_02.gif){kind=small}
_01.gif){kind=spacer}
_05.gif)
_04.gif){kind=small}
_06.gif){kind=small}
_08.gif){kind=small}
_03.gif)
_10.gif){kind=small}
_12.gif){kind=small}
_07.gif){kind=small}
_08.gif){kind=small}
News and Publications
The IIJD 2007 Newsletter Archive:
G8 Summit Results in Weak Promises to Africa |
By Whitney Huss |
June 22, 2007 |
Disappointment swarms after the recent Group of Eight summit in Heiligendamm, Germany. Held June 6-8, leaders from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, and the United States pledged $60 billion to combat Malaria, Tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS in Africa and worldwide [1]. This was the second time in three years that African development played such an important role in the G8 discussions. Yet, the commitments made during the summit merely reiterate previous promises. According to DATA, only Japan and the United Kingdom have been able to stay on track regarding their 2005 development aid promises [2]. Failing to deliver the increase in funding that is needed to follow through on existing 2005 Gleneagles promises, the new commitments mean little for African development.
The 2005 Gleneagles G8 summit set aid levels at $50 billion per year until 2010, with $25 billion earmarked for Africa. The Heiligendamm $60 billion figure translates to only $3 billion in new annual aid until 2010 [3]. The Gleneagles pledge also promised to provide universal access to AIDS treatment by 2010. Only three years away, this leaves eight million HIV patients without the life-saving treatment; UNAIDS estimates that a total of 12 million will urgently need antiretroviral treatment by 2013 [4].
Earlier this year, Oxfam determined that the G8 would miss their 2010 target by $30 billion. With the recent announcement, the gap will remain at $27 billion. Oxfam’s Senior Policy Analyst Max Lawson acknowledges: “The pledge is important, but it should be seen for what it is—a small step when we need giant leaps [5].”
With no country-specific plans, the communiqué calls for funds to appear “over the coming years” [6]. As a result, any progress at Heiligendamm has been interpreted as “a failure,” “misleading,” and “cosmetic” by African media and aid experts alike [7]. Highlighting President Bush’s HIV/AIDS proposal, however, White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino called the summit “very positive” [8].
In addition to the G8 leaders, the June 8 African aid session was attended by African Union chair and Ghanaian president John Kufuor and the political leaders of Algeria, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa. In a written statement, German Chancellor Angela Merkel confirmed that African development challenges can only be met “in a spirit of partnership, mutual accountability, and trust” [9].
The IIJD acknowledges the G8 efforts to increase development aid to Africa, but is saddened by the vague promises and shallow scope of the commitments. As an organization committed to providing innovative development solutions for long-lasting positive change, the IIJD stresses the importance of channeling development aid in such a way that it focuses on the underlying reasons of poverty rather than the symptoms of it. In order to make a long-term impact on the AIDS epidemic in Africa, the G8 should focus on funding that would enable African countries to develop and implement national health plans. This would consist of not simply providing the much needed ARV medication to HIV/AIDS patients but also of medical training and technical resources. By strengthening already existing institutions in Africa, the aid will empower African citizens to combat poverty and disease themselves.
|
| _______________________________________________________________________ |
