NationStates Jolt Archive

Some more Dutchy news, but it is US-related so I suppose you do not mind. :)

Voorhoeve lashes out at Bush

AMSTERDAM — A former Dutch minister has criticised US President George W Bush for refusing for the fourth successive year to pay America's contribution to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

Joris Voorhoeve made the comments on Wednesday when UNFPA's annual report was presented in The Hague. Voorhoeve is chairman of the World Population Foundation, an independent Dutch NGO aiming at the advancement of sexual and reproductive health and rights for people worldwide. He was minister of defence in the Netherlands from 1994 to 1998 and is currently a member of the Council Of State.

He said the US contribution - amounting to USD 34 million - could have been used to prevent the deaths of 4,700 pregnant women. Another two million women could have been helped to avoid unwanted pregnancy. Some 800,000 and the deaths of 77,000 babies and children could also have been prevented with the US contribution, Voorhoeve said. The US Congress approved the funding, but President Bush has vetoed the payment purely because of "domestic political concerns", he said.

Several years ago, the UNFPA was accused of indirectly supporting abortion in China. American experts investigated the claim and dismissed it as unfounded. Nevertheless, President Bush has refused to support the UNFPA since then, Voorhoeve said. "This blockade by Bush is counterproductive. He is against abortion but withholding money from the UNFPA results in more illegal abortions in developing countries," he claimed. "There is a direct link between the USD 34 million and the 4,700 women who died in labour, the two million unplanned pregnancies and countless more HIV/Aids infections," Voorhoeve said.

The EU has decided to make good the amount withheld from the agency by the US. The Netherlands is the largest donor, contributing EUR 65 million annually to the total UNFPA budget of EUR 500 million.

Yay ‘culture of life’.

My apologies if this has been posted before, its an article from last week, but then I don’t often see Dutchy news being discussed here anyway ;)

Well, it's awfully nice of the EU and the Netherlands to pick up the slack after this US will to project their skewed morality upon those in need of help.

Another way the US makes friends around the world ...

Well, it's awfully nice of the EU and the Netherlands to pick up the slack after this US will to project their skewed morality upon those in need of help.

Heh. I suppose. Stupid that it has to be done this way though.

Considering that we supply between 21 and 22 percent of the entire UN budget, I don't see what all the fuss is about.

http://www.state.gov/p/io/rls/rm/2004/39496.htm

"The United States remains the UN’s largest contributor. This would not be the case if we thought the UN insignificant to U.S. foreign policy. We pay 22% of its regular budget, and about 27% of its peacekeeping costs. On top of that, we give generously to support the work of UN agencies providing humanitarian relief, electoral assistance, food aid, and more."

Pregnant women are dying, but never mind that. Your Federal government statement is very on message, you should consider applying for a job with the State Department!

Hmmm... maybe you contribute a lot because of the "wealthiest nation" thing? Maybe that would be plausible? Nah, probably not. Withholding dues because of accusations that have proven unfounded makes sense.

Pregnant women are dying, but never mind that. Your Federal government statement is very on message, you should consider applying for a job with the State Department!

Hmmm... maybe you contribute a lot because of the "wealthiest nation" thing? Maybe that would be plausible? Nah, probably not. Withholding dues because of accusations that have proven unfounded makes sense.

I'm saying that if you want to spend the money on pregnant women, transfer some from some other US donation.

It's just a political accounting trick.

By the way, people die every day. It's what they do.

I'm saying that if you want to spend the money on pregnant women, transfer some from some other US donation.

It's just a political accounting trick.

If you read the article, you see that we are in fact compensating for the US not paying. This is... stupid. The US Congress approved the funding, but President Bush has vetoed the payment based on these unfounded accusations, mind you! The simple solution would be, uh, not vetoeing it?

By the way, people die every day. It's what they do.

Aaaah. Compassionate conservatism. Does the State Departmnent support abortion as well then? I mean, that also involves foreigners dying. Oh... but that is why they were withholding the funds. It might kill people! Only then it turned out that it didn't and you still don't pay a dime. Confusing!

If you read the article, you see that we are in fact compensating for the US not paying. This is... stupid. The US Congress approved the funding, but President Bush has vetoed the payment based on these unfounded accusations, mind you! The simple solution would be, uh, not vetoeing it?

Aaaah. Compassionate conservatism. Does the State Departmnent support abortion as well then? I mean, that also involves foreigners dying. Oh... but that is why they were withholding the funds. It might kill people! Only then it turned out that it didn't and you still don't pay a dime. Confusing!

See my post on the burka (the most recent one). Then let me know if government is really doing anything that makes sense.

Your tax dollars are paying the salary of that woman who wants to ban burkas.

It's better sometimes just to ignore the government - they're going to do something every day that you feel is stupid. And there's nothing you can do about it.

See my post on the burka (the most recent one). Then let me know if government is really doing anything that makes sense.

Already replied to that. And in my opinion it is making sense by helping to prevent the unneccecary deaths of thousands of people, but not making sense when banning burkas. Different policies, different opinions. I'm not blindly supportive of everything Harry Potter and his hench(wo)men do.

Your tax dollars are paying the salary of that woman who wants to ban burkas.

I do not pay tax dollars. We have the euro. And then, this woman also keeps hordes of immigrants out, so meh.

It's better sometimes just to ignore the government - they're going to do something every day that you feel is stupid. And there's nothing you can do about it.

Errrr... so you are saying "the Dutchman might be right, but he can't do anything about it even if it is stupid. So, uh... please ignore it."

:confused:

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/ta0001.jpg

Thank you for explaining that with a picture.

Thank you for explaining that with a picture.
Worth a thousand words you know.

Worth a thousand words you know.

Too bad a picture cannot prevent 4,700 more women who will die in labour, two million unplanned pregnancies and countless more HIV/Aids infections - this year. Not to mention the 77,000 babies and children who will then die from the unwanted pregnancies.

Only the US contribution to UNFPA can.

Too bad a picture cannot prevent 4,700 more women who will die in labour, two million unplanned pregnancies and countless more HIV/Aids infections - this year. Not to mention the 77,000 babies and children who will then die from the unwanted pregnancies.

Only the US contribution to UNFPA can.

I see you've already paid, so the women won't die, etc.