The UN's hubris knows no bounds
The enormity of the massive earthquake in Asia that triggered devastating tsunamis, wiping out coastal villages and killing over 44,000 people so far, is difficult to grasp. Scientists say that the quake changed the earth's orbit, and altered the physical map of the region. The quake moved the island of Sumatra, the sixth largest island in the world, 66 feet. Sumatra has approximately 183,000 square miles; by comparison, only two of the United States are larger: Alaska (656,425 sq. mi.) and Texas (268,601 sq. mi.). The third largest state is California, at 163,707 sq. mi. The earthquake moved an island larger than the state of California 66 feet.
In response, the United States made an initial pledge of $15 million to help the Asian countries cope with the devastation. A U.N. official called the amount "stingy." Secretary of State Colin Powell "bristled" at the remark, noting that "The United States has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world," and Powell noted that the eventual U.S. contribution would run into the billions. The United States has followed up with a pledge of an additional $20 million in aid to the Asian countries. For perspective, the EU gave $4 million initially, with an additional pledge of $27 million. Canada and some European nations pledged $1 million each.
Jan Egeland, the UN's undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs, claims that Western nations could give more "if taxes were raised." Speaking of Western nations, Egeland said, "'There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy,'" and added that "the United States and Europe 'believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more.'"
According to the American Red Cross's FY 2004 report (pdf format), contributions totalled $668.8 million from corporations, foundations, individuals, the United Way, and other bequests, legacies, and in-kind giving. Contributions for Domestic and International Relief, General Operations, and Endowment Gifts were $442.5 million for FY 2004. Of course Americans want to give; what they don't want is the government to force them to do so. As these numbers indicate, left to their own devices, Americans are among the most generous people in the world. There is no need to tax Americans to create an international aid pool.
And apparently, the U.N. believes that its track record of fiscal responsibility, which includes massive fraud over a decade in the administration of the Iraq oil-for-food program, allowing Saddam Hussein to skin over $21 billion dollars from the "humanitarian" effort, justifies calling on the United States to write a blank check. Sorry, Jan.
UPDATE: Jan Egeland has apologized, sort of, for the "stingy" remark. The original statement: "If actually the foreign assistance of many countries now is 0.1 or 0.2 percent of their gross national income, I think that is stingy really. I don't think that is very generous." The "clarification": "I've been misinterpreted when I yesterday said that I believed that rich countries in general can be more generous."
Misinterpreted? There is not much room for error in interpreting that original statement, Jan. Don't compound the error by taking us for idiots.
In response, the United States made an initial pledge of $15 million to help the Asian countries cope with the devastation. A U.N. official called the amount "stingy." Secretary of State Colin Powell "bristled" at the remark, noting that "The United States has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world," and Powell noted that the eventual U.S. contribution would run into the billions. The United States has followed up with a pledge of an additional $20 million in aid to the Asian countries. For perspective, the EU gave $4 million initially, with an additional pledge of $27 million. Canada and some European nations pledged $1 million each.
Jan Egeland, the UN's undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs, claims that Western nations could give more "if taxes were raised." Speaking of Western nations, Egeland said, "'There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy,'" and added that "the United States and Europe 'believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more.'"
According to the American Red Cross's FY 2004 report (pdf format), contributions totalled $668.8 million from corporations, foundations, individuals, the United Way, and other bequests, legacies, and in-kind giving. Contributions for Domestic and International Relief, General Operations, and Endowment Gifts were $442.5 million for FY 2004. Of course Americans want to give; what they don't want is the government to force them to do so. As these numbers indicate, left to their own devices, Americans are among the most generous people in the world. There is no need to tax Americans to create an international aid pool.
And apparently, the U.N. believes that its track record of fiscal responsibility, which includes massive fraud over a decade in the administration of the Iraq oil-for-food program, allowing Saddam Hussein to skin over $21 billion dollars from the "humanitarian" effort, justifies calling on the United States to write a blank check. Sorry, Jan.
UPDATE: Jan Egeland has apologized, sort of, for the "stingy" remark. The original statement: "If actually the foreign assistance of many countries now is 0.1 or 0.2 percent of their gross national income, I think that is stingy really. I don't think that is very generous." The "clarification": "I've been misinterpreted when I yesterday said that I believed that rich countries in general can be more generous."
Misinterpreted? There is not much room for error in interpreting that original statement, Jan. Don't compound the error by taking us for idiots.
posted by Hal | 1:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home