however was rejected, in order to ‘minimize disruptions and promote confidence and stability in world markets’ and to maximize revenues to finance the administration of Iraq.

“In January 2003, EIPG instead proposed a new strategy under which initial repairs — carried out by Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root — would be followed by long-term contracts with multinational companies to expand Iraqi oil production to five million barrels per day, awarded by the U.S. occupation authority. Although noting that many believed such decisions should be left to a future Iraqi government, EIPG argued that this expansion held advantages including putting ‘long-term downward pressure on [the oil] price’ and forcing ‘questions about Iraq’s future relations with OPEC.’ With private companies operating in Iraq since 2010, those questions have already begun to surface: last month analysts noted that Iraq’s rising production could constrain OPEC’s ability to influence oil prices.

“At the same time as making these proposals, EIPG recommended the government state publicly that ‘We will act, through our administration, so as not to prejudice Iraq’s future decisions regarding its oil development policies; its relations with international organizations; [or] the future ownership structure of its oil industry’ — a public position directly contrary to the substantive policy it proposed.

“These documents provide conclusive proof that control of Iraq oil was a critical consideration at the highest levels of the U.S. government while it was planning the Iraq war. There was little regard for the welfare of Iraqis, but the welfare of companies like ExxonMobil was central to the administration’s thinking. It is particularly troubling that the EIPG recommended the government mislead the public on its oil plans.

“The British government repeatedly met BP and Shell in late 2002, to discuss how to help them achieve their aims in post-Saddam Iraq. BP said it was ‘desperate to get in there;’ the Trade Minister said she believed that if Britain participated in the war its companies should get a share of the spoils. The U.S. government in 2006 hired a lawyer to draft a new Iraqi law to reverse the country’s oil nationalization of the 1970s. Getting this oil law passed became the Bush administration’s top priority in 2007, and was closely tied to the ‘surge’ strategy. After BP won a contract to run Iraq’s largest oilfield in 2009, following an apparently transparent process, its terms were renegotiated in secret, such that the Iraqi government would take the major risks and BP’s profits be guaranteed. In spite of all these pressures, Iraqi civil society groups achieved surprising successes in thwarting the U.S. oil plans through popular campaigns, unreported in the West.”

Muttitt was interviewed Monday on Democracy Now.

Filed Under: , Tagged With: Greg Muttitt, Iraq, Middle East, oil,

French and Greek Elections

June 18, 2012

RICHARD WOLFF, rdwolff at att.net
Wolff is author of the new book Occupy the Economy: Challenging Capitalism. He is professor of economics emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and currently a visiting professor in the Graduate Program for International Affairs at the New School University in New York City.

He said today: “Recent elections in France and Greece show politics moving sharply to the left. The basic reasons are shock and then mounting anger. After five years of global capitalist crisis and government bailouts chiefly for the financiers who caused that crisis, the people are told to pay the costs of crisis and bailouts by suffering austerity (reduced public services when most needed plus reduced government jobs when unemployment is already severe). The usual parties and the usual politics are exposed as bankrupt servants of a capitalism that no longer can ‘deliver the goods’ and keeps dumping ‘bads’ on most people. Demands for major leftward social shifts win millions of new supporters, especially among the young.”

COSTAS PANAYOTAKIS, [in NYC] cpanayotakis at gmail.com
Panayotakis is an associate professor of sociology at New York City College of Technology of the City University of New York and author of Remaking Scarcity: From Capitalist Inefficiency to Economic Democracy.

He said today: “With yesterday’s elections, a new phase in the struggle over the Greek austerity program is beginning. The meteoric rise of the anti-austerity left continued, with Syriza, the coalition of the radical left, receiving 27 percent of the vote. However, with the help of scare tactics regarding the economic risks of a Syriza government as well as with the embrace of an anti-immigrant message aimed at voters of the extreme right, the pro-austerity camp rallied around the conservatives, giving them 30 percent of the vote and a chance to form a coalition government. Such a government’s continuation of the austerity program will likely add to the social and economic devastation that this program has already wrought. The strengthening of the left will, however, also strengthen the movements resisting these policies. The struggle over how, and to whose benefit, the Greek crisis will be resolved is certainly not over. If the left does not prove successful, the beneficiaries may not be the mainstream parties presiding over Greece’s ongoing social and economic collapse but the neo-Nazis, who once again managed to enter the parliament by capturing 7 percent of the vote.

See: “Extremes And ‘Extremes’: On The Rise Of Anti-Austerity Parties In Greece And Europe.”

“Radical Left Surges in Greece as Economy Collapses“

Filed Under: Tagged With: Costas Panayotakis, EU Austerity Policies, Europe, France, French Elections, Greece, Greek Elections, Richard Wolff,

* Syria * Ireland Referendum * Charles Taylor Conviction

May 31, 2012

CHARLES GLASS, [in London, 5 hours ahead of U.S. ET] charlesmglassmail2003 at yahoo.com
A noted journalist, Glass was ABC News Chief Middle East correspondent and just wrote the piece “Syria: The Citadel & the War” for the New York Review of Books.

Yesterday, he was featured on Democracy Now.

IARA LEE, iaralee at culturesofresistance.org
A filmmaker, Lee is currently in post-production on her new documentary, “The Suffering Grasses,” which was filmed at the Syria-Turkey border. She recently wrote the piece “The Only True Revolution in Syria Is Nonviolent.”

ROGER COLE, pana at eircom.net, Skype: silchester52,
AP is reporting: “Irish voters were deciding Thursday whether their government can ratify the European Union’s fiscal treaty.”

A spokesperson for the Campaign for a Social Europe, Cole said today: “Legally, Ireland has its own constitution that ensures the Irish people are sovereign, as a consequence of our war of independence — unlike the rest of Europe — so we have a referendum about matters regarding the European Union. The issue is that this referendum is being pushed by the current government based on fear. The vast majority of people in Ireland don’t like how the EU is progressing — it’s dominated by German and French bankers. The previous Irish government took on the debt of the Irish banks that became indebted to the big German and French banks and the Irish people are getting crucified for this, having to pay back money they didn’t benefit from — with interest. So a ‘Yes’ on the referendum is being pushed by fear — the ‘Yes’ side states if Ireland says ‘No,’ then the situation could spiral out of control like in Greece. But a ‘Yes’ vote does not insure stability either. And countries that have defaulted after a tough few years, like Argentina and Iceland, have done well.”

BENJAMIN DAVIS, ben.davis at utoledo.edu
Associate professor of law at the University of Toledo College of Law, Davis said today: “I was born in 1955 in Liberia where my parents were stationed for the U.S. State Department. Liberia is close to my family and my heart. With the conviction and sentencing of Charles Taylor, another former head of state is held accountable at the international level for his depredations and I welcome that result. Charles Taylor is quoted as comparing his treatment with that of former President George Bush and questions whether there is a double standard. For years now, people in the U.S. of goodwill have raised the issue of criminal prosecution in federal and state courts, foreign courts, and international tribunals of former President Bush and others for the torture and war on false pretenses in Iraq. We are insisting that there not be a double standard. …

There is no structural flaw in the Constitution but a failure of character of our leaders and intelligentsia who loathe even the idea of criminal accountability for high-level governmental officials.”

See: “Taylor: Prosecute George Bush, Too.“

Filed Under: , Tagged With: Africa, Arab Spring, Benjamin Davis, Charles Glass, Charles Taylor, Charles Taylor War Crimes, Europe, Iara Lee, Ireland, Liberia, Roger Cole, Syria, UN Convicts Charles Taylor,

G8: Preventing a More Just World?

May 18, 2012

The Guardian is providing coverage of G8 summit at Camp David and NATO protests in Chicago.

DONNA SMITH, donnas at calnurses.org
CHARLES IDELSON, cidelson at calnurses.org,
Smith and Idelson are with National Nurses United, the largest union and professional association of nurses in the U.S. They are holding a rally Friday in Chicago with other groups and musicians including Tom Morello. In a statement, they derided “the AWOL G8 world leaders, who decided to run off and hide in the woods of rural Maryland [at Camp David] rather than face a disgruntled public in Chicago as originally announced, to determine what they are doing to help average families, not just the banks and Wall Street high rollers, in the midst of a continuing economic gloom.” National Nurses United is calling for a “tax on Wall Street stocks, bonds, derivatives and other financial instruments that can raise up to $350 billion every year to help mitigate the economic crisis created by the banks, with the revenue available for jobs, healthcare, education, and other basic needs and services.”

MARGARET FLOWERS, M.D., mdpnhp at gmail.com,
Flowers is an organizer of the Occupy G8 Peoples’ Summit in Maryland. She appeared on Democracy Now this morning and just co-wrote the piece “Why We Protest the G8,” which states: “Countries representing concentrated wealth will gather in remote Camp David this week to try to prop up a failing global economic system that has funneled wealth to the top, leaving everyone else behind. From its founding, the G8 has been engaged in a struggle between the wealthiest people in a handful of nations and everyone else. The losing side of this corrupt bargain has increasingly come to include many people within those wealthy countries, as well.

“In 1974 the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration for the Establishment of a New International Economic Order. This document laid out an economic vision that would have created a much healthier planet and fairer international economy. It would have empowered countries to regulate and control multinational corporations operating within their borders. It sought to develop international trade that was fair so countries received equitable prices for raw materials and labor. It also opposed the use of military, economic or political force to prevent countries from acting in their own economic self-interest, whether individually or jointly. This latter point was in defense of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, whose oil embargo occurred two years earlier.

“The response from the wealthiest nations was to create the G6, the forerunner to the G8 (as it did not include Russia or Canada) which first met in 1975, amidst another recession that featured high unemployment, inflation, and deficit. The G6 sought to circumvent the UN’s Declaration and prevent the world from participating in economic decision-making that benefited all, not just a few. The G6 put the world on an economic path of concentrated wealth and corporatism that has looted our resources and brought the economy and environment to the breaking point.”

KINDA MOHAMADIEH, kinda.mohamadieha at annd.org or via Ryme Katkhouda, rymepmc at gmail.com
Mohamadieh is with the Arab NGO Network for Development and is currently visiting Washington, D.C. with a delegation from several Arab countries. The delegation just released a paper, “Overview and Suggestions for Improving Key Areas in U.S. Foreign Policy Towards the Arab Region,” which states: “U.S. development assistance to the Arab region has been closely linked with promoting foreign policy and strategic military goals, while not necessarily serving democracy and human development.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: ANND, Charles Idelson, Donna Smith, economy, G8, global economy, income inequality, Kinda Mohamadieh, Margaret Flowers, National Nurses United, unions,

Drop Egypt’s Debt: IMF Loan May be “Odious”

April 20, 2012

Reuters is reporting: “The International Monetary Fund said on Friday Egypt’s government and political partners have made good progress in agreeing on the content of an IMF funding program for the country. … Egypt and the IMF are in discussions on a $3.2 billion loan program. The IMF is insisting that any agreement on financing is backed by Egypt’s government and political partners ahead of June elections.”

As the IMF and World Bank meetings begin Friday in Washington, D.C., the Popular Campaign to Drop Egypt’s Debt sent a letter to both expressing its reservations about the interim government’s intent to take more loans — and most explicitly the $3.2 billion IMF loan. In its letter, the PCDED highlights the unelected Egyptian government’s lack of transparency — “the government continues to conceal the details of the economic program that is associated with the loan that Egypt is currently negotiating with the IMF” — and state that such a loan may constitute illegitimate odious debt.

AHMAD SHOKR, shokr.ahmad at gmail.com
SALMA HUSSEIN, salmaahussein at gmail.com
Shokr and Hussein are members of the the Popular Campaign to Drop Egypt’s Debt, which sent the following letter to Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the IMF:

Dear Ms. Christine Lagarde,

The Popular Campaign to Drop Egypt’s Debt is writing you to raise concerns on the way the IMF loan is being negotiated and propose actions by the IMF to correct the problems.

Unfortunately the Egyptian government continues to pursue the same style of the pre-January revolution loan handling. For example, the government continues to conceal the details of the economic program that is associated with the loan that Egypt is currently negotiating with the IMF. This approach is reflected in that:

1. The government has not disseminated the economic reform program through media outlets at any stage during its preparation. The details of the initial draft of the program were unveiled to the public only after the Campaign leaked the document to the media.

2. Thus far, the parliament and the Ministry of Finance refuse to disclose the details of the economic reform program after it has been amended.

3. The economic reform program has not been subject to any form of public debate.

4. The economic reform program was never discussed in any public sessions in the parliament. It was only discussed behind closed doors among members of the parliament’s planning and budget committee, and representatives of the government and the IMF.

5. The parliamentary planning and budget committee had announced initially its refusal to accept the economic reform program. It then reversed its position and told the press it approves of the program, without any explanation to the public of the reasons for shifting its position.

These practices are in direct contradiction to the transparency and accountability principles of both the IMF and the Egyptian governments. The Egyptian people will bear responsibility for the obligations of this loan for years to come, and thus they must actively participate in formulating its terms.

Therefore, the Popular Campaign to Drop Egypt’s Debts urges the IMF to:

- Disclose the details of the economic reform program and the details of previous drafts of the program so that the IMF would not be complicit in sidelining the Egyptian people. Inaction from the IMF would signify its tacit approval of negotiating a loan in isolation from the Egyptian people and of continuing the non-transparent, unfair practices of the Mubarak regime.

- Cease negotiations associated with the proposed loan to Egypt, because the government engaged in these negotiations is unelected and its key figures belong to a corrupt and non-democratic old regime. The Egyptian people continue to struggle to change the old regime in order to establish a society and economy based on transparency, accountability, and citizens’ participation in decision-making affecting their lives. Egyptians are striving for a society and an economy that address the needs of the majority of the people and that distribute burdens among its members according to their respective financial capabilities and obligations.

- Finally, the Campaign believes that the persistence of secrecy surrounding the negotiations of the details of the agreement with the IMF will render the proposed loan suspect of being “odious.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: Ahmad Shokr, Egypt, IMF, Middle East, Salma Hussein,

Welcome to the Energy Third-World: the United States

April 2, 2012

MICHAEL T. KLARE, via Leslie Brandon, leslie.brandon at hholt.com
Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and the author of the new book The Race for What’s Left: The Global Scramble for the World’s Last Resources. He just wrote the piece “A New Energy Third World in North America? How the Big Energy Companies Plan to Turn the United States into a Third-World Petro-State,” which states: “The ‘curse’ of oil wealth is a well-known phenomenon in Third World petro-states where millions of lives are wasted in poverty and the environment is ravaged, while tiny elites rake in the energy dollars and corruption rules the land. Recently, North America has been repeatedly hailed as the planet’s twenty-first-century ‘new Saudi Arabia’ for ‘tough energy’ — deep-sea oil, Canadian tar sands, and fracked oil and natural gas. But here’s a question no one considers: Will the oil curse become as familiar on this continent in the wake of a new American energy rush as it is in Africa and elsewhere? Will North America, that is, become not just the next boom continent for energy bonanzas, but a new energy Third World?

“Eager to escape ever-stronger environmental restrictions and dying oil fields at home, the energy giants were naturally drawn to the economically and environmentally wide-open producing areas of the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America — the Third World — where oil deposits were plentiful, governments compliant, and environmental regulations few or nonexistent.

“Here, then, is the energy surprise of the twenty-first century: with operating conditions growing increasingly difficult in the global South, the major firms are now flocking back to North America. To exploit previously neglected reserves on this continent, however, Big Oil will have to overcome a host of regulatory and environmental obstacles. It will, in other words, have to use its version of deep-pocket persuasion to convert the United States into the functional equivalent of a Third World petro-state.

“The formula for making Canada and the U.S. the ‘Saudi Arabia’ of the twenty-first century is grim but relatively simple: environmental protections will have to be eviscerated and those who stand in the way of intensified drilling, from landowners to local environmental protection groups, bulldozed out of the way. Put another way, North America will have to be Third-Worldified.

“How we characterize our energy predicament in the coming decades and what path we ultimately select will in large measure determine the fate of this nation.”

Filed Under: , Tagged With: corporations, energy, environment, Michael T. Klare,

Summers at World Bank? Record on Poor Countries and Gender Bias

March 21, 2012

ROBERT WEISSMAN, via Barbara Holzer, bholzer at citizen.org, Dorry Samuels, dsamuels at citizen.org
President of Public Citizen, Weissman just wrote the piece “The (Larry) Summers of Our Discontent,” which states: “‘Just between you and me, shouldn’t the World Bank be encouraging more migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs (lesser developed countries)?’

“Do those sound like the words of a man who should be running the world’s leading economic development institution?

“They don’t, but the man who put his name on the memo in which those words appeared — Lawrence Summers — does in fact appear to be the Obama administration’s leading candidate to head the World Bank.

“For the sake of hundreds of millions of people for whose lives and life chances are shaped in some significant part by World Bank policy, please urge President Obama not to nominate Larry Summers to be World Bank president. Sign the petition at http://ForgetLarry.org.

“The World Bank is supposed to be the development bank for the world’s poor. It has a very poor record of fulfilling its mission — precisely because it has pushed the kind of deregulatory policies that Summers has advocated.

“By indefensible tradition, the United States is given the power to name the Bank’s president, and it has always named an American — even though the Bank is governed by a board that represents the world’s nations, and the Bank’s mission is to serve poor countries. In 2005, the Bush administration named neoconservative Paul Wolfowitz to run the Bank. That ended in disaster, when Wolfowitz was forced to resign amidst a personal scandal. It’s hard to imagine the Obama administration is on the verge of making a similarly outrageous pick to head the Bank, but that seems to be the case.”

SHAUNNA THOMAS, Doug Gordon, Doug at fitzgibbonmedia.com
Thomas is co-founder of UltraViolet, an advocacy group focusing on gender inequality, they have organized a petition to President Obama: “Please don’t nominate Larry Summers to head the World Bank. Summers has a long history of making sexist comments and the World Bank has so much control over the lives of women and girls in developing countries. We need someone there who believes that women and girls have the same potential as men and boys.”

ELAINE ZUCKERMAN, elainez at genderaction.org
President and founder of Gender Action, Zuckerman worked on development and gender issues at the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank for years. She said today: “It would be a travesty for Summers to become the head of the World Bank. He was essentially fired as president of Harvard for saying that women didn’t have equal mental capacities as men. He argued that dumping toxic waste in Africa made sense.

“Working inside the World Bank, I noticed this deep divide between the lofty rhetoric on gender issues and the reality of the investments the Bank makes. It talks so much about reproductive health and HIV, but only puts less than one percent of investments there.

“The World Bank finances dirty energy projects — at Gender Action, we work with local partners — and these projects really hurt local women and girls. World Bank-financed pipelines overwhelmingly hire men. The construction of such projects causes female farmers to be displaced and forced into prostitution. Pipeline leaks cause a myriad of health problems for women. Roads that are built end up being conduits for trafficking in women. We need someone atop the World Bank who will push for investments that help — not harm — poor women and girls around the world.”

See also, Robert Kuttner just wrote a piece on Summers “Pick Me! Pick Me!” The piece states: “Why does Larry Summers have more lives than a cat? He was fired as president of Harvard, did not exactly serve President Obama brilliantly as economic policy czar, and now seems to be in line for the presidency of the World Bank, a post traditionally chosen by the president of the United States.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: Elaine Zuckerman, Robert Weissman, Shaunna Thomas, World Bank,

Congressional Push for Sachs as Next World Bank Head

March 16, 2012

For the first time in the World Bank’s history, a candidate is openly campaigning for presidency of the institution. Traditionally, the U.S. government has hand-selected the World Bank president, but economist and health expert Jeffrey Sachs has shaken up the process this time by publicly proclaiming his interest in succeeding Robert Zoellick as World Bank president, saying that to date World Bank presidents have been political appointees or bankers — not development experts.

Members of Congress are expected Friday to deliver a letter to President Obama urging him to nominate Sachs, now the director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University to be the next World Bank president. A letter initiated by Rep. John Conyers and signed by over 25 members of Congress states: “Professor Sachs is widely considered to be the world’s leading expert on economic development and the fight against poverty. For over 25 years, he has advised dozens of governments throughout the developing world on economic development, environmental sustainability, poverty alleviation, debt cancellation, and globalization. He has twice been named among Time Magazine’s 100 most influential world leaders.”

MARK WEISBROT, DEBORAH JAMES, via Dan Beeton, beeton at cepr.net
Weisbrot is co-director fo the Center for Economic and Policy Research. James is director of international policy for the group. Weisbrot has written several pieces about the World Bank including “Why Jeffrey Sachs Would Make a Better World Bank President.”

James said today: “Folks in the U.S. who care about ending the suffering of the world’s poorest, have an opportunity to do something about it over the next week by demanding that President Obama nominate Jeffrey Sachs, probably the world’s best-known development leader, instead of current front-runner Larry Summers, who would just continue to use the Bank to push disastrous neoliberal economic policies and U.S. elite interests. Unfortunately, no developing country leaders have been nominated; however, many developing countries have already nominated Sachs. In addition to being a world candidate, he should also be the candidate of the U.S. After so many decades of damaging policies, we need someone at the World Bank who is deeply committed to a multidisciplinary, practical approach to eradicating poverty while living within the earth’s natural systems to prevent climate collapse.”

Weisbrot said today: “Sachs’ campaign for the World Bank presidency has already succeeded in highlighting the secretive, corrupt, and anti-democratic process by which the president is normally selected, as well as some of the major failings of the Bank itself. It is especially encouraging that a number of countries have been willing to confront the Obama administration by nominating or supporting him.

“President Obama wants to appoint a crony who will do what Treasury and Wall Street (pardon the redundancy) want the Bank to do. Sachs, on the other hand, wants the Bank to do more to help poor countries fight disease and poverty, and has a track record of doing this: including through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria, the Millennium Villages Project, the Earth Institute, and other research and practical projects. He has also been a strong advocate for debt cancellation for developing countries and for stronger measures to combat climate change.”

Sachs has himself written an op-ed in the Washington Post: “How I Would Lead the World Bank” and has received the backing of numerous other individuals, from the prime ministers of Kenya, Namibia and Haiti, to noted economists such as Nouriel Roubini.

Filed Under: Tagged With: corporations, economy, World Bank,

Obama Says G-8 Moving for “Intimacy” — Not Protests

March 6, 2012

When questioned at his first news conference of the year this afternoon about the upcoming G-8 meeting being moved from Chicago to Camp David, President Obama stated that G-8 leaders wanted to meet in an “intimate” and “casual” setting and “the weather should be good.” He made no direct reference to planned protests, but did say “I always have confidence in Chicago being able to handle security issues. Whether it’s Taste of Chicago or Lollapalooza or Bulls championships. We know how to deal with the crowd.” Question starts at 37:15.

“SUGAR” RUSSELL, press at OccupyChi.org
Russell, an activist with Occupy Chicago, said today: “If they wanted to have a more ‘intimate’ setting for the G-8, they would have arranged for that from the start. Instead, they have split the venues for the G-8 and NATO meetings. They fear protests, scrutiny and voices of people representing themselves. They are moving the G-8 meeting because they don’t want negative media, but we will continue the protests — and we’ll be so loud that they will hear us all the way in Camp David.

“The G-8 and NATO work hand in hand for the elites, for cutbacks in social services, militarization of schools and environmental damage that results in increasing inequality, poverty, racism, sexism, loss of youth to war, and destruction of civil rights and democratic systems of governance.”

See: “Obama Moves G-8 Summit from Chicago to Secluded Camp David.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: "Sugar" Russell, G8, nato,
« Older Posts